-
He is a vey lucky young man and you are a nice young lady.
Good luck.
JB
-
Originally Posted by Notbaldyet
Why so many studies? Because patients are walking into doctors offices with complaints and doctors are now investigating it.
But of course, 10,000 times as many people walk into doctors' offices with complaints about non-existent "aspartame poisoning," because they've been misled into believing it's a real phenomenon.
-
gmonasco
i cannot understand why you are so in denial on the side effects of propecia. The evidence, which I cited, is pretty clear at this point. Just in the last 3 months alone, there are dozens of articles which raise very serious questions about the safety of this medicine. Given what is coming out on propecia now in the literature, and increasingly in the lay press, there is no way that this drug will be allowed to continue with FDA approval for hair loss. I would bet money that within 3 years the FDA will pull the approval for this drug for alopecia. Its just a matter of time before the evidence and the press coverage of this reaches critical mass.
-
DUDE!!!! YOUR HIS GIRLFRIEND!!! Just tell him you will love him no matter what, and the fact he does or DOES NOT have hair is irrelevant to you.
THATS what he wants to hear.
COME ON!!!! Does the fact he has hair really matter to you???
What your doing seems nice and all on paper but not in the relationship world
-
Originally Posted by Notbaldyet
i cannot understand why you are so in denial on the side effects of propecia. The evidence, which I cited, is pretty clear at this point.
Because I understand the difference between anecdotal reports and established causation.
Given what is coming out on propecia now in the literature, and increasingly in the lay press, there is no way that this drug will be allowed to continue with FDA approval for hair loss.
People have been saying the same thing about aspartame for years and years. Still no studies actually demonstrating it to be harmful in its intended use, though.
-
uh
1) these are not anecdotal reports. they are studies, in one case a prospective study, and in another a systematic review, both known to be very reliable methods of evaluation, showing that side effects occur in 15-33% of those who take the medication. and anyway, i'm not sure what you mean by 'causation, because studies do not show causation, they show association, from which you have to infer the rest. as to the 'permanent' or 'persistent' issue, of course, no studies yet. i will tell you 'anecdotally' that i recently talked to a friend who is a urologist who says he see "lots" of people with 'persistent' post propecia symptoms that last anywhere from 3-6 months after stopping the medication. the psychological trauma this causes on patients is immense. in fact, they already have a 'treatment protocol' that they start when they see a patient with this (daily cialis for "rehabilitation"). patients have to pay for this out of pocket, which is a cost Merck should bear. And likely will. the issue that makes me most concerned is that those who are concerned about this drug can cite dozens of studies, while there is nothing except the Merck studies from the mid 90's which contradict these new findings. clearly... something is rotten in Merck's lab notebooks, and the reason they would do this is obvious.
2) biologic plausibility. propecia is known to block DHT production. in fact, that is what it is designed to do. DHT is known to have a host of 'male' effects, including causing a) erections and b) hair loss. no biologic plausibility for aspartame. aspartame is not a drug. it was not designed to have biologic effects other than be a sweetener.
what is a terrible shame is that millions of young men have been made to feel like there is something 'wrong' with them so they take a pill that alters their hormones. its really insane.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks