Kintor has started Phase 3 trial in China for Pyrilutamide

[Dimitri001]

I'm not sure how you could placebo yourself into hair growth. I think this is impossible. Positive thinking won't grow hair. Of course it's amatuerish to allow trial subjects to talk to each other, but in the case of a hair loss trial I don't think it's such a big deal aside from side effects.

The placebo effect doesn't just make people think they're experiencing something when they're not, it's not merely a mental phenomenon, it can have actual physical effects and remarkable ones, ones you wouldn't imagine could be the result of placebo. There ARE thing it can't do, IDK whether hair regrowth is on the list, but I highly doubt it, because there's just so many amazing effects it can have, regrowing balding hair seems like a minor feat in comparison.

 

[pegasus2]

The placebo effect doesn't just make people think they're experiencing something when they're not, it's not merely a mental phenomenon, it can have actual physical effects and remarkable ones, ones you wouldn't imagine could be the result of placebo. There ARE thing it can't do, IDK whether hair regrowth is on the list, but I highly doubt it, because there's just so many amazing effects it can have, regrowing balding hair seems like a minor feat in comparison.

Source? It can only induce things that can be psychological. If stress is a factor then placebo can help. Stress does not cause Androgenetic Alopecia. No placebo can reverse a genetic disease.

 

[hmmmmmmmm]

The placebo effect doesn't just make people think they're experiencing something when they're not, it's not merely a mental phenomenon, it can have actual physical effects and remarkable ones, ones you wouldn't imagine could be the result of placebo. There ARE thing it can't do, IDK whether hair regrowth is on the list, but I highly doubt it, because there's just so many amazing effects it can have, regrowing balding hair seems like a minor feat in comparison.

Good summary, people without any scientific or medical background would be very surprised at how much the brain can control our physiology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_top–down_control_of_physiology

Still don't think that's the main concern here, it's that it would be another possible black mark against a Kintor's ability to run a trial

 

[fashy]

Placebo effects mostly extend to psychological effects/perceptions in the user, they can't actually treat the disease itself. A participant in a pain-reliver study might report less pain even though he's effectively taking sugar pills, because the belief of taking the *right* medication can alter his perception of his pain levels, but in something such as a hair loss study you absolutely cannot fool yourself into growing hair as the disease itself is not concerned with the user's psychological state but with processes inside his body that he cannot control. You can't will your body in producing less DHT.

 

[hmmmmmmmm]

Placebo effects mostly extend to psychological effects/perceptions in the user, they can't actually treat the disease itself.

You're not wrong that there are limits to this effect, but placebo groups in almost all hair loss studies experience some growth.

And it's a bit nuanced, but the main issue is the impact it would have on the behaviour of the placebo group, which is then falsely attributed to the effect.

Because the placebo effect in research is a latent variable that can only be measured indirectly, and unblinding compromises that measurement.

e.g. somebody figuring out they're not getting the real treatment and dropping out of the trial would be attributed as part of the background dropout rate, making KX look like it has a better dropout rate relative to placebo

 

[pegasus2]

People without a medical background greatly exaggerate the ability of perception to alter bological function. These are the people who think prayer can cure their cancer so they forego chemotherapy. There are much more plausible explanations for placebo growth, as I previously mentioned. I was very happy when I started losing my hair. It came out of nowhere and was never expected. If changing my frame of mind, through reducing cortisol or whatever would have cured it then it never would've happened in the first place. This is pointless. When a hair loss drug actually works you will know. You won't have to debate endlessly about placebo effects and whether or not you see an improvement

 

[Micky_007]

People without a medical background greatly exaggerate the ability of perception to alter bological function. These are the people who think prayer can cure their cancer so they forego chemotherapy. There are much more plausible explanations for placebo growth, as I previously mentioned. I was very happy when I started losing my hair. It came out of nowhere and was never expected. If changing my frame of mind, through reducing cortisol or whatever would have cured it then it never would've happened in the first place. This is pointless. When a hair loss drug actually works you will know. You won't have to debate endlessly about placebo effects and whether or not you see an improvement

And the same concept can actually be applied to the negative side effects of drugs, whereby people love to say ones sexual sides are "placebo bro" but if the only factor thats changed once someone started using a drug, was the use of the drug itself, and one of the side effects are sexual side effects, then its the drug that's the cause. I'm not mentioning any specific drug because there's a few we all know.

 

[badnewsbearer]

People without a medical background greatly exaggerate the ability of perception to alter bological function. These are the people who think prayer can cure their cancer so they forego chemotherapy. There are much more plausible explanations for placebo growth, as I previously mentioned. I was very happy when I started losing my hair. It came out of nowhere and was never expected. If changing my frame of mind, through reducing cortisol or whatever would have cured it then it never would've happened in the first place. This is pointless. When a hair loss drug actually works you will know. You won't have to debate endlessly about placebo effects and whether or not you see an improvement

this right there. for me i can tell within a week if it works, reduction in shedding, reduction of itch, after a few weeks i can feel the difference in hair quality, not necesaarily bx look but by touching it, its heavier at some point, more colorful after a few months. i suppose it could be placebo if someone has verx slow hair loss and gets different cuts for example when i cut short my hair it looks much better because the thinning is then less obvious and shorter hairs feel stronger and more rigid. but other than that hard to believe someone would subjectively falsely think this

 

[pegasus2]

And the same concept can actually be applied to the negative side effects of drugs, whereby people love to say ones sexual sides are "placebo bro" but if the only factor thats changed once someone started using a drug, was the use of the drug itself, and one of the side effects are sexual side effects, then its the drug that's the cause. I'm not mentioning any specific drug because there's a few we all know.

Sexual side effects are very easy to induce psychologically. In fact, up to a quarter of clinical ED is psychologically induced, and has no physiological cause. If you think you'll get ED you will. Hair growth isn't so easy unfortunately

 

[Micky_007]

Sexual side effects are very easy to induce psychologically. In fact, up to a quarter of clinical ED is psychologically induced, and has no physiological cause. If you think you'll get ED you will. Hair growth isn't so easy unfortunately

I wouldn't agree with this. Its not so easy to just think something and it turn into reality. If such a thing was possible then why is it that the people who still suffer with sexual sides can't just think about having no sexual sides and they get healed? Doesn't work that way.

I know most people who started on anti-androgens were positive minded and ended up with being completely caught blindsided with sexual sides.

 

[pegasus2]

I wouldn't agree with this. Its not so easy to just think something and it turn into reality. If such a thing was possible then why is it that the people who still suffer with sexual sides can't just think about having no sexual sides and they get healed? Doesn't work that way.

I know most people who started on anti-androgens were positive minded and ended up with being completely caught blindsided with sexual sides.

Some people do get physiological side effects from AAs. Actually pretty much everyone does at very high doses used for cancer treatment. Most people do not get it from Propecia. Of those that do, many are because they are simply getting older and just begin to notice it or they are under a lot of stress due to their hair loss, or they are so anxious about getting side effects, because of the fear-mongering, that they think themselves into being unable to perform. Sexual function is largely psychological. Then of course there are those rare individuals who are more sensitive to the hormonal changes and have real physiological ED. If you don't believe ED can be psycholigical, just look at the growing number of teenagers suffering from ED due to p**rn. There's nothing physically wrong with them, they have just trained their minds to only respond to hardcore pornography.

 

[trialAcc]

I wouldn't agree with this. Its not so easy to just think something and it turn into reality. If such a thing was possible then why is it that the people who still suffer with sexual sides can't just think about having no sexual sides and they get healed? Doesn't work that way.

I know most people who started on anti-androgens were positive minded and ended up with being completely caught blindsided with sexual sides.

There is a reason that every finasteride trial has almost identical (but slightly lower) numbers of placebo instances of ED as the actual trial arm does. It has nothing to do with "positive mindsets" or magically thinking away side effects, that's not what placebo is. It's the human brain thinking something is happening on such a deep level that it's beyond the power of manual thought.

People would just rather blame the evil pharma companies for lying to them rather then admit that it's a more complicated issue then most people can understand. Doesn't change that some people get seriously fucked up from finasteride, it's just a smaller amount from the actual body chemistry.

 

[Micky_007]

I could genuinely go on about this with you guys for pages because I strongly disagree that the majority of those people who get sexual sides from AA's are from thoughts (even Pegasus said only up to a quarter of clinical ED is psychologically induced), but let's stop the discussion here on that before we turn this thread into another one of those derailed-topic threads.

 

[hemingway_the_mercenary]

There is a reason that every finasteride trial has almost identical (but slightly lower) numbers of placebo instances of ED as the actual trial arm does. It has nothing to do with "positive mindsets" or magically thinking away side effects, that's not what placebo is. It's the human brain thinking something is happening on such a deep level that it's beyond the power of manual thought.

People would just rather blame the evil pharma companies for lying to them rather then admit that it's a more complicated issue then most people can understand. Doesn't change that some people get seriously fucked up from finasteride, it's just a smaller amount from the actual body chemistry.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The finasteride trials and not designed to actually find occurrence of sexual sides. If they were you'd see them measure how quickly it takes to achieve maximal erection with normal stimuli and how long the male is able to maintain erection without any stimulus. THAT would be scientific. Not asking the participants of the study if they experienced any sexual sides in a self report questionnaire.

The fact that most men don't notice they are losing hair until they've lost 40% density just shows that the majority of men are terrible at spotting subtle changes in their body.

If they actually measured sexual performance in a scientific manner then the occurrence of sexual side effects would be almost 100%

 

[Chads don't bald]

If they actually measured sexual performance in a scientific manner then the occurrence of sexual side effects would be almost 100%

How do you come to this conclusion?

 

[trialAcc]

You have no idea what you are talking about. The finasteride trials and not designed to actually find occurrence of sexual sides. If they were you'd see them measure how quickly it takes to achieve maximal erection with normal stimuli and how long the male is able to maintain erection without any stimulus. THAT would be scientific. Not asking the participants of the study if they experienced any sexual sides in a self report questionnaire.

The fact that most men don't notice they are losing hair until they've lost 40% density just shows that the majority of men are terrible at spotting subtle changes in their body.

If they actually measured sexual performance in a scientific manner then the occurrence of sexual side effects would be almost 100%

Right, I have no idea what I'm talking about because you personally think the merck researchers should have been in there measuring dicks. The definition of erectile disfunction is the inability to get or maintain an erection, so why would the researchers be doing some dick measuring and watching hard-ons with a stop watch instead of just asking for the most obvious markers which would be self reported instances of sexual dysfunction.

"Scientific manner" you're a joke bud. Find me a general study (ie not viagara or an erection drug) on the planet that is measuring dicks to determine sexual impairment. Better yet, find me a "side" outside of blood pressure or a blood metric that is determined without self reporting in a clinical trial.

 

[Intrigued77777777]

Where would this fit in terms of effectiveness? Is it as good as RU or Duta?

 

[Adri23]

Where would this fit in terms of effectiveness? Is it as good as RU or Duta?

It has better binding affinity than RU and different method of action than duta. It will be just one more med for the stack.

 

[whymedamn]

Can be good. At the same time been disappointed too many time to really believe
I mean where is breezula ?? Just gone ..

 

[badnewsbearer]

You have no idea what you are talking about. The finasteride trials and not designed to actually find occurrence of sexual sides. If they were you'd see them measure how quickly it takes to achieve maximal erection with normal stimuli and how long the male is able to maintain erection without any stimulus. THAT would be scientific. Not asking the participants of the study if they experienced any sexual sides in a self report questionnaire.

The fact that most men don't notice they are losing hair until they've lost 40% density just shows that the majority of men are terrible at spotting subtle changes in their body.

If they actually measured sexual performance in a scientific manner then the occurrence of sexual side effects would be almost 100%

you obviouwly know not much about sexual health to underatand this. they use a founded solid questionary to diagnose ED, the side is ED not "takes 2 seconds longer to get erect", it is all about how the patient perceives it and i think patients often actually overestimate any change if at all.

this is the same questionairy that is used to measure the effectiveness of pde5 inhibitors or to measure the effect of certain surgeries like prostate resection or impact and treatment of peyronies disease. this questionary called the IIEF is used in those studies, the questions are so precise that if there is no change in IIEF scores i would say if there is any chance like you suggest it just does not matter. because this is validated for many other diseases and first of all to actually capture what it wants to capture(think about penile surgery its very important to understand erectiob capabilities after various invasive penis surgeries)


if someone can not stay erect anymore without stimukation it WILL be captured in those tests. what are you on about? of course this will be noticeable to koat men, you think people are living under rocks? tgats exactly why you have a placebo group. do you think only in the finasteride group people just do not noticr certwin differences?

you have probavly never designed a study yoursekf as talking on the internet is always easier