All Propecia users,,, come here please !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_charger

In fact there is sufficient evidence that shows DHT is not important, like what i posted above.

---

You completely misinterpreted the study above, which was not unexpected. They do not say that DHT is 'unimportant' but rather that testosterone is more important. People already know that testosterone is a very important factor as well in determining erectile function and is not inconsistent with the notion that DHT is also related.

Quote:

---

Im pretty sure i've kept up and challenged you more than anyone else on this forum so grow up already. I would be happy to have a respectable and intelligent debate with you

---

You have not challenged me, but you have merely disagreed and misunderstood my statements. I would be happy if you could have an intelligent debate as well, but you can't always get what you want.

Quote:

---

They do not say that DHT is 'unimportant' but rather that testosterone is more important. People already know that testosterone is a very important factor as well in determining erectile function and is not inconsistent with the notion that DHT is also related.

---

The study itself concluded "the critical androgenic substance for these effects is most likely T rather than DHT." I read the study and it did not state anywhere with certainty that DHT was important. the data shown in the study strongly supports this fact also

This doesnt state with absolute 100% certainty that this is the case, but it suggests it is most likely the case. You still cant give me a single study that reaches a conclusion supporting your theory.

One more interesting thing to check I assume you have seen a copy of this study so take a look at page 6 (also labeled as page 519 as it exists in the book). Take a look at the 4 referenced dutasteride studies. ill post them here too

Study 1
McConnell et al 2003
Number of subjects: 1493
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 4.5
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 3.5/3.3
Actual ED Rate: 0.2%

Study 2
Andriole and Kirby 2003
Number of subjects: 5655
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 0.8/0.9
Actual ED Rate: 0.1%

Study 3
Roehrborn et al 2004
Number of subjects: 569
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 1.3/1.3
Actual ED Rate: 0%

Study 4
Marberger et al 2006
Number of subjects: 4254
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 6.7/4.0
Actual ED Rate: 2.7%

Total Patients: 11,971
Average Years: 2.6
Average ED rate: 0.75%

Let me summarize.. Out of 11,971 patients taking 0.5mg dutasteride over the (average) course of 2.6 years, with their DHT levels lowered by 95%, only 0.75% reported ED. Yes, over ten thousand men walked around with 95% DHT, the hormone you think is so crucial for achieving erections, and less than 1 out of 130 reported ED. I dont think I could prove my point any more eloquently!

Whats even crazier and proves my point undoubtably is the finasteride studies referenced had an overall ED rate of 3.3% over the course of 2.5 years.

finasteride which lowers DHT by 60 or 70% caused more than four times as much ED as dutasteride which lowers DHT by 95%. Of course there is some margin of error here, but this is a massive amount of hard evidence that 100% supports the idea that DHT is not important for erections.

Ive laid this all out for you.. these are long term studies with thousands of patients over the course of years, showing that DHT appears to have absolutely nothing to do with ED rates.


Now the extent of your data so far consists of a poorly written article from a mens health clinic, and a conclusion you reached on your own from two small primary studies.

How can you still argue this?

Quote:

---

You have not challenged me, but you have merely disagreed and misunderstood my statements. I would be happy if you could have an intelligent debate as well, but you can't always get what you want.

---

Of course I disagree with your statements, isnt that why we are debating!? Perhaps I am no longer challenging you because you have outright given up because you have no more ways to try to make your case?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_charger

The study itself concluded "the critical androgenic substance for these effects is most likely T rather than DHT." I read the study and it did not state anywhere with certainty that DHT was important. the data shown in the study strongly supports this fact also

This doesnt state with absolute 100% certainty that this is the case, but it suggests it is most likely the case. You still cant give me a single study that reaches a conclusion supporting your theory.

One more interesting thing to check I assume you have seen a copy of this study so take a look at page 6 (also labeled as page 519 as it exists in the book). Take a look at the 4 referenced dutasteride studies. ill post them here too

Study 1
McConnell et al 2003
Number of subjects: 1493
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 4.5
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 3.5/3.3
Actual ED Rate: 0.2%

Study 2
Andriole and Kirby 2003
Number of subjects: 5655
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 0.8/0.9
Actual ED Rate: 0.1%

Study 3
Roehrborn et al 2004
Number of subjects: 569
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 1.3/1.3
Actual ED Rate: 0%

Study 4
Marberger et al 2006
Number of subjects: 4254
Dosage: 0.5 mg/d
Years of treatment: 2
ED % Rate Dut/Placebo: 6.7/4.0
Actual ED Rate: 2.7%

Total Patients: 11,971
Average Years: 2.6
Average ED rate: 0.75%

Let me summarize.. Out of 11,971 patients taking 0.5mg dutasteride over the (average) course of 2.6 years, with their DHT levels lowered by 95%, only 0.75% reported ED. Yes, over ten thousand men walked around with 95% DHT, the hormone you think is so crucial for achieving erections, and less than 1 out of 130 reported ED. I dont think I could prove my point any more eloquently!

Whats even crazier and proves my point undoubtably is the finasteride studies referenced had an overall ED rate of 3.3% over the course of 2.5 years.

finasteride which lowers DHT by 60 or 70% caused more than four times as much ED as dutasteride which lowers DHT by 95%. Of course there is some margin of error here, but this is a massive amount of hard evidence that 100% supports the idea that DHT is not important for erections.

Ive laid this all out for you.. these are long term studies with thousands of patients over the course of years, showing that DHT appears to have absolutely nothing to do with ED rates.


Now the extent of your data so far consists of a poorly written article from a mens health clinic, and a conclusion you reached on your own from two small primary studies.

How can you still argue this?




Of course I disagree with your statements, isnt that why we are debating!? Perhaps I am no longer challenging you because you have outright given up because you have no more ways to try to make your case?

---

A friend of mine just quit DUT, he was mumbling words, he couldn't do simple math, his mind was ****ed.

He recovered though, lucky him.

Erections is the least thing i'm worried with fin or dut.

Most people don't have sides or do not notice it or report.

If you have no sides with DUT or FIN, why even come to the forums to prove yourself?

You're one of the lucky guys, move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maradona

A friend of mine just quit DUT, he was mumbling words, he couldn't do simple math, his mind was ****ed.

He recovered though, lucky him.

Erections is the least thing i'm worried with fin or dut.

Most people don't have sides or do not notice it or report.

If you have no sides with DUT or FIN, why even come to the forums to prove yourself?

You're one of the lucky guys, move on.

---

I think some people just get tired of the internet scaremongering...although I appreciate the charger's effort and passion for the subject I don't think he'll get soothsayer to change his opinion no matter what.

It can be argued that debating for and against finasteride on forums is pretty pointless...those who have suffered persistent side effects are probably better off focusing on lawsuits et cet. Those who have success with finasteride are most often not on the forums at all but out enjoying life.

Charger - You fail to properly understand the conclusion of the paper you have submitted. Once again saying that T is the critical factor in maintaining erectile function does not mean that DHT is completely absent in the equation. If you bothered to read anything about how how erectile mechanics work with amino acid signals and the relaxation of smooth muscle tissue you would know better. By presenting the studies you have, you are trying to say that finasteride doesn't cause any sexual side effects at all which is patently wrong. Sexual side effects caused by finasteride have been admitted by Merck and now both Merck and FDA admit its link to irreversible side effects.

I hope you don't get any adverse reactions from the drug because people are going to think you are insane after being in such vehement denial for so long. Good luck.

No sides, no loss significant/ obvious loss in sex drive. Been using it for 9 months.

Now i'd like to see a poll to asses results. Improvement, Maintained, or Lost @ 1 year mark, 2, 3, 5, 10 etc.

My experience as diffuse thinner:

1year, maintained...
2year, maintained...
Into my 3rd year, slightloss perhaps...

I'm 23 years old. I also have a unique red hair color and brown eyebrows. I've had sexual problems on occasion. Also if i squeeze my nipple a little clear fluid comes out.

Been on it since 2008 along side rogaine. If anything i guess it has slowed down my hair loss assuming that I would be much worse without it. Every year I have less hair, I go through a period of little hair loss and then once or twice each year there is a shed. That hair never comes back. It also seems like I'm losing hair diffusely wherever I put the rogaine. My hair loss is literally where I put that stuff.. I dont get it. I started using it before I even had any noticeable hairloss. I had a scalp analysis done and was told I suffered from MPB.

I do not trust these products at all but I'm much to fearful of what would happen without them.

I use an all natural shampoo, a laser comb every other day as well.. nothing seems to be reversing mine.. only gradually getting worse each year.