Is it time we become more responsible??

[NervousNelly]

Hey guys, is it time we start to be more responsible on this forum with our laidback attitude about hairloss medications??

 

Bezane has made some very valid points on some of the other threads and I won't duplicate all of them. But here are some points for all of us to consider:

 

 

1. We tell 21 yr. olds not to get surgery because of possible future changes yet so easily recommend that they take toxic meds for the rest of their lives.

 

2. We know that approx. 100,000 people per year die from prescription medications.

 

3. We know that there are many drugs that later we hear are causing all kinds of issues for people. Can give several examples if wanted.

 

4. We know that they have some pretty serious side effects.

 

5. We know that the jury is still out on what they will do to us 30 years after taking.

 

6. We know that it is a huge marketing ploy that they scare the shit out of you if you think of stopping because "you'll lose all the hair you gained."

 

7. We all know that pharmaceutical companies primary goal is profits.

 

8. They do very little really. I have seen so few great success stories.

 

 

 

I ofcourse could continue the list but I think that should suffice to make my point.

 

To simply say "Oh I don't get side effects is idiotic." Possible 10 yrs from now you won't be saying the same thing??

 

YES I AM A BIT OF A HYPOCRIT BECAUSE I DO TAKE MEDS. I DON'T TAKE AS OFTEN AS PRESCRIBED BUT STILL TAKE. I HOPE TO CHANGE THAT----VANITY SUCKS!!!

 

 

For example-- Most of us lose our ability to get an erection as we age. It could just happen at a younger age if on the meds or much worse--who knows??

 

Just something to think about..

 

 

NN

[NervousNelly]

Hey guys, is it time we start to be more responsible on this forum with our laidback attitude about hairloss medications??

 

Bezane has made some very valid points on some of the other threads and I won't duplicate all of them. But here are some points for all of us to consider:

 

 

1. We tell 21 yr. olds not to get surgery because of possible future changes yet so easily recommend that they take toxic meds for the rest of their lives.

 

2. We know that approx. 100,000 people per year die from prescription medications.

 

3. We know that there are many drugs that later we hear are causing all kinds of issues for people. Can give several examples if wanted.

 

4. We know that they have some pretty serious side effects.

 

5. We know that the jury is still out on what they will do to us 30 years after taking.

 

6. We know that it is a huge marketing ploy that they scare the shit out of you if you think of stopping because "you'll lose all the hair you gained."

 

7. We all know that pharmaceutical companies primary goal is profits.

 

8. They do very little really. I have seen so few great success stories.

 

 

 

I ofcourse could continue the list but I think that should suffice to make my point.

 

To simply say "Oh I don't get side effects is idiotic." Possible 10 yrs from now you won't be saying the same thing??

 

YES I AM A BIT OF A HYPOCRIT BECAUSE I DO TAKE MEDS. I DON'T TAKE AS OFTEN AS PRESCRIBED BUT STILL TAKE. I HOPE TO CHANGE THAT----VANITY SUCKS!!!

 

 

For example-- Most of us lose our ability to get an erection as we age. It could just happen at a younger age if on the meds or much worse--who knows??

 

Just something to think about..

 

 

NN

[thanatopsis_awry]

I think most people who take the hair meds, as with most prescrip drugs, are aware of the side effects, but choose to take them because they place the drugs utility above said "side effects"; also, it is said that whatever unintended-effects may occur will diminish if you decide to stop taking the drugs.

 

I personaly disagree that "they do very little really"; sure, they don't manifest huge fields of newfound hair for you, but who knows how much worse things would be off the stabalizing drugs....moreover, that they help in preserving hair is of huge benefit when/if you look into an HT program.

 

Its true that its impossible to say if there will be very-long-term, unforseen consequences by taking the drugs....but thats just the nature of the beast in this instance, imo. I agree the drugs shouldn't be peddled as flawless miracles that should be exempt from critical examination; but, I think that as far as drugs go they are quite useful, and the side-effects are, as a whole, rather mild.

 

EDIT -- hair loss is a rough, tough situation no matter how you cut it; right now, it seems one basically has three options: wigs, drugs, HTs...and the drugs almost go hand in hand with getting a HT. not a whole lotta options or choice if you really place a premium on stopping and reversing your hair loss!

[bezane]

Why do drugs go hand and hand with HT?. Because most posters and doctors say so? My results as very very good and don'y do meds.

 

Side effects are rather mild? Says who? Merck? Or are you speaking of the 2%? I know recreational drug users since my college days that still use and never stepped over the edge into addiction. Should that be considered when informing college kids about meth?

 

Once the meds work you have to stay on it for that result. End of story. That's addiction.

 

The difference between me and others here is that they have a 250 million dollar PR and ad campaign on their side. I'm just using historic pharma data and logic. And when side effects have been documented why is someone saying they don't have side effects a testimony to someone considering taking the meds? It seems crystal balls are a myth, and that doesn't make sense to assume someone else is safe.

 

The initial point to all this was about mostly everyone here saying it was near criminal for a doc to do a HT regimen on a 22 year-old. Yet taking a strong chemical possibly for life is okay and the way to go.

 

Many drugs are designed to damage certain things in our body in order for other body functions to survive or rule. For example chemo therapy. Propecia is designed to tuen the prostate from a plum to a prune. I'll take my chances without it.

[MrJobi]

Guys

 

I must disagree a bit with some of your points (or your opinion) .. Yes, any drug we put in our body is a foreign object. But to say "don't take it because there could be side effect , etc. is not good enough" You are focusing on only the negative. If that is the case then don't eat anything processed, drink, smoke , or take any artificial substance

 

How many of you on here take any pills, even asprin ( it can kill you ) ?

 

How many people drink Diet coke (side effects read the link below)?

 

http://www.mcmanweb.com/article-110.htm

 

How many people smoke (it can kill you & has side effects)?

 

How many people drink ( it can kill you & has side effects)?

 

How many of you are overweight ( it can kill you & has side effects) ??

 

Even Minoxidil has it's issues ( has side effects)..

 

Do you know what the #1 killer in the US is??

 

HEART DISEASE (I think we have bigger issues as well)

 

So if you are boycotting Propecia to treat hairloss, which is a viable treatment you might as well start with all of the other items above as they can ( and many have actually been proven to e fatal)

 

If you don't want to take it, fine, don't but I do .. But don't start talking about what if this and what if that and drawing conclusion based on your looking at a small portion of the picture?

 

I really could careless about Mercks marketing campaign.. What about Nike's and child labor, and the fact a bunch of thugs are promoting their stuff to our kids.. It's 2007 dude, get over it , marketing is everywhere..

 

Propecia has helped my hairloss & to this day, I have not experienced side effects. 10 years down the road, maybe I will but then again so may everyone else who has put any foreign substance in their bodies on a regular basis including Mcdonalds ( remember that film).

 

I don't drink, don't smoke and exercise so I like my chances at the end of the day.

 

Everything we do has consequences, and I agree we should weight them based on objective data both good and bad..

[bezane]

That's all fine Mjrb but any of my rantings about meds was not in response to YOUR personal situation. You informed yourself and decided to go with it. This is about GENERALIZING when giving advice to people seeking it out.

 

And your comparisons to make your point are quite the quantum leaps from aspirin for example to Propecia. Aspirin afterall has been approved for use for a little bit more time than Propecia. I think the comparison is kind of silly no?

 

Milk?

 

Weight?

 

Not sure why it is so important to make Propecia keep such company but for some of us/you it works and thats fine.

[MrJobi]

Agreed

 

My point is don't just look at one side because your post is based on your view of the possible side effects.i'm being objective and looking at all sides of the situation. Propecia is a viable option for hairloss & there is no proof that you will get side effects. There is risk in anything we put in our body regardless of what it is .. Yes, Asprin too ( milk doesnt count as it is natural) The amount of marketing money spent is a mute point as all companies do the same.

 

I do agree though, whoever takes it should be informed jusyt like anything they put in their bodies.. Including Alcohol or anything and they should be ready to accept possible "side effects".

[bezane]

Just one more point Mjrb, and I do know you and I both have patients' best interest in mind, you stae that there is NO PROOF that Propecia has side effects. That's just 100% false. It does. Merck says so. That's why they say 2%. My opinion is it's higher and there's no proof it is safe long-term (10-50 years).

 

When they speak, they speak to all. Not someone that has been on the drug for two years and are happy. That disclaimer is generally for new users.

 

And the reason I say long-term 10-50 years is because it is not a therapeutic drug when used for MPB. Use it, it works. Stop, it falls out. And that fall out by the way is not considered a side effect. And consequently very little from Merck promotes that fact.

[MrJobi]

Hi B

 

Yes, we do have the same intent which is the best interest of someone suffering from hairloss.

 

Let me clarify, there is no proof that there are side effect , meaning in everyone who takes it. I can honestly say I have no side effects or none I am aware of. Due to this it is unfair to tell someone not to take it due to side effects. You may or may not ( just like smoking or the other examples)

 

There is no long term proof any chemical is safe 10 - 50 years.. That is my point. So if you generalize with Propecia, then you have to be fair and do it with ALL habitual foreign substances you put in your body.

 

That's not me being diffucult , i'm just using your rationale. So to make a blanket statment bout Propecia and the side effects you will get is not accurate.

 

See my point?

[NervousNelly]

I won't add much more to this as I do certainly understand and appreciate both sides of the arguement but...

 

Why do we tell most 21 yr. olds not to get a HT or if they do, not to dense pack their hairlines?

 

Because of the uncertainty of the future.

 

Shouldn't that same rationale apply when recommending medications??

 

 

I understand the thought process that you might never know the future of anything we put in our bodies.

 

HOWEVER, WE DO KNOW the long term complications of ingesting any pharmaceutical for several years. There will be negative issues. What type of complications, we are still uncertain.

 

If you disagree with this statement above please provide me with examples!!! Even aspirin will thin the blood, bruise easily, arteries can weaken, etc....

 

 

NN

[finnari]

This is rather easy really. The question is how serious are you about not being bald? If you absolutely hate the idea you might take the risk of taking a chemical compound such as propecia. Our bodies are all different and process out "chemicals" very effectively. We really dont understand completely how everything impacts us. Studies are limited and are not the end all of the discussions. We may be completley unaware right now that a drug like Propecia may in the future be implicated in causing some sort of cancers.

 

Its your body. Roll the dice.

[NervousNelly]

Its your body. Roll the dice.

 

 

Very accurate statement. Since some of these young men on this site need our advise to think rationally about heavily loading their hairlines with Fu at a young age don't they possibly need to be educated about possible consequences of a lifetime of pharmaceuticals??

 

Remember, dense packing a 21 yr. old hairline with mega fu may POSSIBLY be a bad idea. With this example there is no way of predicting future either. We all seem on board with this, but don't seem to grasp the same concept when it comes to pharmaceuticals.

 

 

NN

[Bill - Seemiller]

Though this is an interesting discussion, I think we have to take a step back for a minute.

 

It is ALWAYS up to EVERY individual on this forum to research the information given to them. Nobody here is giving information that should be taken as "gospel".

 

Often I will give my opinion...and I will use words like "consider" and "research", however I'm sure I've used words like "get on" when referring to finasteride.

 

Why does medication go hand in hand with HT you ask? It's the only thing that MIGHT help prevent future loss. Most people want to preserve existing hair rather than lose it all and add transplants to the entire head. Of course, not everyone will end up a NW7, but it's about minimizing the risk of future loss.

 

Are there potential side effects? Sure! But since everything causes cancer, according to scientific study, I guess it's just one more thing.

 

But seriously....recommendations from this forum should ALWAYS be researched and not taken as gospel.

 

If anything, perhaps we should be more "responsible" by adding disclaimers like "don't take my word for it, do your own research" or something like that.

 

I'm aware of the risks of taking finasteride and I have chosen to take it anyway. Others should educate themselves as well before jumping into anything whether it be medication or HT.

 

Bill

[nobuzz4me]

If a new "Hair Steriod" came out and was not approved or monitored for potential side effects BUT, was proven to grow back a full head of hair, how many of you out there would get on it??? My guess would be around 90% of us.

[NervousNelly]

"Not to get off the subject but I feel sometimes people get a bit carried away with their opinions ( see the Propecia thread)"---This was a quote from Mrjb from another thread.

 

Not to stir up shit but I would hope that he would give us a little more respect for our opinions as we respect opposing views.

 

We obviously are not all going to agree and that is ok but I like giving people both sides to each story and let them make up their own minds.

 

NN

[Bill - Seemiller]

NN,

 

I don't think Mrjb was trying to start anything. Perhaps he stated that because there have been many recent threads about how TERRIBLE medication is, mostly coming from Bezane. I'll let him speak for himself.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I believe it's healthy to look at both sides of the coin.

 

But we also have to remember to look at all the components behind someone's opinion. Do you think Bezane, for example, would be so against medication if he didn't experience side effects? After all...he wasn't against the medication before this time...otherwise he wouldn't have even had the chance to have side effects. There are certainly logic behind his claims so I don't want to knock that.

 

Anyway...it's a healthy discussion, let's not make it personal anyone

 

Bill

[TheHairLossCure]

I think one reason people are quick to recommend medication - particularly for young patients who are infatuated with the idea of transplant surgery ??“ is that the complications associated with meds are usually minimal as compared to those associated with surgery. Even a top quality procedure will involve healing time, scarring etc. For a young patient doing HT, it also can involve a commitment to multiple sessions as hair loss progresses. To me, that is not always an ideal solution if medication can treat or temper the problem.

 

We do not know the long to term ramifications of taking drugs like Propecia though. I think this is something to be explored and discussed. Hair loss meds are certainly not candy, so they should not be "offered" as such.

 

Good topic fellas.

[MrJobi]

Gentlemen

 

I would never ay anything to Stir up "stuff" but when an opinion becomes a bashing session presenting only the possible side effects reported in a small percentage of a random population, I have an issue with that. I am the first one to admit, side effects could be possible. This is noted and is printed on the bottle.. We could die from drinking diet coke, who the hell knows?

 

However, this does not give reason to scare the piss out of people who take it or who are considering it. Again Correclation does not equal to causation..

 

All I am saying is be consistent and don't paint a one sided picture. Propecia does provide results for some and this is documented ..

 

Don't come to the table with What if this and what if that based on a small percentage.

 

I do not like lessons in futility based on a small percentage of results. If that's the case, do not take anything that doesn't grow from the ground.. It "could" cause cancer

[Guest]

I just think we should leave the prescribing of prescription drugs to the doctor.

 

Why is it a Prescription drug & not an over the counter drug?

 

Because only doctors are allowed to prescribe it. There must be a reason for that.

[youngsuccess]

I just think we should leave the prescribing of prescription drugs to the doctor.

 

Why is it a Prescription drug & not an over the counter drug?

 

Because only doctors are allowed to prescribe it. There must be a reason for that.

 

 

Excellent point. Even when a poster might recommend finasteride to a newcomer on this site, implicitly he/she is suggesting to speak with a doctor (you can't run out to supermarket and pick up some Propecia on a whim). Maybe this just needs to be articulated a little bit more clearly. Doing this would not be irresponsible; in fact, this is the most sound advice that can be given. As far as being manipulated by the pharmaceutical companies goes,(which I gather is an undertone of this conversation) I don't think that applies to this subject in the same sense.

 

All of these Coalition surgeons who have invested their lives in the field of hair restoration are a bit more conversant with medical studies than we are, and I think all of them feel confident that Propecia is a relatively safe and effective part of treatment for those who respond positively to the drug. And look at the resumes of some of the guys represented here: Dr. True, for example, who seems to be a strong advocate of finasteride, has been involved in medicine, not just hair transplantation, for a LONG time. Sure, it can be argued that pharmaceutical companies are primarily motivated by profit. But doctors have nothing to gain by prescribing finasteride; in fact, hair transplant surgeons especially would not recommend taking it if profit were the only thing considered, as it essentially could take business, i.e. further hair transplantation, away from them. When proscar was first being prescribed to patients by some doctors to treat hair loss, many dermatologists and others involved in the field of hair restoration, afraid of losing money to proscar, would fill their offices with inaccurate literature about side effects because they wanted to keep charging their patients a ton of money for their useless hair potion concoctions. So I think there is propaganda on both sides. And Proscar, a more potent dose of finasteride than Propecia, has been used to treat the prostate since the early nineties. Not that it means a whole lot, but it's not like finasteride popped up a year ago.

 

Especially now, consider the sheer volume of anonymous information available online. I think the internet often gives people a false sense of empowerment when it comes to the "fight the power" mentality with prescription drugs and things of that nature. Doctors study peer reviewed, hardcore scientific data; one's computer does not become the "fact box" when the internet is connected. For the record I do think Bezane is right though that it can be hypocritical to admonish new posters about the dangers of early hair transplantation and then go and recommend Propecia as if it were a vitamin.

[bezane]

Hey Guys....I to think this is an important topic and glad some of the bigger posters are weighing in.

 

Bill.....I don't and haven't taken Propecia. "I'm fucking bald" is my logic and I've had HTs. I don't want to take the med. And not because of side effects. My reason is that personally, baldness ruined my life in many ways. And Propecia, by the time it came available would of probably kept 1/3-1/2 my loss. Might of still been on it. I want to be done with baldness once and for all. To open that bottle and take a pill every day would be a horror for me. It had to stop. I started HT repair and a regimen and probably am finished.

 

I did however, suffer from an illness in which the chemicals prescribed were toxic and caused side-effects. That was bad. That was necessary.

 

I think you also mentioned in a jestful way that "everything causes cancer." And while I get your point, this whole thing did not start as a war on Propecia or even a negative topic started on Propecia. This is about a poster like you for example. You answer, to the best of your ability, many new posters asking the same kind of initial questions as others. You give them advice. But you also include the Propecia regimen when they are asking about a HT. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that I think I read as many as 50 posts from you to that effect. And you're just one poster.

 

And it is relative to mention Propecia. But to me, an maintenance program to hold onto your hair, that may have side effects, and might be for life, should be given as much weight as the HT in our debate de rigeur with new posters.

 

Presenting ourselves as knowing individuals, and we are!, immediately sounds like a Propecia endorsement. Get on this pill possibly forever and get a transplant and if you quit the pill your hair will fall out and you'll need more transplants!

 

Now that seems to be popular logic here. It's not for me. We also like the idea that a 22 year-old is too young for a HT. And for the most part maybe he is, but why?

 

Generally speaking the Coalition and forum state that it's too early predicting the amount of loss. I think there should be a new scale just like Norwood called a Norwood Rate Scale. Instead of just showing what degree of baldness you have, it will show what what degree of baldness you WILL have and how fast from today you're going there. The amount of donor hair is also an issue. How much will you need. Will it cover. Will it be there in ten years.

 

Well the point that this intertwines with Propecia is that if the 22 year-old gets on it, at what point will we be able to predict how fast he's balding and how bald will he get if he stops Propecia? After all, there's a chance taking the meds might stop any additional loss.

 

So now we have the dilemma of the lifelong addiction. That's a bit weird. Isn't it. And there's other developmental side-effects to consider. Many reports of sensitive mid-section to the breast area, even slight enlargement, and lots of weight gain out there. Any of these can possibly relate to development in a young adult. Additionally there are complaints of lethargy usually around mid afternoon and also lack of assertiveness.

 

And to Mjrb....This is not about scaring the shit out people. This is called a debate on side-effects and especially to be perused by a non-user considering use. No one is scared. But if someone objects to coaxing people to do it, which would be the case if someone doesn't speak out against it, then it becomes an advertisement. This is supposed to be an upscale well-informed forum. It's not just about the hair man at any and every cost. Especially to a 21 year-old in a panic. He'll tend to ignore what he doesn't want to hear.

 

Folica....about Doctors should handle this. Sounds good but doesn't make sense. The FDA approves this drug and a doctor has to prescribe it but the way it's dispensed seems a bit easy.

 

Medicine and medical school isn't a mystery to me. I accept very little at face value. I trust but verify. And even these esteemed coalition doctors need to be challenged. There is more work to be done in their area. The status quo here getting up to speed on the level of Hasson. It's not research and development.

 

So my point is not "it's all about money and they're all corrupt." I know they have a business and I know they have bills to pay and I for one never asked a surgeon for a discount. But the average doctor makes $75 on the initial prescription. It's huge when you tally it up.

 

Consider this as well. Many general practitoners dispense Propecia. In fact a huge amount more than HT docs. Most men on Propecia are not or not yet considering a HT. However that number is still a low percentage of their patients compared to HT docs where it is discussed with every male patient and prescribed to half.

 

It is part of the business.

 

I saw this site and liked it because the guy includes some stuff from med school books and med journals as well as his own experience. There's a link somewhere to a forum with a lot of complaints. I in no way promoting this. I came across it and it was pretty good. He has side-effects that continued on after he stopped use. I'm 100% certain this is a rare case. Just didn't want you to think I was pulling out the pom poms in the fight against Propecia.

 

http://www.propeciasideeffects.com/index.htm

[NervousNelly]

Mrjb,

 

There is no need for us to present the "other side of the story" as that is what yourself and others are doing. That is what makes it a debate. I also don't believe we should compare Propecia to diet coke. You're smarter than that.

 

 

 

NN

[MrJobi]

Of course we do. It's called being objective..If you only look at one side, you are not seeing the full picture.

 

My whole approach is to be fair in your judgement. Opinions arent facts, including my own

 

As far as the diet coke I thing the Procpecia vs Aspertane, it is a very good comparison.

 

did you read that link I sent.. The side effects mentioned are worse than Propecia's

[NervousNelly]

So many of our debates do come down to a matter of opinion. We will never accomplish anything other than expressing ourselves as there is no right/wrong answer.

 

Ofcourse our opinion is that not yet is there an answer. I hope however that there are not hard lessons to learn years from now.

 

NN

[MrJobi]

Amen Brother!