EVERYONE Will Get Finasteride Side-Effects Eventually

[trialAcc]

As someone who got their hormones checked and is trying to educate themselves of finasteride, this makes 100 percent sense. If one wants to keep their hair, I am not sure what proven , potent and side effect free choices they have. I know there RU58841 and CB-03-01 and heard something about Progesterone but I dont think any of them have been studied as much as finasteride.

RU didn't make it past clinical trials and the studies were never published - 0 safety profile yet people still talk about it like an acceptable alternative.

CB is still in clinical trials and the only place to get it is from grey-market sources - Somewhat of an established safety profile but no good way to source without testing every batch for contaminants. Also not really shown to be very effective yet.

 

[sytpg]

I have never understood this myself. I sometimes question the accuracy of the side effect reported. What exactly was Propecias official statement? Only 2 percent get sides or get persistent sides?

Even those who only experience mild side effects, it seems like almost every other person I read online experiences something like temporary watery c*m, which I thought the studies said should only happen in like 1-4% of people

 

[trialAcc]

Even those who only experience mild side effects, it seems like almost every other person I read online experiences something like temporary watery c*m, which I thought the studies said should only happen in like 1-4% of people

Ya I'm sure the people without water c*m were dying to get online to tell you about the thick texture of it.

 

[bluecyclone]

This has nothing to do with my post and I’m not sure where you’re pulling these numbers from but it doesn’t really matter

bottom line, erectile function decreases with age due to a decrease in the bodies androgens and typically as men get fatter with age also an increase in amortization. Progression of heart disease has a minor effect as well

Inhibiting over 60% of your bodies main androgen will have side effects for almost all men in the long run

Any thoughts on the Topical Dutasteride rationale, molecular weight etc? As someone with ideal function at 42 when starting Finasteride I can tell it’s really done some damage. I’m at the point of stopping, been using topical Dutasteride 1X week RU daily. Starting to think it’s just not worth it.

 

[kidcurry96]

Ya I'm sure the people without water c*m were dying to get online to tell you about the thick texture of it.

I am pretty sure watery semen is a sign of low sperm count.

 

[welshman123]

Living in a city has risks, I'm willing to take those as well. Point being that there are many elements to health, sexual health included. I try not to stress things I can't control and instead focus on what I can. I am using topical finasteride as of recently and notice little to no difference. Things like lack of sleep, frustrations, lack of healthy diet, lack of exercise have affected me noticeably, topical finasteride has already reduced the stress caused by indecision. I am more than happy about making the decision to proceed.

did you use oral finasteride before? did you have sides if so? thinking to swap to topical finasteride soon

 

[user394587]

It's true that people and doctors are much more aware of the risks than in the past, more and more doctors and dermatologists who also don't want to prescribe it anymore.

I also want to make it clear that I'm not against banning finasteride/dutasteride, everyone should be free to take whatever they want BUT they should be informed correctly and completely. And I believe topical AA's like topical duta can be benefitial for hairloss with a good balance between risk and reward.

I have to wonder how many doctors are reluctant to prescribe finasteride because of what they've heard, and not necessarily due to personal prescribing experience or reviewing the data on the drug. This is my own personal experience, but I've found that the vast majority of general practitioners have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to the endocrine system, let alone neurosteroids.

It should be clear to most people that have reviewed literature on the endocrine system that inhibiting 5AR is not a healthy thing to do. Having endocrinologists not being fans of the drug should be the equivalent of calling the sky blue, because you're negatively interfering with the endocrine system for what is effectively a cosmetic problem.

With that said, I do take issue with one thing that you've said here; "correctly and completely". I think that the vast majority of people that are lurking around on hair loss forums aren't exactly educated on how to properly read a scientific study. There are many things to consider in statistics, such as establishing controls, conducting random sampling with appropriately large sample sizes, dealing with confounding factors, and attempting to reduce bias.

The meta analysis you linked before points out that the safety profile methodology for finasteride in the large clinical trials was poor, which may very well be true. What is also problematic is that the studies conducted on the persistent side effects of finasteride were also poorly conducted, even more so than what is present in the clinical trials. They contain sample selection bias, confounding, small sample sizes, and the absence of properly formulated controls. The issue here is that a study such as this is effectively worthless from a statistical point of view, and is hardly an indication of "correct" information. At best, they raise awareness about a debilitating issue and may prompt better research to be done in the future. It becomes problematic when these studies are cited under the assumption that they are at a quality level that provides informative material, which is not the case.

I'd also like to note that I think PFS is a real condition, albeit a rare one, and that I think you have good intentions posting here trying to warn young impressionable people of the risks of finasteride. With that said, I did feel compelled to write this because some of the studies you've linked here are not statistically relevant and are not representative of a "correct" interpretation of the dangers of finasteride.

 

[trialAcc]

Of course you're balding hence you needing finasteride to stop/slow it down. Keep on coping finasteride is completely safe though and stop lying, the "several studies showing fina are safe" are already debunked by the meta-analysis, most of the other studies fina takers try to cope with are dermatologist studies that only focus on hair improvement.

Btw why do you think I like propeciahelp? I'll tell you a secret, a lot of those PFS guys hate people like me who post about the reality of 5ar inhibitors, they love guys like you who are ignorant and emotionally invested in their hormone treatment to save their hair and promote that poison. More people taking fina/duta > more people with PFS.

Ask the researcher from the study what the N value is but sucks for you that won't change the observations made. But it's really funny how fina lovers cope and try to dismiss every study showing the negative effects of fina as "low quality", meanwhile fina lovers still think Merck studies are the highest standard... Oh wait, "Merck Manipulated the Science about the Drug Vioxx" https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13685-drug-giant-merck-accused-of-deaths-cover-up/

Anyway cope any way you want, more and more doctors are waking up to the dangerous reality of 5ar inhibitors.

Pardon? The N value determines how credible the study is. Same goes for a control group, which this study doesn't have. If you can't understand why these are important to the credibility of a study, then you should stop posting research. Of course it doesn't change the observations made, but medical studies that carry weight need to show why the observations are statistically significant by ensuring adequate sample size and a comparison to an otherwise random control.

There's a massive problem in the world today with people having such easy access to both find and publish information without the credibility of it being easily known. You are just contributing to it by pushing your narrative.

The funny thing is that I fully just said in the sentence that you quoted that I would be the least surprised person to find out that finasteride/dutasteride are far more dangerous then advertised. You called me a finasteride lover, ignorant and emotionally invested in a drug, when you're the one sharing ever scrap of poor research that remotely says "finasteride = Bad" and are clearly the biased one here.

 

[user394587]

Of course you're balding hence you needing finasteride to stop/slow it down. Keep on coping finasteride is completely safe though and stop lying, the "several studies showing fina are safe" are already debunked by the meta-analysis, most of the other studies fina takers try to cope with are dermatologist studies that only focus on hair improvement.

Btw why do you think I like propeciahelp? I'll tell you a secret, a lot of those PFS guys hate people like me who post about the reality of 5ar inhibitors, they love guys like you who are ignorant and emotionally invested in their hormone treatment to save their hair and promote that poison. More people taking fina/duta > more people with PFS.

Ask the researcher from the study what the N value is but sucks for you that won't change the observations made. But it's really funny how fina lovers cope and try to dismiss every study showing the negative effects of fina as "low quality", meanwhile fina lovers still think Merck studies are the highest standard... Oh wait, "Merck Manipulated the Science about the Drug Vioxx" https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13685-drug-giant-merck-accused-of-deaths-cover-up/

Anyway cope any way you want, more and more doctors are waking up to the dangerous reality of 5ar inhibitors.

Finasteride has been added to the 'list of drugs to avoid in 2021' by a French Medical Journal

Translation from the Journal 'Drugs to be Avoided for Better Care 2021 Report'

'Finasteride 1mg, a 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor, has a very high efficacy in modest androgenic alopecia in men: it increases hair density only slightly on the top of the head (by about 10%), and only for the duration of the treatment. It exposes particular sexual disorders (e.g., sexual dysfunction in erection and ejaculation, decreased libido), depression, suicidal ideation and cancer of the breast. When a drug is the chosen option, local minoxidil used with care is less dangerous.'



If posting new studies about finasteride makes fina/duta users afraid then that says a lot about them. Seems they're not that convinced themselves about the safety of fina after all...


Good you acknowledge that long term inhibition of 5ar is not healthy. And your critique about these news studies showing the dangers of fina is nothing more than the same cope as above, although you do have a point but as you know big studies need a lot of funding. I'm sure we can agree we need more studies about 5ar inhibitors and the (long term) effects they have.

Anyway, these dicussions always end the same though. Agree to disagree is the best course of action for people who think 5ar inhibitors are safe.

We need properly conducted studies that show the incidence of PFS. This means a design that includes blinding, unbiased sampling with an appropriately large sample size, randomized assignment to placebo and treatment groups, and the proper handling of confounding variables.

The studies on PFS throw away these basic statistical concepts and are not suitable for making statistical inference. Pointing this fact out is hardly "cope".

Not everyone has the technical knowledge to be able to differentiate a properly conducted study from a poorly conducted one. Finasteride users already have enough sh*t to worry about such as the long term systemic inhibition of DHT and neurosteroids. I don't think citing these studies (IE those conducted by Irwig et al.) really do anything except induce fear over something that wasn't even shown through proper statistical inference to begin with.

I'm all for spreading knowledge, but only when it's backed by strong statistical evidence. We aren't there yet when it comes to the long term side effects of finasteride or PFS.

What I do find concerning is, as you eluded to, such studies require significant amounts of funding. I don't think this is something that we're going to have a clear answer on for quite a while unfortunately.

 

[trialAcc]

We need properly conducted studies that show the incidence of PFS. This means a design that includes blinding, unbiased sampling with an appropriately large sample size, randomized assignment to placebo and treatment groups, and the proper handling of confounding variables.

The studies on PFS throw away these basic statistical concepts and are not suitable for making statistical inference. Pointing this fact out is hardly "cope".

Not everyone has the technical knowledge to be able to differentiate a properly conducted study from a poorly conducted one. Finasteride users already have enough sh*t to worry about such as the long term systemic inhibition of DHT and neurosteroids. I don't think citing these studies (IE those conducted by Irwig et al.) really do anything except induce fear over something that wasn't even shown through proper statistical inference to begin with.

I'm all for spreading knowledge, but only when it's backed by strong statistical evidence. We aren't there yet when it comes to the long term side effects of finasteride or PFS.

What I do find concerning is, as you eluded to, such studies require significant amounts of funding. I don't think this is something that we're going to have a clear answer on for quite a while unfortunately.

This exactly. I'm hardly "coping" by pointing out that poor information is being spread.

 

[trialAcc]

Of course you're emotionally invested, you're taking finasteride and even dutasteride. And excuse me reading over the fact you acknowledge that 5ar inhbitors are more dangerous than advertised, my bad.

I'm not actually on dutasteride, I don't know why it says that.

 

[trialAcc]

But it isn't "poor information", hence you coping. But anyway, we already discussed this.

Hope we'll get bigger studies in the near future. I'm sure 5ar inhibitor research will garner more interest and let's hope the necessary funding will follow.

No, you didn't discuss it lmao, you ignored valid criticism of why the study you posted was poor/irrelevant and just said the results are the same either way. You're not actually willing to have a real discussion about the realities of drugs, you just are decided that they are abundantly dangerous and don't care that you are posting just as biased and poor research as you are accusing the drug company of supplying.

 

[SomeoneHasToSayIt]

What I do find concerning is, as you eluded to, such studies require significant amounts of funding. I don't think this is something that we're going to have a clear answer on for quite a while unfortunately.

We're certainly not, because the pharmaceutical companies have no incentives to ask questions whose answers can only hurt them.

Anyway, I could go on a long rant about finasteride and all the motivated reasoning anxious balding men engage in to justify its usage, but I'll refrain lol. I agree with OP's contention, though I'll add that sexual sides are just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[user394587]

We're certainly not, because the pharmaceutical companies have no incentives to ask questions whose answers can only hurt them.

Anyway, I could go on a long rant about finasteride and all the motivated reasoning anxious balding men engage in to justify its usage, but I'll refrain lol. I agree with OP's contention, though I'll add that sexual sides are just the tip of the iceberg.

Aren't you taking finasteride (your regimen indicates so)?

 

[SomeoneHasToSayIt]

Aren't you taking finasteride (your regimen indicates so)?

Not anymore.

 

[trialAcc]

No we did discuss it briefly, I said to ask the researchers from the study for more information and acknowledge your general criticism but that doesn't make the study poorly done or the outcome invalid like you try and make it seem, the study is a comparative study and is done well.

The study is done by researchers from the university of southern Denmark, not some random idiots who don't know how to conduct a proper study or have no knowledge of statistics. I also see no conflict of interest either.

Characteristics of finasteride users in comparison with nonusers: A Nordic nationwide study based on individual-level data from Denmark, Finland, and Sweden - PubMed

Systematic differences between finasteride users and nonusers were found emphasizing the importance of confounder adjustment of associations between finasteride and male breast cancer.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Here's the link to one of the researchers with her email: https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/persons/thok

Please send her a mail and tell her exactly why her study is "poor research". Of course you won't because the truth is you don't know what you're talking about.

Here's another one of the researchers from the study: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anders-Green

Surely you know better than a Professor in Clinical Epidemiology right? Lol, these internet warriors man....

So far it just looks like a weak attempt from your part to discredit the study because you don't like what it shows and we all know why, you don't like to be confronted with the dangers of fina since you're taking it yourself like so many here. And don't get confused, you're the only one who is really biased, I have no stake in this.



That's a very good remark and you're absolutely right. So far we'll have to do with smaller scale studies, although it seems we get more and more studies about fina/duta/5ar inhibitors in general these last years so interest in the subject is definitely getting higher.

"I have no stake in this", say's a poster that pops up in every thread of people asking about finasteride sides with studies on 5AR use on rat livers.

I'm not even bothering with this anymore. You're using strawman arguments and appeals to authority to make it seem like anything you post is free of criticism because it fits the narrative you feel you need to push. You can also say that I don't know what I'm talking about, but I get paid very well in life to be able to breakdown and find quality information from the overwhelming abundance of garbage that is available, so you flashing credentials of people who posted studies means absolutely nothing to me, nor should it anyone else while we have the ability to actually judge the value of the research separate from the person who's compiled it. If you think anyone with a credential creates equal output, then you're actually part of the problem of why people don't take finasteride doomsayers seriously.

I could honestly care less about the dangers of fina, I accepted when I took it that I was probably taking a drug far more dangerous then advertised. I'd be very happy if others were more properly warned about what dangers actually exist so that they can make a more informed decision then I did, but guess what? You're not doing a very good job of this with this hypocritical and entrenched stance you've decided you have to take that's apparently void of all legitimate criticism.

Good luck.

 

[trialAcc]

All these fina lovers use the same worn out arguments, so tiresome... Besides this thread I'm definitely not popping up in every thread about people who take finasteride, check my post history. And is it against the rules to post my opinion in threads specifically about finasteride side effects? Or are only the same biased opinions ad nauseam from you and your fina taking friends allowed? And of course animal studies aren't valid and legitimate in your mind, if you think studies based on rats can automatically be dismissed then it just shows again how little you know about scientific research. Also most studies I posted aren't even animal studies, stop with your pathetic attempts to try and discredit studies that do not fit your narrative.



Who cares that you're paid well, plenty of fools in this world who get paid too much. You're still not anything close to a real scientist who actually knows how to conduct a scientific study, let alone know anything about endocrinology. (edit; just saw you're a debt analyst, lol at the arrogance of thinking you know better...)



Sure buddy, I also wish you good luck with your finasteride journey.

Again with the useless and tiresome arguments. I'm not a finasteride lover lmao, you have some issues man. Share some quality studies and I'll openly support your efforts. Until then, stop fear mongering with useless articles.

I also never claimed I was a scientist, but the skills for being able to determine what credible information looks like is a universal one. I never once criticized the science of the paper, just the research methods which are being used to present information.

 

[trialAcc]

Haha, ok friend I can post a million quality studies and you'll keep denying reality. Keep on coping with your finasteride usage I really don't care, whatever makes you sleep at night. This has gone on long enough anyway.

Then post those studies and admit that the last one you posted was garbage, but you wont, because apparently "email the researchers" is a valid response to the criticism I had.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

I have unfortunately read quite a lot of this thread from the start, there seems to be two phrases that constantly get thrown about as some kind of bizarre reverse psychology schoolyard put downs to anyone who states they are using finasteride and are content with the results, one is ''emotionally invested'' and the other is ''coping'', neither of them makes any sense or has any logic in this context..

 

[trialAcc]

I have unfortunately read quite a lot of this thread from the start, there seems to be two phrases that constantly get thrown about as some kind of bizarre reverse psychology schoolyard put downs to anyone who states they are using finasteride and are content with the results, one is ''emotionally invested'' and the other is ''coping'', neither of them makes any sense or has any logic in this context..

Seriously, I'm openly saying that I've always expected that finasteride was far more dangerous then advertised and that I would be happy for people faced with the decision now to be more openly informed about the decisions they're making. The caveat is that we need actual quality information, otherwise you're no better then what you're accusing the drug companies of. Bias and misleading studies.

The response? I'm an emotionally invested fina lover who needs to discredit studies to cope. At what point do you just stop caring and let the obsessives do their thing on their own time and simply ignore it.