I'm Leaving This Site. finasteride Is Working For Me.

[INT]

the first fate is worse quite obviously, and yes, I got data on it, there was ironically from the anti finasteride guys a la pigeon and co who did a poll trying to figure out how many people here had sides on finasteride. it came out at like 70% which should be enough "data"(as if it wasn't f*****g obvious and common sense anyway) that this subsection is mostly populated by people with people who had no luck with finasteride. and how else could it be? I would even argue most people who have success with it don't even post on any other sub section of the forum, why would they? they have moved on as they should.

Sigh... so a silly random internet poll is now considered data?

there is also data on your second point , gyno is incredibly rare on finasteride and unlike ED is not susceptible to nocebo and can be diagnosed by a doctor by touch. not only is it rare, it also happens to be the case that around 30% of men especially at a later age in life develop some form of gyno. when you read about gyno on finasteride, you can find CASE reports. literal case reports because its so rare. one study with 14k people found that only 0.3% had mild gyno(which is not even a reason to quit in my opinion)

so yes, the likelihood of them being just fat is many times higher

You do see that that is quite a leap in logic at the end right?

and one last thing, do you ever read hairloss forums online? if you did you would have realized that the most common though not here is something along the lines of "i wish i had started finasteride sooner, now its almost too late but earlier the fear mongers have driven me away from it". thats very common, I would even go so far as to says its one of the most common thoughts on /r/tressless for example.

That is not my impression at all (if I understand your weird sentence correctly) and yes I spend a fair amount of time on hairloss forums.

there is literally people here like pigeon, very very bitter people that NEED to believe that finasteride is the devil because otherwise they couldnt cope with them not being able to take it. so they have to rationalize that choice. he said its better to try everything else first, buying white powder from china that might ACTUALLY wreck your body, seti and all the crap before trying finasteride. what a smart choice /s.

I do not speak for pigeon, nor do I agree with some of the things he says about finasteride. But yes I agree, a lot of people demonize the drug because it did not work for them and/or brought them a lot of suffering. But there are also a lot of people that tell themselves and others that it is a completely harmless sugar pill with no dangers at all in order to rationalize the choice to continue taking a potentially dangerous drug that keeps their hair. But let me ask you this: what do other people have to do with the discussion I have with you?

 

[Rho Gain]

I will reply to your previous message to me a bit later as that one is a bit longer and I am busy AF at the moment.



Saying that a specific category of people here is overrepresented is merely an assumption that suits your belief system. Got any data on that?


Another assumption. Got any data on that?



The importance of data only becomes a thing when it suits your belief system?



For some, sure. I am sure there are some guys that could have stayed in the same Norwood for 25 years with finasteride but never took it because of some anti-finasteride posts. There are also some guys that probably saved their quality of life for years and sometimes decades by never taking the drug. Is this number smaller? Sure, I will give you that. But I will leave it up to you to decide which of the two fates is worse

Did I claim to have any data? I said it was my personal observation and it makes sense that forums would be overpopulated with non-responders/hypochondriacs since for those for whom it works - which is, according to the data, the majority, of which the OP is one - simply don't need to look for alternatives. As for the impotence data "becoming a thing," when did I say it wasn't? What I said was that TWO PERCENT of finasteride users report it, and given the nature of impotence, the likelihood that it's actually the drug causing it is probably even lower. So, regarding data, since YOU'RE the one claiming that "a lot" of people have kept their hair without finasteride, got a link to that data? Everything else I've said is 100% supported by three decades worth of data and about ten years of attempted - and 100% failed - lawsuits.

 

[Rho Gain]

how do you know theres tens of million of men on it for 28 years without sides? ( im about to see my doctor to get prescription btw, it took me 1.5year to book an appointment because of fear mongers.

Because the drug has been on the market for almost 30 years (finasteride was first and also prescribed for BHP under the name "Proscar," and at 5x the potency), and it has been prescribed to tens of millions of men. If it were causing a high incidence of sides, would it be on the market for literally a generation? Would every single attempt to sue Merck over finasteride have failed if the data were falsified? I mean, at this point on the forums, the conclusion about finasteride has reached conspiracy theory levels. You guys don't do any research, and instead of actually reviewing the original studies for Proscar (and later Propecia), you read a couple of anonymous posts on a forum and end up believing that it makes your dick shrink. YOUR DICK SHRINK. That's what people are now claiming. Or you take it, can't get it up - which can be caused by literally anything, but most usually your own head - and blame it on finasteride. Maybe give finasteride another try, but this time, instead of jerking off to p**rn three times a day, you go no fap for a week and see what happens?

I couldn't care less what anyone does; it's not my job to spread the gospel of finasteride. But for those newbies who are just starting to lose their hair, don't give in to the baseless fear mongering - for 80% of men, finasteride WILL save your hair, and for 66% it will regrow it. As for sides, 2% - TWO PERCENT - of users will experience them, and if you do, and you're sure it's not in your head (which it most likely is, given how low the incidence of drug-induced sides really are), then that sucks for you and you stop taking it.

 

[Rho Gain]

That is not my impression at all (if I understand your weird sentence correctly)

It's probably "weird" because English is likely not his first language. How many languages do you speak fluently?

 

[INT]

Did I claim to have any data? I said it was my personal observation, and that it makes sense that forums would be overpopulated with non-responders/hypochondriacs since for those for whom it works - which is, according to the data, the majority, of which the OP is one - simply don't need to look for alternatives. You're the one claiming that "a lot" of people have kept their hair without finasteride. Still waiting for a link to that data. Everything else I've said is 100% supported by three decades worth of data and about ten years of attempted - and 100% failed - lawsuits.

Personal observation=anecdote, what did you say about anecdotes again? That is what I mean, you are against anecdotes when it goes against your position but it is no issue when you do it yourself.

It is also a cheap shot to ask for data regarding experimental treatments. I have been on hair loss forums for a decade and over the years there have been many people that had good results without finasteride.

Aso, you are aware of the fact that Propecia has been mentioning since 2008 that the drug can cause persistent ED right? Even Merck itself admits to dangers that were not 'found' in earlier studies (probably just to avoid more lawsuits since they already have paid a few million for settlements.

 

[INT]

It's probably "weird" because English is likely not his first language. How many languages do you speak fluently?

Nor is it mine. And 4, to answer your question. Is that relevant? Just hoped that my comment would make him proofread his texts better to avoid confusion for everyone that wants to read and/or contribute to this discussion.

 

[Drextez]

@Rho Gain other than that, what is your current hair situation? what brings you to this forum?

 

[Rho Gain]

Personal observation=anecdote, what did you say about anecdotes again? That is what I mean, you are against anecdotes when it goes against your position but it is no issue when you do it yourself.

It is also a cheap shot to ask for data regarding experimental treatments. I have been on hair loss forums for a decade and over the years there have been many people that had good results without finasteride.

Aso, you are aware of the fact that Propecia has been mentioning since 2008 that the drug can cause persistent ED right? Even Merck itself admits to dangers that were not 'found' in earlier studies (probably just to avoid more lawsuits since they already have paid a few million for settlements.

I said not to listen to them REGARDING FINASTERIDE, since the DATA say that TWO PERCENT actually encounter side effects. Do try to stick to the topic at hand instead of moving the goalposts because you've lost the argument.

 

[Rho Gain]

@Rho Gain other than that, what is your current hair situation? what brings you to this forum?

I'm a NW2 and I'd like to be a NW0, and I think Follica is going to do it, so I like to keep abreast of the latest developments. I started losing my hair at 18. I got on finasteride at around 20 (the earliest it was available), and I maintained a NW1 for a decade, after which I slowly continued to lose to my current NW2. Without finasteride, I'd have been a NW6 by 30. Instead, I got to live my 20's - really live them, not hide in my house or under a baseball cap - with a full head of hair.

 

[INT]

I said not to listen to them REGARDING FINASTERIDE, since the DATA say that TWO PERCENT actually encounter side effects. Do try to stick to the topic at hand instead of moving the goalposts because you've lost the argument.

Haha cute. You just qualified yourself from the rational part of the discussion.

 

[Rho Gain]

Nor is it mine. And 4, to answer your question. Is that relevant? Just hoped that my comment would make him proofread his texts better to avoid confusion for everyone that wants to read and/or contribute to this discussion.

What a nice guy you are, helping others to "proofread" their texts. I'm glad you weren't trying to just employ an ad hominem by attacking his English instead of his argument. .

 

[Rho Gain]

Haha cute. You just qualified yourself from the rational part of the discussion.

If you say so? Again, here are the facts:

Finasteride stops hair loss for 80% of the men who take it.

Finasteride grows hair for 66% of the men who take it.

2% of the men who take it experience sexual side effects.

Those are all "rational" statements based on data. You've been arguing against them. What was that about "disqualifying" one's self from rational discussion again?

And for the third time, link to the data that details how many and by what therapy "many" have kept their hair without finasteride?

 

[INT]

What a nice guy you are, helping others to "proofread" their texts. I'm glad you weren't trying to just employ an ad hominem by attacking his English instead of his argument. .

Dude, you should work on your fallacy knowledge. First, you falsely accuse me of moving the goalpost, and now you try to ad hominem me, WHILE making a Strawman argument yourself... Again, very cute.

I would have made an ad hominem if I would have said something along the lines of "your English sucks and therefore I cannot take your finasteride argument serious". The only thing I replied to an earlier statement of his was "That is not my impression at all (if I understand your weird sentence correctly)". I merely expressed that I had some difficulties understanding his sentence because of a confusing order of words and that I picked a reply based on how I interpreted his particular sentence. By doing so I created an opportunity for him to correct me if my interpretation was wrong.

I guess I could have removed the word 'weird' but since he always feels the need to dislike all my posts whenever he disagrees with me I felt no need to be extra polite.

I would never say anything about English skills just to attack someone since my English skills are far from perfect and we are on an international forum.

 

[INT]

If you say so? Again, here are the facts:

Finasteride stops hair loss for 80% of the men who take it.

Finasteride grows hair for 66% of the men who take it.

2% of the men who take it experience sexual side effects.

Those are all "rational" statements based on data. You've been arguing against them.

I have not argued against the first two. Another strawman from your side.

What was that about "disqualifying" one's self from rational discussion again?

Falsely accusing someone of a logical fallacy and then claiming themselves winner of a discussion (when they are not) usually disqualifies someone as being a winner in a rational discussion yes.

And for the third time, link to the data that details how many and by what therapy "many" have kept their hair without finasteride?

Fine, I will explain it in a way that will make it impossible for you to not understand. In a decade of being on various hair loss forums, there have been many users that have had results with different treatments that did not include finasteride. And no, this is not coming from a peer-reviewed meta-analysis but from users here an around 5 other forums that I have visited over the last decade. Yes, I am aware that with finasteride you have the best shot, based on scientific and anecdotal evidence, but it is not as black and white where if you do not go on finasteride it means that your hair is a lost cause.

 

[kiwipilu]

I have not argued against the first two. Another strawman from your side.



Falsely accusing someone of a logical fallacy and then claiming themselves winner of a discussion (when they are not) usually disqualifies someone as being a winner in a rational discussion yes.



Fine, I will explain it in a way that will make it impossible for you to not understand. In a decade of being on various hair loss forums, there have been many users that have had results with different treatments that did not include finasteride. And no, this is not coming from a peer-reviewed meta-analysis but from users here an around 5 other forums that I have visited over the last decade. Yes, I am aware that with finasteride you have the best shot, based on scientific and anecdotal evidence, but it is not as black and white where if you do not go on finasteride it means that your hair is a lost cause.

ye it’s possible to maintain a certain time with some others treatments but don’t dream. it also depends on the pattern and how aggressive your hairloss is. But one thing is for sure, at the moment, finasteride( or other anti androgen)remains the “call the ambulance “option! when you wake up and realise you have nearly reached the point of no return that’s when you rush to the kitchen, take a glass of water and swallow your first finasteride pill. Others options are: hair transplant or buzz your hair. That’s how dramatic our current options are

 

[INT]

ye it’s possible to maintain a certain time with some others treatments but don’t dream. it also depends on the pattern and how aggressive your hairloss is. But one thing is for sure, at the moment, finasteride( or other anti androgen)remains the “call the ambulance “option! when you wake up and realise you have nearly reached the point of no return that’s when you rush to the kitchen, take a glass of water and swallow your first finasteride pill. Others options are: hair transplant or buzz your hair. That’s how dramatic our current options are

Agree with pretty much everthing you said. In order to succeed without finasteride you probably need an alternative AA. I have almost never seen anyone claim to maintain over 15 years with just a growth stimulant.

 

[Rudi]

At the end of the day, we have chosen to be here on this forum to report (among other things) on our experiences with hair loss treatments. Fina being one of them.

That is different from a random selection of Fina users by an independent party that is asking/examining users about side effects and efficacy of Fina.

This needs to be clearly understood by anybody who is seeking advice here on HairLossTalk.com.

If this is not understood....good luck!!!!

 

[Rho Gain]

Dude, you should work on your fallacy knowledge. First, you falsely accuse me of moving the goalpost, and now you try to ad hominem me, WHILE making a Strawman argument yourself... Again, very cute.

I would have made an ad hominem if I would have said something along the lines of "your English sucks and therefore I cannot take your finasteride argument serious". The only thing I replied to an earlier statement of his was "That is not my impression at all (if I understand your weird sentence correctly)". I merely expressed that I had some difficulties understanding his sentence because of a confusing order of words and that I picked a reply based on how I interpreted his particular sentence. By doing so I created an opportunity for him to correct me if my interpretation was wrong.

I guess I could have removed the word 'weird' but since he always feels the need to dislike all my posts whenever he disagrees with me I felt no need to be extra polite.

I would never say anything about English skills just to attack someone since my English skills are far from perfect and we are on an international forum.

What straw man argument have I made? Where did I employ an ad hominem against you? What was the purpose of attacking another person's comprehension while trying to rebut their argument? And finally - and for the fourth time - link to that stack that doesn't include finasteride and the data that says it helps "many" keep their hair without it? Oh, wait - your belief is based on your experiences on the forums, and yet when I made the same observation about the TYPES OF PEOPLE who frequent forums - not a statement about THERAPIES AND THEIR EFFICACIES - it was illegitimate?

I don't have all day to go back and forth with you - if you've got that much time on your hands, well...

 

[jamesbooker1975]

" bye bye hairloss site, welcome sexual problems site " lol

 

[R_gesus]

Do not give false hope. It is very very rare that people gain 'a few norwoods' with pretty much any treatment.

I’m not giving false hope. The thread on min and microneedling is proof that there is a chance, and its not “very very rare”.