Does finasteride block dht or cause the body to produce less dht?

[the_charger]

As someone who publicly defends Propecia and is thereby charged with demonstrating that it's safe, can you rule out that side effects aren't race specific? I'm sure you know for instance that many people of Asian descent can't tolerate alcohol because of a genetic mutation that other races don't have.

Fair enough, yes many conditions are race specific. but my problem is you are saying an entire study is BS because there *might* be a chance it only affects certain races? what you are doing is trying to get me to prove a negative (basically evidence of absence) by asking me to rule out the possibility that it’s race specific. This is a really, really weak argument. It’s the type of argument people use when they don't have a leg to stand on (yes I took a debate course last semester and am quite familiar with techniques people often try to use to win an argument). Its just like if we were arguing about the color of the sky: I think its blue and you think its red. You tell me “okay smart ass, prove to me that the sky ISN’T red!”

Source the trial.

Took a while, but found it! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12824459

Yes. If Merck and the FDA are backtracking on their warnings, then there's clearly something that concerns them - no doubt for legal and financial reasons. As I mentioned earlier, it wouldn't be the first time that a drug has been withdrawn because the original trials that cleared the FDA were proven to be unreliable. Reasons why that happen are numerous! It's naive to think that the FDA are infallible and that Merck aren't operating solely with regard to commercial interest.

Okay again, how *exactly* are they “backtracking” on their warnings? Look up the definition of that word please, just so you understand it’s the complete opposite of what you are trying to explain. You might want to use the word "revising" because it makes much more sense and is completely accurate.

OK so if the FDA is as unreliable as you say then should we just ignore this new warning they released? Okay lets just do that, it will save a lot of time arguing!

Where to begin with this? Literally sighing here.

LOL!! you are the one sighing? You made so many contradictory remarks in this next statement. I have a paper due tomorrow, but I just have to point out how many blatant mistakes you have made here:

For a start, you're inferring that Propecia is totally safe

So this is exactly what I said a few posts back: “finasteride isn’t perfect, I don’t even think its near perfect. but it is a very effective treatment for hair loss but you risk some very rare symptoms if you take it.”

You read that statement and then somehow take my meaning to be “Propecia is totally safe”. You are clearly pulling things out of your ass here… Try to remember that posts are saved on this thread and very easy for everyone to confirm!

All I was trying to show is that propecia is *relatively* safe, when you compare to other common prescription medications. In all honesty, no prescription medication is or ever will ever be completely safe.. But its all a matter of weighing out risk versus benefit

because of your single, anecdotal, positive experience (thus far)

Okay, just a few posts back you said, and I quote “Let the men on these forums speak the truth” meaning we should stop listening to the fda and merck and studies, and start listening to the individual, anecdotal stories that people have to tell. So my experience, because it is good, should be ignored, yes? But yours and others because they are bad should be listened to? How ass backwards is that?

Next, it's got nothing to do with testosterone levels. The issue is DHT. DHT is what causes you to bald, and the interactions of DHT is what Propecia basically blocks.

and again a few posts back you said this “Let the fact that Propecia is designed to literally **** with your testosterone levels speak for itself”

I'm sorry but when you said the word "testosterone" I thought you might have been talking about testosterone.. not sure how I ****ed that one up, apologies.

DHT is a primary sex hormone involved in regulating libido is both men and women, so if there is no DHT in the body, your libido will be effected.

Im going to call you out on this and ask for a source also, please. The Wikipedia article says nothing about DHT regulating libido, so can you show me a source that says that? You are just jumping to conclusions, unless you have a better source. the wikipedia article actually kinda supports what I thought, that DHT is really only important during development, and after puberty it doesnt do much of anything except make people bald.

You might possibly be right that if there is no DHT in the body whatsoever, it could affect the libido. But finasteride only inhibits like 60% of DHT right? So it’s pretty obvious that the remaining 40% is more than enough for most men to get along great without problems.

[chrisis]

Fair enough, yes many conditions are race specific. but my problem is you are saying an entire study is BS because there *might* be a chance it only affects certain races? what you are doing is trying to get me to prove a negative (basically evidence of absence) by asking me to rule out the possibility that it’s race specific. This is a really, really weak argument.

How is it a weak argument? Clearly the participants were all Japanese. How can the trial prove safety in men who aren't Japanese in that case? There is a high likelihood in my view that there is a genetic basis to whether someone suffers side effects, just as there is a genetic basis as to whether a man suffers from MPB at all!!

Took a while, but found it! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12824459

You've cited two trials. In one all of the participants were Japanese, in the other all of the men were 55 years of age or older.

Do you SERIOUSLY not see any problem with the methodology of these trials despite the fact no men under 55 of caucasian descent were involved? I'm not sure whether you're a troll, an idiot or a Merck employee.

Okay again, how *exactly* are they “backtracking” on their warnings? Look up the definition of that word please, just so you understand it’s the complete opposite of what you are trying to explain. You might want to use the word "revising" because it makes much more sense and is completely accurate.

They changed the labeling to expand the list of sexual adverse events and suggest a possibility that they may be permanent in some men. Whether it's a "revision" or "backtracking" is mere semantics.

OK so if the FDA is as unreliable as you say then should we just ignore this new warning they released? Okay lets just do that, it will save a lot of time arguing!

I did not suggest we should ignore them, simply acknowledge they are not infallible, as demonstrated by their "revised" (happy?) stance on Propecia.

All I was trying to show is that propecia is *relatively* safe, when you compare to other common prescription medications.

"Relatively" safe just does not cut it! Who are you kidding? We have a right to know exactly how safe. This is not a prescription medicine to treat a disease, it is purely a vanity drug; men deserve to know the full risks before opting into a drug they don't necessarily need.

Okay, just a few posts back you said, and I quote “Let the men on these forums speak the truth” meaning we should stop listening to the fda and merck and studies, and start listening to the individual, anecdotal stories that people have to tell. So my experience, because it is good, should be ignored, yes? But yours and others because they are bad should be listened to? How ass backwards is that?

You miss my point. I will try to spell it out one more time. Your experience is supposed to be good - probability is supposed to be strongly in your favour; you are in the 97%. I (and many others) are in the 3%, so my experience is far more important in terms of determining the safety of Propecia. It's not a matter of bias, it's a matter of statistics.

I'm sorry but when you said the word "testosterone" I thought you might have been talking about testosterone.. not sure how I ****ed that one up, apologies.

I messed up there. I was referring to a comment I read elsewhere and "****ing up testosterone levels" is a casual and inaccurate way of describing what happens. I described the actual interactions of finasteride and DHT in my follow-up post and either way, the truth is finasteride impairs hormones in the body which can subsequently impair sexual health. That is undeniable - it's how the drug works.

Im going to call you out on this and ask for a source also, please. The Wikipedia article says nothing about DHT regulating libido, so can you show me a source that says that? You are just jumping to conclusions, unless you have a better source.

Sure took me 30 seconds!

"DHT's status as a highly active androgen hormone causes an increase in sex drive, especially in individuals using supplemental amounts of it. Its inhibition of estrogen in the body also causes the increase in sexual desire."

You might possibly be right that if there is no DHT in the body whatsoever, it could affect the libido. But finasteride only inhibits like 60% of DHT right? So it’s pretty obvious that the remaining 40% is more than enough for most men to get along great without problems.

Are you kidding me? You think it's ok that finasteride might only mess up 60% of a hormone that is crucial for good sexual health? Sure some men might get along with 40%, but the question remains how many men? How safe is this drug? Nobody knows!!!.

[the_charger]

Im in a bit of a hurry and will respond to the rest of your post a bit later, but I just wanted to comment on that source you provided:

Sure took me 30 seconds!

"DHT's status as a highly active androgen hormone causes an increase in sex drive, especially in individuals using supplemental amounts of it. Its inhibition of estrogen in the body also causes the increase in sexual desire."

maybe, you should spend a bit more than 30 seconds to find me a source on this. First, this is an article written by "Chris Stee" (not a doctor) on eHow.. a website that also shows how to change the oil in my car.

His first 2 references link to www.thinksteroids.com, the articles are written by "Patrick Arnold" (not a doctor). Even worse, this website actually SELLS anabolic steroids including DHT boosting products. that directly shows they have a clear bias in promoting their products.

The third reference (Cleveland clinic) is actually a pretty legit website, but doesn't even mention the word DHT. It just says androgen deficiency brought on by age can cause sexual problems, which is 100% true! Testosterone is very closely linked to sexual desire, but says nothing about DHT.

Find me a study, preferably written by a doctor, with a conclusion that says something along the line of "DHT is directly responsible for maintaining libido or erections". If this is such a well known fact like you say, it shouldnt be hard to find a good study (written and conducted by DOCTORS!) that concludes what you are saying. of course I could be wrong about all this because I havent completely soured the internet to research this stuff, but form what ive seen you are wrong.. But bringing me to the second point really nails my point home




so have you ever heard of the drug dutasteride? apparently it also acts same as finasteride and lowers DHT, but it actually lowers it by over 95% instead of only 60% like finasteride. So if we go by what you are sayin, every single guy that takes this dustateride has to have almost 100% sexual side effects.. But when I looked at these side effects for that drug, they are just slightly higher than finasteride. if what you are saying is true, how on earth do you explain this???

[chrisis]

maybe, you should spend a bit more than 30 seconds to find me a source on this. First, this is an article written by "Chris Stee" (not a doctor) on eHow.. a website that also shows how to change the oil in my car.

Fine! My point was (aside: you seem to consistently miss these!) that it isn't difficult to establish how important DHT is in male sexual health, but within a few minutes I've found two reliable sources from different academic backgrounds which will hopefully meet the extraordinary high standards you set for arguments against what you believe!

"DHT is responsible for the formation of male primary sex characteristics during embryonic life and responsible for the development of most secondary sex characteristics in males at puberty, and it continues to be important to male sexual function throughout adult life."
by Ron Kennedy, M.D., Santa Rosa, CA
http://www.medical-library.net/content/view/1527/41/

Without adequate DHT men have no body hair at all (which is why companies that make hair removal products for men love DHT) and, more importantly, without adequate DHT the male sexual organs (including the prostate) fail to fully mature. This bad condition is compounded by low sex drive and impaired sexual function.
Mike Mahler, stength coach and author
http://www.mikemahler.com/online-lib...androgens.html

Find me a study, preferably written by a doctor, with a conclusion that says something along the line of "DHT is directly responsible for maintaining libido or erections".

This is ridiculous. You want a study that proves a basic biological function? Studies are for proving medications. The function of DHT is known. If you want to study it read some medical literature.

so have you ever heard of the drug dutasteride? apparently it also acts same as finasteride and lowers DHT, but it actually lowers it by over 95% instead of only 60% like finasteride. So if we go by what you are sayin, every single guy that takes this dustateride has to have almost 100% sexual side effects.. But when I looked at these side effects for that drug, they are just slightly higher than finasteride. if what you are saying is true, how on earth do you explain this???

Data on dutasteride is even less comprehensive than studies on finasteride. The only study I know of was performed by GlaxoSmithKline who chose not to even bother taking it to the FDA.

My previous points stand, whether you find the time to reply or not.

[the_charger]

Fine! My point was (aside: you seem to consistently miss these!) that it isn't difficult to establish how important DHT is in male sexual health, but within a few minutes I've found two reliable sources from different academic backgrounds.......

........... "DHT is responsible for the formation of male primary sex characteristics during embryonic life and responsible for the development of most secondary sex characteristics in males at puberty, and it continues to be important to male sexual function throughout adult life."
by Ron Kennedy, M.D., Santa Rosa, CA
http://www.medical-library.net/content/view/1527/41/

this is a slightly better source because it is at least written by a doctor, but still a very bad one. I completely agree DHT is very important for embryonic development and for puberty. This is why there is a very explicit warning saying that pregnant women should stay far away from finasteride, and the reason why only fully matured men (only older than 18) should ever take it.

but this isnt a study. its not even an article! it's a small sentence written by a doctor that practices very questionable treatments. For the first two examples I found on his webpage, he treats patients with Photoluminescence Therapy and Intravenous Hydrogen Peroxide Therapy, both regarded as complete quackery. that wouldnt matter at all if he actually had a source for his statements but he doesnt.

Without adequate DHT men have no body hair at all (which is why companies that make hair removal products for men love DHT) and, more importantly, without adequate DHT the male sexual organs (including the prostate) fail to fully mature. This bad condition is compounded by low sex drive and impaired sexual function.
Mike Mahler, stength coach and author
http://www.mikemahler.com/online-lib...androgens.html

Please don't cite any more studies unless they at least are written by a (non-quack) doctor. "Mahler's aggressive strength" doesnt exactly scream professional of medicine to me. and yet again, no sources to be found.

which will hopefully meet the extraordinary high standards you set for arguments against what you believe!

Lets just get this straight so that everyone reading can understand whats really going on here. you have outright rejected the 3 largest finasteride studies i've posted because the studies werent conducted in the exact methods that you would feel live up to your standards (ill expand on this next time I post to reply to your other statemnts). These studies were done by universities, medical agencies, were placebo controlled, were done on thousands of patients, took place over the course of years, showed all data, and were conducted by groups of dozens of medical professionals.


the sources you provided, that you believe are completely relevant, consist of:

1. An article written by 'Chris Steel' on www.ehow.com. Sources are provided, link to articles written by other non-doctors on a website that sells DHT supplements and steroids. The only somewhat legit source linked to a page with irrelevant information.

2. A short sentence posted on the website of a very questionable Dr. Kennedy. No citations for any of his statements. He also sells treatments that are supposed to boost or regulate hormones.

3. An article written by a strength coach. No sources cited.


and just to stress this again, just so everyone can very plainly see this, you told me that I have "extraordinary high standards" when it comes to sources and studies. I think actually I have very reasonable standards. Your standards appear to be very lacking, in that basically you will believe almost anything you read on the internet, as long as it directly supports your theories....that about right?

please take some time to read up on what is considered a good source or study. If you cant figure this out, let me know and ill be happy to explain the "extraordinary high standards" that is shared by almost every professional out there.

This is ridiculous. You want a study that proves a basic biological function? Studies are for proving medications. The function of DHT is known. If you want to study it read some medical literature.

okay ill say this again, if it is such a basic and fundamental biological function, the internet must be overflowing with very strong studies that show without a doubt that this is the case. why havent you been able to show me anything even passable?

Data on dutasteride is even less comprehensive than studies on finasteride. The only study I know of was performed by GlaxoSmithKline who chose not to even bother taking it to the FDA.

What are you talking about? just look at the wikipedia article, dutasteride IS FDA approved for BPH in north america! If you are saying its not approved for hair loss, yes this is true, but it has absolutely nothing to do with what I am saying. Men could be taking the drug for a runny nose for all I care, it doesnt matter because it still has the exact same effect on the body.


I really want to understand what your problem with this is, so i'll break it down, and please answer each statement im making here:


1. dutasteride lowers dht by about 95%. Do you agree? If not, why?

2. You are saying that DHT is largely responsible for libido, therefore if DHT is lowered to a significant degree, the vast majority of people will have sexual problems. Do you agree? If not, why?

3. Studies of dutasteride on average show side effects similar to what studies of finasteride show. side effects like loss of libido and ed occur slightly more frequently in men taking dutasteride, but not by much. certainly, not every test subject is experience complete impotence or loss of libodo. Do you agree? If not, why?

My previous points stand, whether you find the time to reply or not.

Don't think I am trying to get out of responding to your other points, but I am currently juggling some other important tasks. I just wanted to conclude this discussion about DHT because I am so utterly convinced you are wrong. Ill respond to your other points later if not tonight if I can.

BTW thank you for challenging me, honestly. A week ago I didnt really know much about any of this stuff, but ever since we started debating ive spent a lot of time searching google and reading a lot of these studies, and understanding finasteride much better.

[the_charger]

Double post

[chrisis]

Before we go any further, I want you to digest this. Do you accept these definitions of DHT used by health professionals from medical literature? Is there anything more you need before I actually pull my hair out?

dihydrotestosterone /di·hy·dro·tes·tos·te·rone/ (DHT) (-tes-tos´tĕ-rōn) an androgenic hormone formed in peripheral tissue by the action of 5 on testosterone; thought to be the androgen responsible for development of male primary sex characters during embryogenesis and of male secondary sex characters at puberty, and for adult male sexual function.
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers.

dihydrotestosterone (DHT)
[di-hi′drōtestos′terōn]
an androgenic hormone formed in peripheral tissue from testosterone. It is thought to be the androgen responsible for development of the male primary sex characters during embryogenesis and of male secondary sex characters at puberty and for adult male sexual function.
Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition

dihydrotestosterone (DHT) [di-hi″dro-tes-tos´tĕ-rōn]
an androgenic hormone formed in peripheral tissue from testosterone; thought to be the androgen responsible for development of the male primary sex characters during embryogenesis and of male secondary sex characters at puberty, and for adult male sexual function.
Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, Seventh Edition

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/DHT

[the_charger]

I will take a look at these links you provided. I take your response to mean you wont respond to the very good points I made in my previous post?

*EDIT*

wow that didnt take long.

sigh... Okay you have posted three links to the same website that contains definitions that can be easily added by anyone

NONE OF THESE PROVIDE A SOURCE TO A STUDY THAT SUPPORTS WHAT THEY ARE SAYING

For the third time now: you are saying this is a common, fundamental biological function. If this is really the case, show me a STUDY that supports what you are saying. I dont know how I can explain this any more clearly. Do you know what a medical study is? Im not asking for the world here, and I think im being extremely reasonable.

[chrisis]

The reference I supplied sourced 3 definitions of DHT from 3 medical authorities:

Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers.
Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition
Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, Seventh Edition

Why is this not good enough for you? I've got no idea what your problem is with TheFreeDictionary.com. It's just a website that aggregates information from various sources.

I will take a look at these links you provided. I take your response to mean you wont respond to the very good points I made in my previous post?

I have no interest in debating with an idiot. If you can't accept what the medical literature says about DHT then I give up on this debate.

Here's another medical reference:

"Dihydrotestosterone: A byproduct of the male hormone testosterone. Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) is considered to be the essential androgenic hormone. DHT is responsible for the formation of male primary sex characteristics during embryonic life. It is responsible for the development of most secondary sex characteristics in males at puberty. And it continues to be important to male sexual function throughout adult life. A semisynthetic analog of DHT is called stanolone."

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/...ticlekey=33416

[the_charger]

okay my new friend, the fact that you are now resorting to personal insults and refuse to respond to any of the questions I asked you shows me that you have no more sound arguments to make, and are essentially giving up. again, something I also learned in debate class, as soon as someone says something along the lines of "I wont waste my time debating this with an idiot like you" pretty plainly shows they have just admitted defeat.

So if you arent giving up, at the very least, respond to what I said about Dutasteride, because that alone proves that you are completely wrong. I think you know this, you have no idea how to respond to it, so you are now resorting to insults. If im wrong, prove it. respond to it and tell me why its wrong.

you still are unable to provide one study or valid source that supports anything you are saying. I keep asking you for one thing, and you give me the complete opposite. I've given you 3 chances now, and everything you are posting is garbage. your fundamental inability to understand what constitutes a valid source or study makes this all very difficult. And for a fourth time, you post yet another website with a definition and no source.

let me try to explain to you what a study is and maybe you will finally understand something here:

A study will often start when a group of doctors have a hypothesis. If there is not enough existing to reach a sound conclusion based on this hypothesis, a study will usually be conducted. they will set up the study to eliminate biases, and make sure they get some solid usable results. then they get together a group of test subjects, usually with a placebo control, then conduct the study. They monitor the study closely, take tests, then analyze the data afterwards. Then, they look at the data, then conclude whether or not the PROOF supports their hypothesis. the data tells them how and why their hypothesis is true or false. This will be summarized in the conclusion.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?

I AM SAYING THIS FOR THE FOURTH TIME NOW: you said that the fact DHT is critical in maintaining libido, erectile function and general sexual health is fundamental, common medical knowledge. SHOW ME SOMETHING THAT PROVES THIS!

A website with definitions posted by anonmyous authors is not PROOF
An article written by a doctor with no sources is not PROOF
An article written by a non-doctor with no sources is not PROOF



last but not least..

YOUR PERSONAL OPINION AND INABILITY TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT YOU ARE WRONG IS NOT PROOF


Hope to hear from you again