EVERYONE Will Get Finasteride Side-Effects Eventually

[Micky_007]

Ok i'll just post some pictures of the Snooker player John Higgins, to illustrate what im talking about incase its not 100% clear

John Higgins is a similar age to me and has been loosing his hair for a similar amount of time as me.

View attachment 171400
This is him around 1996, he is about 21 and looks to have been already loosing for around 3 years

View attachment 171401
age 23 - 1998 loosing hair for 5 years

View attachment 171402
age 30 - 2005 loosing hair for 12 years

View attachment 171403
age 40 - 2015 loosing hair for 22 years

View attachment 171404
age 46 - 2021 loosing hair for 28 years

He still hasn't reached his final norwood pattern yet, you can argue if you want that this is non-aggressive hair loss, as he is only loosing 10 or whatever percent every 3 years, because its taken him 28 years to get there. but At the end of the day he is bald.

If he had started a hair loss regime in 1998 there is a very high probability that he would have been able to maintain the majority of his hair until now, the same like I have, so where as I look about 35 he looks closer to 60.

This is why people need to stick to there regimes for decades. and this why the people who do have success.

Fortunately I am far younger than him and also we have improved technology exponentially compared to when he just starting to experience hairloss.

I'm pretty sure we will have atleast a few viable treatments within the next 6 years that are far better than everything we currently have now.

Some Pro-Finasteride people like others to think that literally no treatment will ever come out that's going to be better in every way than Finasteride even in the next 20 years , and that's so far from the truth lol.

 

[Micky_007]

Here we go again.It worked for many people far longer than 2 years.

No one said it didn't. I said statistically, Finasterides efficacy peaks at the 1 or 2 year mark, and that is for the those who do actually respond to Finasteride well (best cases)... Of course there will be people who maintain for much longer, but statistically, even pro-Finasteride studies show that the rate of efficacy even in the best responders who have peak results at 1 or 2 year mark, steadily declines after that point.

So the fact that the other guy said my tiny 10% worsening of hairloss in 3 years is something bad is quite ridiculous when not even Finasteride in best cases can maintain at 100% for 3 years for even the best responders.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

I've been on Propecia for literally 2 entire years. I have experience in it.

I didn't say you have never taken it. I said the following

what personal experience do you have in the the field of hair maintenance

You have never mentioned that you have had a regime that has successfully maintained your hair for any length of time

So the fact that the other guy said 10% worsening of hairloss in 3 years is something bad is quite ridiculous when not even Finasteride in best can maintain at 100% for 3 years for even the best responders.

WTF , I have just posted photos of John Higgins who is loosing less than 10% of his hair every 3 years, and is a similar age and hair loss pattern to me, I have been on finasteride for almost 22years and my hair is virtually the same as when I started, and his hair looks like that, and you are trying to convince me that finasteride at best can only maintain for 3 years. This is why I keep telling you you have no experience of long term hair maintenance.

 

[Micky_007]

I didn't say you have never taken it. I said the following

You have never mentioned that you have had a regime that has successfully maintained your hair for any length of time

WTF , I have just posted photos of John Higgins who is loosing 10% of his hair every 3 years, and is a similar age and hair loss pattern to me, I have been on finasteride for almost 22years and my hair is virtually the same as when I started, and his hair looks like that, and you are trying to convince me that finasteride at best can only maintain for 3 years. This is why I keep telling you you have no experience of long term hair maintenance.

Even the Finasteride studies do not show that there is 100% maintenance after the 2 year mark. You might be an extremely extremely rare case if what you say (is to be believed) that you maintained 100% of your hair for 22 years.

I don't need to personally have used Finasteride for 20+ years to know that the probability of someone keeping 100% of their baseline hair (since starting Finasteride) for 22 years is probably like 0.01%.

You're literally the first person in approximately over 1000 people that I've spoken to online, or that I've just read their testimonials on hairloss forums on all the major hairloss forums, hair websites and in real life (including pro-Finasteride people and hyper responders), that has said they have maintained 100% or virtually all their hair for 22 years.

So no, I actually do have experience, yes not solely from my own experience but I have without a doubt read or spoken to over a 1000 people over the 7 years that I have been researching hairloss.

If you think knowledge is only limited to whether someone has personal experience using a treatment for 22 years, then by that logic you would probably also say, that people in the research field or who are scientists that have studied diseases for many many years, don't have any experience of of the disease or treatments because they haven't been affected by the disease or because they haven't use the treatments for the disease personally for x amount of years.
That logic literally doesn't make sense.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

even pro-Finasteride studies show that the rate of efficacy even in the best responders who have peak results at 1 or 2 year mark, steadily declines after that point.

Re read the studies the 1-2 year mark is about regrowth, you are unlikely to experience any extra regrowth after 2 years that doesn't mean after 2 years the drug stops slowing down your hair loss.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

Even the Finasteride studies do not show that there is 100% maintenance after the 2 year mark. You might be an extremely extremely rare case if what you say (is to be believed) that you maintained 100% of your hair for 22 years.

I don't need to personally have used Finasteride for 20 years to know that the probability of someone keeping 100% of their baseline hair for 22 years is like 0.01%.

You're literally the first person in approximately over 1000 people that I've spoken to online, or that I've just read their testimonials on hairloss forums on all the major hairloss forums, hair websites and in real life (including pro-Finasteride people and hyper responders), that has said they have maintained 100% or virtually all their hair for 22 years.

So no, I actually do have experience, yes not solely from my own experience but I have without a doubt read or spoken to over a 1000 people over the 7 years that I have been researching hairloss.

If you think knowledge is only limited to whether someone has personal experience of a health issue or treatments, then by that logic you would probably also say, that people in the research field or who are scientists that have studied diseases for many many years, don't have any experience of of the disease or treatments because they haven't been affected by the disease or because they haven't use the treatments for the disease personally for x amount of years.
That logic literally doesn't make sense.

Look im not replying to you anymore you have shown you have no idea what you are talking about lets just leave it at that, the things you are posting now are just making yourself look stupid, I thought this is a forum to actually help people about hairloss.

 

[Micky_007]

Look im not replying to you anymore you have shown you have no idea what you are talking about lets just leave it at that, the things you are posting now are just making yourself look stupid, I thought this is a forum to actually help people about hairloss.

No, you fail to realize that the probability of someone maintaining 100% of their hair for many years on Finasteride is small. We have a majority of people who have used Finasteride on this forum alone who have said they noticed atleast some decline, and that was for those who were good responders.

My point is that you are trying to make it seem as if it is common for people to maintain their hair with no worsening for 22 years. And I am saying, no that is just very very rare.

What's stupid is you thinking just because you (supposedly) maintained for 22 years (if it is to even be believed to maintained approximately 100% of your baseline) that it this is very common, when it isn't.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/10-years-stable-on-finasteride-alone.134730/#post-2019829

 

[20YearsOnFin]

This is a good example, and the reason most guys in their 40's who have been on finasteride since the late 90's or early 2000's don't post on hair loss forums anymore, because you just get guys with less experience constantly telling them they are wrong and trying to pick a fight, it gets to the point where by sharing experience actually becomes pointless and futile.

 

[Micky_007]

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/10-years-stable-on-finasteride-alone.134730/#post-2019829

Link to pictures? Because the only pictures I've seen is of this guy who looks quite different in the 2 photo's (so hard to tell if it's the same guy), only showing what looks like a receding hairline possibly which could actually just be a maturing hairline and not male pattern baldness in the first place...

But regardless, even if it HYPOTHETICALLY is male pattern baldness, not sure what that is supposed to imply, because it's one guy, and my point still stands that it is rare* to maintain on Finasteride 100% from baseline for decades.

 

[Micky_007]

This is a good example, and the reason most guys in their 40's who have been on finasteride since the late 90's or early 2000's don't post on hair loss forums anymore, because you just get guys with less experience constantly telling them they are wrong and trying to pick a fight, it gets to the point where by sharing experience actually becomes pointless and futile.

Not really, (and also that's a really weak excuse), it's most probably because there actually aren't that many people who can post results of truly maintaining 100% of their hair or even close for decades on Finasteride.

 

[user394587]

No, you fail to realize that the probability of someone maintaining 100% of their hair for many years on Finasteride is small. We have a majority of people who have used Finasteride on this forum alone who have said they noticed atleast some decline, and that was for those who were good responders.

My point is that you are trying to make it seem as if it is common for people to maintain their hair with no worsening for 22 years. And I am saying, no that is just very very rare.

What's stupid is you thinking just because you (supposedly) maintained for 22 years (if it is to even be believed to maintained approximately 100% of your baseline) that it this is very common, when it isn't.

The problem is that the long term studies that we have on this matter don't coincide with what you're saying, at least up until the ten year mark.

The sample sizes are a bit limited, but that's to be expected when you're examining people in a controlled setting for 10 years.

118 Caucasian men, 10 year study:

Finasteride, 1 mg daily administration on male androgenetic alopecia in different age groups: 10-year follow-up - PubMed

Finasteride 1 mg is indicated for the treatment of men with androgenetic alopecia (Androgenetic Alopecia). However, more than 5 years efficacy and safety has not been previously reported. To assess the efficacy over 10 years in different age groups of men with Androgenetic Alopecia. 118 men, between 20 and 61 years, with Androgenetic Alopecia...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"In our opinion, the result after the first year can help in predicting the effectiveness of the treatment. Its efficacy was not reduced as time goes on; in fact, a big proportion of subjects unchanged after 1 year, improved later on, maintaining a positive trend."

523 Japanese men, 10 year study:

Long-term (10-year) efficacy of finasteride in 523 Japanese men with androgenetic alopecia

OA Text is an independent open-access scientific publisher showcases innovative research and ideas aimed at improving health by linking research and practice to the benefit of society.

www.oatext.com

A small proportion of men (14% for Caucasians) see some worsening, but they would likely be very bald without pharmacological intervention. It seems that the results in terms of improvement plateau at the two year mark and then either maintain or very slowly decline over time.

We can argue back and forth fruitlessly about the side effect profile, but the efficacy of finasteride is well established at this point.

Anything beyond the ten year mark is purely anecdotal speculation because there are no studies on the matter.

 

[Micky_007]

The problem is that the long term studies that we have on this matter don't coincide with what you're saying, at least up until the ten year mark.

118 Caucasian men, 10 year study:

Finasteride, 1 mg daily administration on male androgenetic alopecia in different age groups: 10-year follow-up - PubMed

Finasteride 1 mg is indicated for the treatment of men with androgenetic alopecia (Androgenetic Alopecia). However, more than 5 years efficacy and safety has not been previously reported. To assess the efficacy over 10 years in different age groups of men with Androgenetic Alopecia. 118 men, between 20 and 61 years, with Androgenetic Alopecia...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"In our opinion, the result after the first year can help in predicting the effectiveness of the treatment. Its efficacy was not reduced as time goes on; in fact, a big proportion of subjects unchanged after 1 year, improved later on, maintaining a positive trend."

523 Japanese men, 10 year study:

Long-term (10-year) efficacy of finasteride in 523 Japanese men with androgenetic alopecia

OA Text is an independent open-access scientific publisher showcases innovative research and ideas aimed at improving health by linking research and practice to the benefit of society.

www.oatext.com

View attachment 171410

A small proportion of men (14% for Caucasians) see some worsening, but they would likely be very bald without pharmacological intervention. It seems that the results in terms of improvement plateau at the two year mark and then either maintain or very slowly decline over time.

We can argue back and forth fruitlessly about the side effect profile, but the efficacy of finasteride is well established at this point.

Anything beyond the ten year mark is purely anecdotal speculation because there are no studies on the matter.

Ah, The Japanese dermatology study:

One of the Problems with this is study is that they used older men for their studies and as we know most older men will think their lower libido, brainfog,... is due to ageing. Safety evaluation was also only done by questionnaire, no bloodwork or any deeper evaluation was done. So when it comes to the safety profile it's a very weak study. We can also ask questions about this having any conflict of interest since it's done by dermatologists who prescribe fina themselves. We see this study was done by dermatologists of the Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery . So it's clear this study was especially focused on the efficacy of fina for hairloss and not fina's safety profile.

age at frst visit, 37.8 ± 10.0 years

As this doctor says:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1333240440003420160

"And I’m 100% certain this effects older guys as well...it’s just more obvious in the younger guys who typically have no co-morbidities."


Btw, finasteride's safety profile is getting constant updates, like the meta-analysis showed as did I, the safety profile is far from "established":

New adverse event added to Propecia label on 15 Jun 2021: Hematospermia (blood in semen)

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1421157529875357701

Based on that fault I would definitely not trust the results from that Japanese study.

 

[20YearsOnFin]

Based on that fault I would definitely not trust the results from this study.

Based on everything you have posted in the last half an hour I would definitely not trust any of your opinions.

 

[user394587]

Ah, The Japanese dermatology study:

One of the Problems with this is study is that they used older men for their studies and as we know most older men will think their lower libido, brainfog,... is due to ageing. Safety evaluation was also only done by questionnaire, no bloodwork or any deeper evaluation was done. So when it comes to the safety profile it's a very weak study. We can also ask questions about this having any conflict of interest since it's done by dermatologists who prescribe fina themselves. We see this study was done by dermatologists of the Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery . So it's clear this study was especially focused on the efficacy of fina for hairloss and not fina's safety profile.

age at frst visit, 37.8 ± 10.0 years

As this doctor says:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1333240440003420160

"And I’m 100% certain this effects older guys as well...it’s just more obvious in the younger guys who typically have no co-morbidities."


Btw, finasteride's safety profile is getting constant updates, like the meta-analysis showed as did I, the safety profile is far from "established":

New adverse event added to Propecia label on 15 Jun 2021: Hematospermia (blood in semen)

Based on that fault I would definitely not trust the results from this study.

Do you just have this sh*t saved in a text file to copy and paste?

I wasn't even referencing the side effect profile, I was referencing the efficacy.

JFC, you might actually want to read what people have written before you comment.

 

[Micky_007]

Do you just have this sh*t saved in a text file to copy and paste?

I wasn't even referencing the side effect profile, I was referencing the efficacy.

JFC, you might actually want to read what people are saying before you comment.

I know what you are referencing but if you actually read what I said at the end of my last message, I said based on the fault of that Japanese study, I do not consider those Japanese studies to be accurate, i wouldn't trust it to be accurate even the efficacy part.

Also, I don't believe it's just a coincidence that there's a negligible amount of long term studies on Finasteride besides that one, to say something similar, when Finasteride has been available for over 2 decades.

 

[user394587]

I know what you are referencing but if you actually read what I said at the end of my last message, I said based on the fault of that Japanese study, I do not consider those Japanese studies to be accurate, i wouldn't trust it to be accurate even the efficacy part.

Also, I don't believe it's just a coincidence that there's a negligible amount of long term studies on Finasteride besides that one, to say something similar, when Finasteride has been available for over 2 decades.

So you're discounting the entire scientific method around the efficacy of finasteride because the safety methodology was not up to what would be considered a reasonable standard?

I think it's pretty clear that the study was focused specifically on the efficacy and not the safety profile given that the title of the study is

"Long-term (10-year) efficacy of finasteride in 523 Japanese men with androgenetic alopecia"

"Also, I don't believe it's just a coincidence that there's a negligible amount of long term studies on Finasteride besides that one, to say something similar, when Finasteride has been available for over 2 decades."

Or, you know, it could be because tracking patients for 20+ years is not feasible for a study design. Good luck getting a relevant sample size.

I guess you're just ignoring the first study there for one of two reasons

1. Mediocre safety assessment somehow means that we can't trust the efficacy data
2. Big pharma conspiracy, paid off by Merck

 

[20YearsOnFin]

So no, I actually do have experience, yes not solely from my own experience but I have without a doubt read or spoken to over a 1000 people over the 7 years that I have been researching hairloss.

Where you really lose credibility is for all your 7 years of research and 1000's of people you have spoken to, your current regimen by your own admission consists of doing nothing, that's right doing absolutely nothing to actually halt your own progressive male pattern baldness. But you are happy to spend time on a forum telling everyone else what they are doing is wrong.

I'm not even on any regimen for the past 3 years

 

[Micky_007]

So you're discounting the entire scientific method around the efficacy of finasteride because the safety methodology was not up to what would be considered a reasonable standard?

I think it's pretty clear that the study was focused specifically on the efficacy and not the safety profile given that the title of the study is

"Long-term (10-year) efficacy of finasteride in 523 Japanese men with androgenetic alopecia"

"Also, I don't believe it's just a coincidence that there's a negligible amount of long term studies on Finasteride besides that one, to say something similar, when Finasteride has been available for over 2 decades."

Or, you know, it could be because tracking patients for 20+ years is not feasible for a study design. Good luck getting a relevant sample size.

I guess you're just ignoring the first study there for one of two reasons

1. Mediocre safety assessment somehow means that we can't trust the efficacy data
2. Big pharma conspiracy, paid off by Merck

Ofcourse! The same study you posted also has a "Safety Evaluation" within it.

With contents of the study clearly being flawed, believing the rest of the efficacy stuff is just asking to be fooled twice.

Furthermore, I don't believe it's just a coincidence that there's a negligible amount of long term studies on Finasteride besides that one, to say something similar, when Finasteride has been available for over 2 decades.

 

[Micky_007]

Where you really lose credibility is for all your 7 years of research and 1000's of people you have spoken to, your current regimen by your own admission consists of doing nothing, that's right doing absolutely nothing to actually halt your own progressive male pattern baldness. But you are happy to spend time on a forum telling everyone else what they are doing is wrong.

This is yet another one of your terribly weak arguments where you actually lose all credibility for trying to find a problem with me not taking any treatments in the past 3 years as if it's some problem when I have only had 10% hairloss over those 3 years after stopping Finasteride.

I was obviously FAR better off without using Finasteride.

Also, you fail to remember I repeatedly mentioned I used Finasteride for 2 years, and before using Finasteride I used Minoxidil + Microneedling. And before using Minoxidil + Microneedling I used Minoxidil alone (which min alone didn't work).

You're literally grasping at straws at this point and it's just stupid and transparent AF.