Pills pills pills

[bverotti]

I would like to warn that taking pills on a long term base is subject to many dangers.

Do I dispute the effectivness of proscar etc, NO not at all.

I would just like to point out that the long term effects are UNKNOWN !

It would not be the first time the chemical industry lies about certain products just to get them SOLD. The industry itself may even not know what the longterm effects are since that takes TIME ! Has anybody here taken proscar or propecia for 30 years or more. Nope.

 

I know Americans take pills to solve nearly any problem and pills are generally accepted. In Europe taken pills is much less evendent. I know because I have lived in both continents.

 

Think about it, you may end up with a full head of hair but at the costs of organ malfunction or some worse SH...

 

All I ask is to think about it, after all it is your health.

[bverotti]

I would like to warn that taking pills on a long term base is subject to many dangers.

Do I dispute the effectivness of proscar etc, NO not at all.

I would just like to point out that the long term effects are UNKNOWN !

It would not be the first time the chemical industry lies about certain products just to get them SOLD. The industry itself may even not know what the longterm effects are since that takes TIME ! Has anybody here taken proscar or propecia for 30 years or more. Nope.

 

I know Americans take pills to solve nearly any problem and pills are generally accepted. In Europe taken pills is much less evendent. I know because I have lived in both continents.

 

Think about it, you may end up with a full head of hair but at the costs of organ malfunction or some worse SH...

 

All I ask is to think about it, after all it is your health.

[fizzlefest]

I'm only on month 2 of taking propecia. I too am not a big fan of taking any sort of drug for many years, perhaps the rest of my life. Hopefully hair cloning will be perfected and legalized (here in the U.S.) so I can eventually stop the drug and just get a transplant. But until that day, I'll continue to take propecia.

[vocor1]

These are good points.

 

Truly, we are attempting to commit to a drug for "life", yet no life-long studies have been completed because of when the drug was introduced.

We just have to make a "best guess", and see what comes out.

Who knows what is destined to happen to us sans Proscar -- other than more lost hair in most cases?

I think most of us choose to try based on what we've seen.

But remembering that it is a risk is important.

 

vocor1

Knowledge is Power

If the worst question is the one never asked, then the worst answer is the one never shared.

[none]

In life, you must risk. I don't know the long term problems that proscar could cause. It is my risk. Thinking about proscar causing me to die at 45 from organ failure would suck. So I don't think about it, the same way I don't thinking about getting hit by a mac truck that ran a red light. I was over weight all my life, until about 17, I started working out and feeling good about how I look, then I start loosing my hair? no, I think the risk of going bald and being just as insecure as was as a kid outwieghs the risk of long-term proscar side effects.

 

none

[Guest]

I've been on Propecia for almost a year now, and have no problem taking it for the rest of my life. The fact that it was approved by FDA helps. Whether anyone likes it, or not, it is pretty much the only thing clinically proven to help. I'm always amazed at how many people condemn anything artifital and resort to taking herbal remedies and such - just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good for you - in fact, in many cases it's just the opposite. To tell you the truth, my main concern with Propecia was the libido sideffect, but fortunatelly it didn't occur in my case. I don't worry about what might go wrong when I'm fifty - what matters to me now, that I know I'm spending my money on stuff that has been proven to work, instead of wasting it on 'snake oils'.

 

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic''. Arthur C. Clarke

[vocor1]

Good points. Propecia is the MOST effective solution right now. If we were SURE that their would be damning long-term effects, then people don't take it.

But without that, why not try? Who's to say that the body is in it's very best state sans drug intervention.

Remember, nature creates some pretty messed up sick twisted shxt on its own. Leads me to believe that maybe some proactive steps to correct that is worth the risks involved.

One can only manage what he/she knows about -- not on what we speculate might or might not happen based on fear.

 

vocor1

Knowledge is Power

If the worst question is the one never asked, then the worst answer is the one never shared.

[Smoothy]

I've been of propecia for 6 1/2 years and have had no problems or side effects. I do understand your questions into long term side effects and long term studies. What I have done is every 24-30 months take a 3-4 month "break" off of propecia for a clean out period if you are concerned. I've done this a few time, but be prepared to start to have some additional fall out after 4 weeks and when you start back it might take 8 weeks to establish the effecacy.

[Guest]

The results of a longitudinal study on finasteride's effects were reported in an online release from the New England Journal of Medicine. The study was cut short after 7 years because enough data was collected to draw conclusions about the effects of finasteride on incidence of cancer. The rate of less aggressive cancers was reduced 25% while the rate for more aggressive cancers increased by nearly 25%. Non aggressive prostate cancers are quite common in older men and they are highly treatable. Aggressive cancers are less common and pose considerably greater risk of death.

 

Last time I posted on this, someone made the comment that this study was misleading and that cause was not suggested by this study. On the contrary, while the study did not ferret out the mechanism(s) of cause, cause was suggested. This was a field experiment, not a correlational study. There was nothing whatsoever misleading about the study. The possiblity that the results were due to chance are very small.

 

Finasteride may directly act in a way that promotes development of aggressive tumors. Or, it may have an indirect role in cause. For example, suppression of low grade cancers may inhibit cancer detection and treatment until an aggressive cancer has developed. This is just one possible indirect mechanism of cause.

 

Given the low base rate for aggressive prostate cancers, a 25% increase in the rate of aggressive tumors might not seem like a great risk. But, what will happen after 15, 20 or 30 years of use? We don't know, but the results of this study are not encouraging.

 

The impulse of some who responded to my post last time seems to be to accept the study findings they liked (i.e., a decreased risk of non aggressive cancers) while dismissing the findings they disliked (an increased risk of aggressive cancers).

 

At the very least the results of this study suggest that we should be more vigilent than we are about screening for cancers. The online version of the research results did not describe the frequency and methods of cancer screening employed. But, the age range of study participants and the very purpose of the study (to measure incidence of prostate cancers) would suggest that they received at least routine screening (PSA and digital exam) - the kind of screening that any of us should have yearly after age 50.

 

Here is a link to the report:

 

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/NEJMoa030660v1

[uncjim]

Paul,

Should I assume by the tone of your post that you feel as if hairloss is preferable to cancer? (just kidding).

 

Thanks for the post. I'm overdue for a screening and this was a nice push.

Jim

[Guest]

Your data doesnt seem accurate about high grade tumors increasing by 25% while low grade tumors decreasing by 25%.

This report said this about long term finesteride usage:

 

"However, high-grade tumors (Gleason score, 7-10) were diagnosed more frequently in the finasteride group than in the placebo group (6.4% vs. 5.1% of participants).

 

This seems to increase it by 1.3%. Not too bad to risk good hair!!