Official Propecia/Proscar Websites Taken Down

   
Share/Bookmark
 

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

January 21, 2012, 12:06 PM

http://tinyurl.com/72wmsvq


Presumably because of impending lawsuits. Notice the 1-800 number for negative side effects. Sadly, I would still take the drug if I didn’t get side effects lol


Here is a video interview from chief researcher in recent persistent side effect study:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAZ3-t7vJeg

and a tragic case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXxUpiExMtQ

 

IGNORE

Avatar

halfempty

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 58

Member Since:
March 2010

# 1 ]

January 22, 2012, 10:55 AM

This really creeps me out.

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 2 ]

January 22, 2012, 02:27 PM

I wouldn’t be too creeped out if your not taking it or if your not experiencing any side effects while taking the drug. But for those that have side effects they are really REAL. They are not due to “other factors”. If you look at the Propecia FDA study there is no significant difference between treatment and control groups in terms of side effects. I have huge doubts about the 2% number as a lot of people that are able to take the drug get at least some of the listed effected albeit at a more tolerable level.

 

IGNORE

Avatar

Nidhogge

RankRankRank

Editor

Total Posts: 510

Member Since:
January 2010

# 3 ]

February 03, 2012, 09:00 PM

bear101—

I would be creeped out either way.  The people that get sides in the short-term are the lucky ones, because they’re forced off the poison early before it does some real long-term damage.  Those who don’t get sides in the short-term persist to consume this crap, and 10-30 years down the line, have increased their chances of winding up with a death-threatening illness.

Messing with DHT like that, a hormone that our body needs to function properly…that’s just not right.

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 4 ]

February 04, 2012, 10:28 AM

Nidhogge - February 03, 2012, 09:00 PM

Messing with DHT like that, a hormone that our body needs to function properly…that’s just not right.


I strongly believe whether you are taking a DHT inhibitor, natural or man-made, topically or orally, the inhibitor, if it works, will get into your blood stream (in at least some amount) and reduce serum DHT levels.  Are you saying that inhibiting DHT is bad?

I also believe everything has risks whether it is natural or unnatural. Some of the most deadliest chemicals in the world are natural: botulinum toxin, aflatoxin-b (one of the most carcinogenic substances), snake venom, etc. Furthermore, anything can be labelled as a poison. Paracelus first law of toxicology: the poison is in the dose.

 

IGNORE

Avatar

Nidhogge

RankRankRank

Editor

Total Posts: 510

Member Since:
January 2010

# 5 ]

February 06, 2012, 03:44 PM

bear101—

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.  DHT is there for a reason; it’s a crucial hormone for men and women alike.  Playing “god” by taking a man-made substance that forces your body to behave in a certain manner is why so many people are sick now.  That is, essentially, the definition of a pharmaceutical drug.  They aren’t adaptogenic, they do not work with your body to return it to homeostasis.  They simply force your body to behave in a certain manner.  If you build up a dam in a river, that water’s going to re-direct itself and cause a problem somewhere else.  Best thing to do is find a reason as to why you’re producing excessive DHT, quit using the cop-out genetics excuse, and address that issue so that your body makes a correction.

Some of the most dangerous substances on the planet may be natural, but look at their names—they have the word “toxin” in it, and snake venom isn’t natural any more than feces is.  I’m referring more to what grows out of the ground and, of course, not everything that grows out of the ground is meant for human consumption and usage.  That’s what we look to ancient cultures (Indians, Chinese, Eastern Medicine) and modern-day science to figure out for us.  The big difference between a synthetic drug and natural herb is that a synthetic drug is produced by extrapolating just one small part of the entire constituency of said herbal, and then artificially augmenting its potency to levels WAY beyond that which is found in nature.  By taking that one constituent without the entire spectrum of other constituents that nature intended it to be taken with, and then augmenting it 25x on top of it, this creates an incredibly hazardous product for human consumption.

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 6 ]

February 06, 2012, 05:09 PM

I have no doubt that a lot of these herbs/natural products may have some benefit. I’m not arguing against that. I can support the idea of Zix Creator that the side effects from finasteride are due to the reduction in DHT levels in the body and not the finasteride itself. Anything natural or unnatural that reduces plasma levels of DHT will do this.

If your not inhibiting DHT, then your going to have to at least address what it does: apoptosis, inflammation. I have no problem with that and in fact treating hairloss this way might be my only choice. Genetics is not a cop-out it’s a reality: it’s called androgenetic alopecia for a reason.

I really don’t believe nature intended us to take herbal supplements in pill form from a bottle. And I don’t care if it did as long as the product works and is safe. How do you know what doses are effective and safe without some sort of scientific investigation? I don’t have issue with taking natural supplements, but I would like to know what safe and effective doses are. Perhaps there isn’t much money to be made by investigating them to the same degree that pharmaceutical drugs undergo, but it would be highly beneficial information.

I’ve never said finasteride is good for you, but it has been tested and a lot is known about it. It appears thru further research that its low incidence of sexual side effects was grossly unexaggerated.

I made the initial post to bring awareness regarding the risks of finasteride, but IMO DHT has to be addressed in some way, shape, or form to effectively treat MPB.

 

IGNORE

Avatar

Nidhogge

RankRankRank

Editor

Total Posts: 510

Member Since:
January 2010

# 7 ]

February 06, 2012, 06:59 PM

bear101—

It’s called androgenetic alopecia, because the medical establishment gives generic names to things that they haven’t figured out.  Just like cancer…as far as “modern medicine” is concerned, it’s just a random thing that you get or don’t get, and the only way to treat it is to cut, burn, or poison your body into remission.  Cancer isn’t random, it is preventable, and it is naturally treatable (it is also unheard of in “uncivilized” societies).  About 5% of doctors out there actually do original research and care to learn beyond what they’ve been “inDOCTRinated” with in school.  The rest are just out to make a living and pay off their massive school debt.

There is no gene that says “Hey buddy, you’re going to lose your hair at age 20.”  It’s a lot more complex than that, as is the human body as a whole.  From a genetic perspective, the most realistic answer is that some possess a gene that creates inflammation as a result of excessive parasitical population, with the primary effect being the eradication of the excess populations, and the secondary effect being damage to the hair follicle and bulb. 

http://www.jashbotanicals.com/articles/natural_guide_to_healthier_hair_2.html

http://www.demodexsolutions.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=282

The thing about the parasites, is that they’re not even the original problem.  Yes, they may result in your body producing inflammation signals to kill them off, but why are there such abnormally large populations over those not afflicted by MPB?  That goes all the way down to your basic estrogen levels being out-of-whack from god knows how many factors in our society…eating habits, environmental toxins, what we put in and on our bodies, sleep patterns, and so forth.  Imbalanced estrogens affect hormones like a domino effect, resulting in more DHT production and somehow often more sebum production, thus giving these parasites more fuel to reproduce.

Do you feel that nature intended for us to drink cow’s milk meant for calves?  How about cow’s milk treated with hormones and pasteurized to destroy all the beneficial bacteria, heated to such extreme temperatures that it converts lactose into the dangerous beta lactase that spikes our insulin levels through the roof?  Did nature intend us to cake aluminum and chemical-laden paste into the thinnest skin membrane on our body to prevent us from sweating and smelling (armpits)?  How about eating meat treated with hormones that grazes on genetically modified corn grown in nutritionally-devoid soil?  Or sugary foods, or even better, high fructore corn syrup?  Inorganic foods?  Bread?  Vaccines?

Nature doesn’t intend on 95% of the things that we consume on a day-to-day basis as a Western population.  THIS is why supplements are clutch; extreme measures to deal with extremely bad lifestyles.  If you’re eating completely organic, avoiding gluten, avoiding dairy and all processed foods, then sure…those supplements really aren’t of much benefit to you.

As for knowing what doses are safe—we look to what science and history (ayurvedic medicine) has said is safe based on human trials and hundreds if not thousands of years of anecdoctal evidence.  Very rarely do herbal supplements give amounts that aren’t safe for human consumption.  Not effective, sure, but rarely hazardous.  The bodybuilding supplement industry is a whole horse of a different color as that is always a mixed bag due to tampering with hormones and caffeine, but the natural supplement industry really boils down to whether people are going to cheap out on you with a poor quality product that is ineffective, or if they’re going to deliver a quality product with bioavailable ingredients that your body and readily use.  That research that you’re looking for is there…you just need to look for it.  Literally, I’m talking PubMed.  For the Ortho Nutrition supplements, ImmortalHair backed up each product with a bunch of individual studies that are a good starting point @ Ortho-Nutrition.com.  Many companies do this now to help people make educated decisions.

Addressing DHT specifically is like trying to complete a puzzle by only looking at the middle piece.  You still have the beginning and end to address.  I stand by only recommending Epilobium for some semblance of DHT control, and perhaps Farmed Cultivar Pueraria Mirifica to balance estrogens in the body which may influence DHT production.

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 8 ]

February 06, 2012, 11:32 PM

Nidhogge

I’m for the whatever works method to stopping baldness, but not at all costs. That’s why I stopped finasteride, because it wasn’t worth the trade-off (acute and possibly long-term side effects). Modern medicine can help and so can more traditional medicine. Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

“Just like cancer…as far as “modern medicine” is concerned, it’s just a random thing that you get or don’t get, and the only way to treat it is to cut, burn, or poison your body into remission.”

I work in this field and some cancers like cervical cancer are very well understood. Close to 100% of squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix are caused by human papilloma virus (HPV), with the main ones being HPV16 and 18. A very small percentage is caused by other factors. This is far from random. Many other epithelial cancers are caused or suspected to be caused by HPV.

Why does demodex decide to pack up and leave after after it reaches the remaining horsehoe of hair? Is there a forcefield there? Or if it does indeed get into the permanent area why doesn’t that area bald as severely?

Demodex could accelerate hair-loss in prone follicles…that seems plausible. But why not the rest of the hair? Like I stated in a previous thread my hair oiliest there with very bad folliculitis, but shows no sigh of thinning.

I think we can just agree to disagree with some things.

 

IGNORE

bigluke

Rank

New Member

Total Posts: 19

Member Since:
September 2011

# 9 ]

February 07, 2012, 07:33 AM

well said Nid!

 

IGNORE

Calbruin

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 49

Member Since:
January 2010

# 10 ]

February 07, 2012, 01:10 PM

Guys -
I’m officially very concerned regarding this news. I’ve been on the drug for four years. I am not certain what to do at this point but it seems like I’m rolling the dice by continuing to take it. I scheduled an appoinment with my doctor, and I’m not quite certain what is the best way to come off it…

 

IGNORE

Calbruin

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 49

Member Since:
January 2010

# 11 ]

February 07, 2012, 01:10 PM

Guys -
I’m officially very concerned regarding this news. I’ve been on the drug for four years. I am not certain what to do at this point but it seems like I’m rolling the dice by continuing to take it. I scheduled an appoinment with my doctor, and I’m not quite certain what is the best way to come off it…

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 12 ]

February 09, 2012, 06:16 PM

Calbruin,

www.propeciahelp.com is your best bet.

I could never tolerate the drug for longer than 6 months and that was at a very low dose (1 mg once per week) so I just went off cold turkey. Every time I quit it took around 10-14 days to start to get back to normal.

 

IGNORE

Avatar

Nidhogge

RankRankRank

Editor

Total Posts: 510

Member Since:
January 2010

# 13 ]

February 16, 2012, 07:54 PM

bear101—

HPV has absolutely nothing to do with cervical cancer…this has been shot down some time ago.  It’s just another myth propagated by the medical industrial complex to push “HPV vaccines” which are, in fact, the real cause for cervical cancer:

http://docakilah.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/hpv-does-not-cause-cancer-the-gardasil-scam/

You’ll find that it’s a rare doctor that actually questions what he or she is told, and they simply administer what their protocol tells them to administer.  Whether it’s burning, poisoning, or dicing a man or woman up, that’s where the money is so that is where the money will continue to go.  Additionally, that doctor is saddled with student loans, and branching off into alternative medicine and all the red tape that you have to go through isn’t exactly in their financial interests when they can just “go with the flow” and do what big pharma paid off the government to tell them to do.

The two are, indeed, mutually exclusive because one is true medicine while the other is not.  One associates the word “medicine” with “cure,” and modern medicine does not “cure” anybody.  First off, it’s our immune system that cures us; that’s it.  Not a drug, not an herb, nothing.  Natural treatments work to improve the strength of our immune systems so that we can reverse disease whether it’s the common cold or something far worse, and prevent it from happening to begin with.  Drugs are used to torch the body, killing “good” and “bad” flora at the same time, opening people up to a series of side-effects and diseases that they would have not of otherwise have contracted.

Back to the cancer topic…the fact is that the majority of people that “die of cancer” do not in fact die of cancer.  They die of simple diseases such as pneumonia as a result of having a severely weakened immune system which is in itself a direct result of utilizing chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery to try to diminish cancer.  These “treatments” are traumatic to the body and are no different than medieval torture in terms of the shock that it delivers to the body.  Just because drugs are used to suppress the pain receptors on our bodies from receiving these treatments, it doesn’t mean that the shock to our organs and energy flow isn’t realized throughout every cell in our systems.  Pretty much everybody has cancer from middle to old age, it’s just the way things go:

http://ortho-nutrition.com/article-cancer-look-before-you-leap

It’s unrealistic to think that every cell in our body will be normal when what we put into our bodies is anything but!  It doesn’t mean that having cancer is a bad thing, either…

As for demodex, the answer to that is simple.  People refer to hair that doesn’t fall out as “DHT-resistant” which is ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense.  Now, “inflammation-resistant” sounds a bit more reasonable.  DHT in and of itself does nothing…it’s a hormone, therefore, it triggers other processes in your body.  What we have on the sides and farther back our head are most likely follicles that simply resist inflammation.  No inflammation, no hair loss.

 

IGNORE

tanner84

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 105

Member Since:
January 2012

# 14 ]

February 17, 2012, 01:03 AM

You’d think taking a daily ibuprofen might help with inflammation -

 

IGNORE

bear101

RankRank

Member

Total Posts: 55

Member Since:
January 2010

# 15 ]

February 17, 2012, 08:35 PM

HPV association with cervical cancer is not a myth.

I agree, however, that the vaccine may not live up to the hype because:

1. It does not protect against all the HPV viral sub-types
2. Cancer takes 10-20 years to progress…we won’t know if it works until we reach that time range
3. It might need boosters in between…most vaccines do…therefore it might not provide adequate protection for the lifetime of the patient.
4. As your article pointed out there are some studies that suggest it might increase the risk of progression of high grade lesions in those that already have an HPV infection.
5. If the patient already has HPV, then the vaccine does very little. Not surprisingly the drug companies Merck and Glaxo-Smith Kline are trying to market to people that already have the virus. The claim that they might still get protection for the strains that they don’t have. The jury is still out on this.
6. Viral replacement. The non-targeted strains could become more prevalent.

Also true from your link is that that most HPV infections clear for most individuals and that persistent infection is the problem. And the immune system as well as other environmental and lifestyle factors may play a large role in this. Genetics are probably a factor in this too. However, the immune system will almost never be able to rid the body of a CIN 2 or higher lesion. But, it is true that not all of these high grade lesions will progress to invasive cervical cancer in the lifetime of the patient.

Sure there has to be the right conditions, but one thing that is undeniable is HPV viral DNA integration into the cells of those suffering precancerous lesions.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12893192
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17724723

Here is a also an abstract of association of inflammation with those suffering from high grade lesions and infected with HPV. No argument that inflammation may play a role. The question is how much of a role.

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/10/10/1021.full

There are conspiracy theories, but there is also a mountain of evidence that will contradict that.


As for demodex, the answer to that is simple.  People refer to hair that doesn’t fall out as “DHT-resistant” which is ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense.  Now, “inflammation-resistant” sounds a bit more reasonable.  DHT in and of itself does nothing…it’s a hormone, therefore, it triggers other processes in your body.  What we have on the sides and farther back our head are most likely follicles that simply resist inflammation.  No inflammation, no hair loss.

The above sounds reasonable.

 

IGNORE

 
   
 








THE INTERNET'S HOME FOR

HAIR LOSS NEWS, TREATMENTS, SOLUTIONS, AND FORUMS.