Using Propecia for 10 yrs

[Bryan]

Finasteride at the very least greatly slows the progression of male pattern baldness in most men, and may stop it completely in some of them. That's more than minoxidil does, which aparently doesn't have any direct effect at all on the progression of male pattern baldness, just an indirect one.

maybe, but it (minoxidil) gives the appearance of slowing down hairloss and isn't that the point of it all? to appear non-balding? whether you actually slow down the male pattern baldness process or not, makes little or no difference.

It DOES make a difference, because the period of time that finasteride will maintain your hair at or above your original starting baseline (or any other given level, for that matter) is longer than the time that minoxidil will do that. On average, of course.

finasteride, according to studies, will first increase hair count, then steadily decrease over the next years. minoxidil, will give dormant follicles a boost, which in turn will, in most who use it, lead to "more hair". or at least the appearance of more hair. then, as the balding process continues, you'll lose more and more ground. different mechanisms, but the end result is the same. only difference is that finasteride probably works better in the long run, but that was never relevant to my point in the first place.

Yes, it works better in the long-run, which is the whole point.

 

[Bryan]

where do you get your numbers that hair couts drop below baseline? the propecia 5 year study had 90 percent maintaining or regrowth at 5 year mark, also the graph at 5 years is still above baseline by a good amount and thats with the non responders being entered into the equation. So the hair counts on the graph most certainly would be even higher if you didn't factor in the 17 percent that don't respond to the drug.

I certainly agree with the main thrust of what you're saying, with just one minor exception: people are fond of talking about the 17% of "non-responders" to finasteride, but I strongly suspect that virtually EVERYBODY responds to it, at least to _some_ degree. In Merck's large Propecia Phase III trial, the famous 17% to which you're referring are merely the ones who continued to have a decline in haircounts even while taking finasteride. However, it shouldn't be inferred that that means that those individuals (the 17%) didn't at least have a SLOWING in their rate of loss, as a result of using finasteride. It's just a small point, but it annoys me when everybody assumes that those guys had "no response" AT ALL to finasteride.

 

[peakhair]

I´ve also been using propecia for 10 years and in my case it worked great for 5 or 6 years.
After that it´s all been downhill. Now i´m patiently waiting for hair cloning. :sleep:

 

[phish]

I´ve also been using propecia for 10 years and in my case it worked great for 5 or 6 years.
After that it´s all been downhill. Now i´m patiently waiting for hair cloning. :sleep:

so how much would you say in 10 years are you below baseline, you worse then you started by a lot or a little?

 

[abcdefg]

What causes hairloss to pick up or continue even when the person is still inhibiting dht? If dht was the sole cause wouldnt taking say propecia keep your hair forever?

 

[phish]

my theory is that the folicle eventually fills up with type 2 dht again. finasteride only blocks 85 percent of type 2 dht. so the first year your removing 85 percent of it around the folicle. then every year after that 15 percent still remains. so each year your adding 15 percent dht till you get to the 7 year mark where you reach 100 percent back to baseline. then years after that you slowly keep diping down by 15 percent very slowly. thats my theory and it doesnt have an ounce of proof and is probably wrong but most people seem to say around 7 years is when they start to get below baseline. it would be very interesting to see a drug that complety blocks type2 dht by a 100 percent and no type 1 dht, how far you could stretch it out. i think it would give you double the years say 14 years till you got to baseline again. then old age takes its toal, and is the reason your hair thins more and not dht. If i were to create a study it would be 1000 twenty year olds with slight balding taking a drug that blocks 100 percent of type 2 dht and no type 1 dht. It would be facinating to report back at age 30 to see how many were at baseline still. My guess would be 90 percent would still be at baseline or above.

 

[cal]

Look, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure most of this stuff out. There's so much back & forthing in all these discussions about whether finasteride "really works" or not, and whether finasteride can really regrow XXX amount of hairs, etc.

People sometimes act like Finasteride is supposed to be a holy-grail "light switch" that turns off all male pattern baldness on contact, and then act surprised when there are differing reports about its effectiveness. Why? finasteride is nothing but a mere mortal product. It reduces a certain one of the hormones in your system. That's all.


Think about it: The more genetically-male pattern baldness-prone that you already were to begin with, the less "effective" the Finasteride will probably seem to be on you! This is not complicated.


A mild balder will probably hold off all signs of loss for many years and thicken what was there. A severe early balder will probably not think the drug is as "effective" when he doesn't see the same degree of protection from it.

A mild balder might still be seeing hair counts on the upswing after more than one year. A severe balder will probably still seem to be heading downhill. He's just doing it more slowly than nature intended.

 

[ps1freak]

Look, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure most of this stuff out. There's so much back & forthing in all these discussions about whether finasteride "really works" or not, and whether finasteride can really regrow XXX amount of hairs, etc.

People sometimes act like Finasteride is supposed to be a holy-grail "light switch" that turns off all male pattern baldness on contact, and then act surprised when there are differing reports about its effectiveness. Why? finasteride is nothing but a mere mortal product. It reduces a certain one of the hormones in your system. That's all.


Think about it: The more genetically-male pattern baldness-prone that you already were to begin with, the less "effective" the Finasteride will probably seem to be on you! This is not complicated.


A mild balder will probably hold off all signs of loss for many years and thicken what was there. A severe early balder will probably not think the drug is as "effective" when he doesn't see the same degree of protection from it.

A mild balder might still be seeing hair counts on the upswing after more than one year. A severe balder will probably still seem to be heading downhill. He's just doing it more slowly than nature intended.

very wise

my family generally has good genes, only 3 uncles i have are at the worst, a nw3.5 with thin hair on top

propecia has super slowed the recession and each month, the hair gets better n better

unfortunatedly, a friend of mine who has men in his family with nw6+ continues to thin and recede aggressively and he is on minoxidil and finasteride.

what you have said prob explains a great deal about the 'non-responders' here

 

[k3nn7i]

WOW!
10 years long and it's still working. You're one lucky guy!

 

[RaginDemon]

Look, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure most of this stuff out. There's so much back & forthing in all these discussions about whether finasteride "really works" or not, and whether finasteride can really regrow XXX amount of hairs, etc.

People sometimes act like Finasteride is supposed to be a holy-grail "light switch" that turns off all male pattern baldness on contact, and then act surprised when there are differing reports about its effectiveness. Why? finasteride is nothing but a mere mortal product. It reduces a certain one of the hormones in your system. That's all.


Think about it: The more genetically-male pattern baldness-prone that you already were to begin with, the less "effective" the Finasteride will probably seem to be on you! This is not complicated.


A mild balder will probably hold off all signs of loss for many years and thicken what was there. A severe early balder will probably not think the drug is as "effective" when he doesn't see the same degree of protection from it.

A mild balder might still be seeing hair counts on the upswing after more than one year. A severe balder will probably still seem to be heading downhill. He's just doing it more slowly than nature intended.

very wise

my family generally has good genes, only 3 uncles i have are at the worst, a nw3.5 with thin hair on top

propecia has super slowed the recession and each month, the hair gets better n better

unfortunatedly, a friend of mine who has men in his family with nw6+ continues to thin and recede aggressively and he is on minoxidil and finasteride.

what you have said prob explains a great deal about the 'non-responders' here

I can relate to it as well, Propecia definitely slows down my hair loss, I don't have any dramatic improvements yet, but my hair does get healthier.

 

[pinkfloyd7]

propecia10years, what is your families history of male pattern baldness.