Official Thread: Have you experienced side effects from finasteride? (Poll)

[kirkland]

Voted no - I have not had one issue with fin or dut and have been on one or the other for nearly 3 years (started with fin then moved to dut).

[Melvin- Admin]

11 minutes ago, kirkland said:

Voted no - I have not had one issue with fin or dut and have been on one or the other for nearly 3 years (started with fin then moved to dut).

Thanks every vote counts, I would love to see some true figures.

[JDEE0]

Voted cause why not, and whilst I like the idea Melvin, I do think we just have to keep in mind that this is the least scientific method possible to gather data; it's an online poll for a hair loss forum with huge selection bias. There are probably only hundreds of active posters at any given time on here, and 99.9999 percent of people either losing hair in the first place/dealing with MPB or those who use finasteride will ever even visit an online hairloss forum, let alone post on one. As such, aside from the complete lack of scientific control, you're just bound to get a massively inflated rate of side effects vs what actually occurs in reality. 

As for people earlier in the thread coming through with the Big Pharma-esque conspiracies, there have been lots of independent studies not carried out by Merck along with studies carried out for things like topical finasteride in which it would be extremely beneficial to paint oral fin in a negative light for obvious reasons, and they literally all show the same thing within a few percentage difference each time. All double blind, placebo controlled studies done on the drug in the past decades put the incidence of sides at roughly the 5% mark give or take a few points (usually take). in the most recent study conducted on the drug from last month, a new topical fin study that compared to oral, this was true yet again. In fact, Placebo was something like just under 3 percent whilst topical finasteride was around half a percent and systemic DHT was actually reduced by over a third in the topical group.

I'll say this: it really is just statistically impossible that numerous (in the double digits) unrelated studies all controlled in a highly scientific method have all shown similar results over the years. If the true incidence really is higher, then there really is no other option than there being some sort of behind the scenes force that is actively interfering with governmental regulatory bodies all over the globe and falsifying their study data, and all for a drug that has been generic for a long time and isn't some sort of trillion dollar scheme. Seems extremely far fetched to say the least. If anyone has any other scenarios in which the rate of sides coming from official data could actually be wrong, I'd be all ears if there was anything that made sense. 

Anyways, not a dig at this thread, I actually like the insight into peoples experiences on here, I just thought I should say my 2 cents for anyone who may read this and be completely put off from even trying fin after seeing 50 odd percent and going bald as a result. Probably would have scared the piss out of me back when I was considering it as I was already extremely apprehensive. 

Back to the question, my semen is more watery than it used to be, for sure, even now 2 years on, but it's not really a big deal to me personally, and I've had nothing apart from that.

Edited October 28, 2021 by JDEE0

[Melvin- Admin]

22 hours ago, JDEE0 said:

Voted cause why not, and whilst I like the idea Melvin, I do think we just have to keep in mind that this is the least scientific method possible to gather data; it's an online poll for a hair loss forum with huge selection bias. There are probably only hundreds of active posters at any given time on here, and 99.9999 percent of people either losing hair in the first place/dealing with MPB or those who use finasteride will ever even visit an online hairloss forum, let alone post on one. As such, aside from the complete lack of scientific control, you're just bound to get a massively inflated rate of side effects vs what actually occurs in reality. 

As for people earlier in the thread coming through with the Big Pharma-esque conspiracies, there have been lots of independent studies not carried out by Merck along with studies carried out for things like topical finasteride in which it would be extremely beneficial to paint oral fin in a negative light for obvious reasons, and they literally all show the same thing within a few percentage difference each time. All double blind, placebo controlled studies done on the drug in the past decades put the incidence of sides at roughly the 5% mark give or take a few points (usually take). in the most recent study conducted on the drug from last month, a new topical fin study that compared to oral, this was true yet again. In fact, Placebo was something like just under 3 percent whilst topical finasteride was around half a percent and systemic DHT was actually reduced by over a third in the topical group.

I'll say this: it really is just statistically impossible that numerous (in the double digits) unrelated studies all controlled in a highly scientific method have all shown similar results over the years. If the true incidence really is higher, then there really is no other option than there being some sort of behind the scenes force that is actively interfering with governmental regulatory bodies all over the globe and falsifying their study data, and all for a drug that has been generic for a long time and isn't some sort of trillion dollar scheme. Seems extremely far fetched to say the least. If anyone has any other scenarios in which the rate of sides coming from official data could actually be wrong, I'd be all ears if there was anything that made sense. 

Anyways, not a dig at this thread, I actually like the insight into peoples experiences on here, I just thought I should say my 2 cents for anyone who may read this and be completely put off from even trying fin after seeing 50 odd percent and going bald as a result. Probably would have scared the piss out of me back when I was considering it as I was already extremely apprehensive. 

Back to the question, my semen is more watery than it used to be, for sure, even now 2 years on, but it's not really a big deal to me personally, and I've had nothing apart from that.

I do believe the side effects are massively underreported. According to an article written by Reuters, even the official numbers given by Merck were inaccurate based on participants that weren't counted. I believe the numbers to be a lot closer to 10% than it is 3.8% as reported by Merck. While i'm not a conspiracy theorist, it has been proven that Merck at best inaccurately or underreported side effects, including depression and cognitive sides. Watch this video very insightful.

 

[Gokuhairline]

why anyone would take a risk even if its .0000001% that it would literally F your life up....is beyond me.....its your livelihood we are talking about here. 

[Falconary]

8 hours ago, Gokuhairline said:

why anyone would take a risk even if its .0000001% that it would literally F your life up....is beyond me.....its your livelihood we are talking about here. 

F your life up? Why do you think so? People are using all kind of stuff 24/7 all over the world, from vast amount of drugs, steroids, smoking, alcohol... And if we include bad diets, too much sugar, too much fat, too much carbs, too much cholesterol, toxins in foods, water etc., all inducing all kinds of diseases, cancer, heart diseases, mental problems etc. There are a very low minority that tries to live a perfectly healthy life, but the vast majority simply don't care. It is perfectly understandable that people would try finasteride. I gave up smoking for finasteride and so far no side effects at all. I only once had a hard time getting an erection, but it were probably a mental thing rather than finasteride because I never had any problems after that. 

[Melvin- Admin]

13 hours ago, Gokuhairline said:

why anyone would take a risk even if its .0000001% that it would literally F your life up....is beyond me.....its your livelihood we are talking about here. 

To be fair, you could say the same thing about anything. My main goal is making sure people are fully informed. Given the efficacy of topical fin though, I’d much rather use that, as opposed to the oral version.

[Gokuhairline]

3 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

To be fair, you could say the same thing about anything. My main goal is making sure people are fully informed. Given the efficacy of topical fin though, I’d much rather use that, as opposed to the oral version.

yes and no....more no actually. maybe something like crack or heroine....theres many cases of people reporting their lives turned upside down just after 1 finas pill.....that is 1 one mg pill....check out this kid damon and his testimony , look at the comments, many report similar things, they all cant be wrong. and again i think many just do not want to come clean for feeling embrassed or shamed....just saying this is not something i'd risk no matter how small the percentage is....hair is NOT worth your life.

 

 

[Melvin- Admin]

22 minutes ago, Gokuhairline said:

yes and no....more no actually. maybe something like crack or heroine....theres many cases of people reporting their lives turned upside down just after 1 finas pill.....that is 1 one mg pill....check out this kid damon and his testimony , look at the comments, many report similar things, they all cant be wrong. and again i think many just do not want to come clean for feeling embrassed or shamed....just saying this is not something i'd risk no matter how small the percentage is....hair is NOT worth your life.

 

 

I think anyone who denies PFS isn’t being honest. It all depends on the person. For some, it’s been a lifesaver, for others a life-ender. Personally, I agree with you, which is why I don’t take it, but I respect someone’s decision to take it.

[Tao]

I chose not to take it too.  Messing with my hormones is a risk I didn't want to take.  I had a wife who changed completely when she took hormones so that definitely influenced my decision.  That said, life is full of balanced risks/rewards so I don't blame people for trying it out and seeing if works for them.

[Curious25]

I think people would be naive to suggest a medication that alters your natural hormone profile wouldn't affect people, in equal measure to it being naive to suggest that the same medication would absolutely negatively affect people - we are all unique entities, and each and every one of us will be somewhat differently affected by different things. A single peanut can kill some people, whereas the majority of the world can eat bag after bag, and not offer it a second thought. 

It is a personal decision, and no one should criticise people's decisions either way. 

With regards to the 'official data', that shows figures of 5% of users being adversely affected, whether or not you want to believe this data as being absolute or not, that 5% is still enough to put some people off from even wanting to try it, and that is absolutely fine. For others, it may be minimal enough to happily pursue it. 

I do believe PFS is a thing, because the consultant I visited last year told me that he has had first hand experience working with some of these unfortunate guys, so I don't think people should be mocked for bringing this into conversation either. 

At the end of the day, we are lucky to have options available to us that don't involve medication - and we are lucky to have these available medication options. Imagine balding in the 70's and 80's? To be honest, I imagine the social scrutiny of image potentially being a lot less so back then, outside the ages of social media etc. However given so many combover hair styles being sported, it clearly still greatly affected men. 

[ciaus]

17 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

I do believe the side effects are massively underreported.

 

Beliefs without hard evidence shouldn't have such strong adjectives like massive. What we're really seeing in this poll and the topic in general is how susceptible we are to being biased by anecdotal stories from other people (some true others false) and our own personal experience. 48% side effect rate in our poll currently. I'm not sure aspirin could be FDA re-approved if they used these folks. LOL

 

This made me just think to back when I started doing research for SMP, there was a guy on a different forum from ours that reported he was diagnosed with a blood cancer about 6 months after he get his SMP done. He admitted there was no actual proof that the SMP had caused it, but he believed it did and wanted to tell everybody else about it so they could make their 'own decision.' Wouldn't surprise me if he was actually one of these hair transplant clinic reps trying to spread some fear to help steer people away from SMP.

Either way, the point is what actually caused blood cancer in a middle-aged man were almost certainly some combination of lifetime of poor lifestyle habits and bad genetic luck. And when it comes to sexual performance issues, the same can be said with even more emphasis on poor lifestyle and diet habits.  

 

And of course we're all getting older and even those of us doing everything right in terms of lifestyle and diet are still falling apart.

 

https://www.webmd.com/erectile-dysfunction/news/20030804/erectile-dysfunction-common-with-age

The Younger the Man, the Better the Function

Results showed that age played a primary role in men who said they had ED. The older the men, the higher the reports of ED. The reports ranged from "good" function among younger men to a steady decline to "poor" among the older group.

 

The majority of younger men (74%) rated sexual function as good or very good; only 10% of men older than 80 rated sexual function the same. Only 12% of younger men reported big or moderate problems. But nearly a quarter to a third of men older than 50 reported this degree of severity in sexual function.

 

• 2% reported first experiencing ED before age 40
• 4% reported first experiencing ED between ages 40 to 49
• 26% reported first experiencing ED between ages 50 to 59
• 40% reported first experiencing ED between ages 60 to 69

 

Men with a healthy lifestyle and no chronic disease had the lowest risk for erectile dysfunction; the greatest difference was seen for men aged 65-79. For instance, men who exercised at least three hours per week had a 30% lower risk for ED than those who exercised little. Obesity, smoking, and excessive TV watching were also associated with having a greater risk of erectile dysfunction.

[Curious25]

The points you make in relation to poor lifestyle habits, contribute to the decline in performance, largely from the effects they have on peoples hormone profiles.
Sure, you can argue obesity and smoking affects blood circulation, which in turn can affect erection qualities etc and etc. - but the fact of the matter is, the altering and changes of mens hormone profiles due to ageing and these poor lifestyle choices, is largely what causes the issues.

. . . . which ties into absolutely why people shouldn't be criticised for taking their time to consider taking a medication (for life) that will alter their natural hormone ranges. 





 

[Melvin- Admin]

21 minutes ago, ciaus said:

 

Beliefs without hard evidence shouldn't have such strong adjectives like massive. What we're really seeing in this poll and the topic in general is how susceptible we are to being biased by anecdotal stories from other people (some true others false) and our own personal experience. 48% side effect rate in our poll currently. I'm not sure aspirin could be FDA re-approved if they used these folks. LOL

 

This made me just think to back when I started doing research for SMP, there was a guy on a different forum from ours that reported he was diagnosed with a blood cancer about 6 months after he get his SMP done. He admitted there was no actual proof that the SMP had caused it, but he believed it did and wanted to tell everybody else about it so they could make their 'own decision.' Wouldn't surprise me if he was actually one of these hair transplant clinic reps trying to spread some fear to help steer people away from SMP.

Either way, the point is what actually caused blood cancer in a middle-aged man were almost certainly some combination of lifetime of poor lifestyle habits and bad genetic luck. And when it comes to sexual performance issues, the same can be said with even more emphasis on poor lifestyle and diet habits.  

 

And of course we're all getting older and even those of us doing everything right in terms of lifestyle and diet are still falling apart.

 

https://www.webmd.com/erectile-dysfunction/news/20030804/erectile-dysfunction-common-with-age

The Younger the Man, the Better the Function

Results showed that age played a primary role in men who said they had ED. The older the men, the higher the reports of ED. The reports ranged from "good" function among younger men to a steady decline to "poor" among the older group.

 

The majority of younger men (74%) rated sexual function as good or very good; only 10% of men older than 80 rated sexual function the same. Only 12% of younger men reported big or moderate problems. But nearly a quarter to a third of men older than 50 reported this degree of severity in sexual function.

 

• 2% reported first experiencing ED before age 40
• 4% reported first experiencing ED between ages 40 to 49
• 26% reported first experiencing ED between ages 50 to 59
• 40% reported first experiencing ED between ages 60 to 69

 

Men with a healthy lifestyle and no chronic disease had the lowest risk for erectile dysfunction; the greatest difference was seen for men aged 65-79. For instance, men who exercised at least three hours per week had a 30% lower risk for ED than those who exercised little. Obesity, smoking, and excessive TV watching were also associated with having a greater risk of erectile dysfunction.

I provided proof, perhaps “massively” may have been a poor choice of words, but it’s been factually proven that Merck underreported side effects. Watch the video I posted. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-courts-secrecy-propecia/

 

“The motion cites an email in which a Merck analyst tells executives that 23 men taking Propecia experienced sexual side effects during the final three years of the expanded study. That phase comprised 922 men who took the drug for varying lengths of time, according to a 2002 article Merck published in the European Journal of Dermatology.

The label, as revised in 2002, omits the experiences of nearly all of those men, reporting only on sexual dysfunction in men who took Propecia in the first year of research and in those who took it continuously for all five years. Merck didn’t include the experiences of men who finished the study before the fifth year or who were given placebo doses earlier in the study. The revised label also omitted information about six men who dropped out of the study during the final three years due to sexual side effects.

It is impossible from the numbers Merck has published to tell what percentage of men experienced sexual dysfunction over the full five years.

It is “not fair or standard practice” to report results from only a portion of a multi-year study because it systematically underestimates the risk of any side effect, said Avorn, the Harvard pharmacoepidemiologist who reviewed the court filing and Merck’s statements at Reuters’ request.”

That’s from official court documents. There’s evidence. Now, I’m not demonizing the drug, but you have to be honest and transparent about everything. That’s why we have this community. 

[Z--]

Not sure why anyone would want to defend the obvious underreporting regarding finasteride. It obviously works for the majority who take it, and if it works, that's great for them. I'm not pointing fingers here, but the problem is that proponents of it, particularly on places like tressless or other hair loss forums, seem to balk at the notion of someone not wanting to risk the side affects (and downplay those that do). Assuming they aren't paid shills, why the staunch insistence that people make the same choice they do? It's just peculiar.

The truth with finasteride is that you're playing Russian roulette, particularly due to change in hormones. Family member of mine had taken it for nearly decade without any issues, but after around 7 or 8 years, they had all sorts of libido problems. After they'd been off the drug, they'd slowly recovered for the first three or so months and claim to have completely recovered after around 6 months. Sadly, can't say the same about their hair. It's gone from a NW4 to at least a NW6 over that same year. Other people unfortunately never recover. I don't think anyone is a corporate conspiracy theorist or foolish to avoid taking this drug.

Edited October 30, 2021 by Z--

[BaldReaper]

bump this we need a bigger sample

[HairRun]

I've been experimenting topical formulations, with the italian one (farmacia patraicia or something like that) the Hassan formulation, and the California Specialty Pharmacy for over 2 years. 

It'll work for a while, then I'll get sides, then I'll go off it, wait for a week or two for sides to pass, then I'll try again at a lower dose. 

The last time it was more than a few weeks and spooked me out of trying again. Maybe I'll try the Hassan one again at a very very low dose. Like 1 pump a week. But I doubt i'll continue. 

[BaldDude]

For those who got sides did you try to stick it out for at least six months to see if the sides decreased?

[NTCP8]

From all the people I know, all of them have sexual side effects. They didn't admit themselves, but their wives/girlfriends told me... 

It's also starting for me, getting a bit worse than the previous three years. Have to decide to continue or not. Had a transplant last year (disappointing results, more in another topic), so if I stop taking Propecia, results will even be worse... 

 

 

[civic]

9 minutes ago, BaldBobby said:

For those who got sides did you try to stick it out for at least six months to see if the sides decreased?

I was on 1.25 mg fin back in 2009-11, before there was generic 1mg. It worked well for about 2 yrs, but eventualy it started losing effect. My doctor at time tried to increase dose to 1.75mg. I then started noticing sides, & was advised to quit immediatly. Now that i reached NW6, the 2 doctors i consulted with advised me there is no point even microdosing as i lost most hair on top & fin does not stop hair loss but slows down. I think those with retrograde & dupa might benefit from fin , but most NW6-7 with relativly strong donor, will probably not see much benefit.

Edited August 7, 2022 by civic

[mister_25]

I started Finasteride at the beginning of last year. I was getting what I believed were placebo side effects for the first two-three weeks then they went away and I've been normal since. 

I got more side effects from Minoxidil if I'm being honest.

Edited August 7, 2022 by mister_25

[Melvin- Admin]

42 minutes ago, HairRun said:

I've been experimenting topical formulations, with the italian one (farmacia patraicia or something like that) the Hassan formulation, and the California Specialty Pharmacy for over 2 years. 

It'll work for a while, then I'll get sides, then I'll go off it, wait for a week or two for sides to pass, then I'll try again at a lower dose. 

The last time it was more than a few weeks and spooked me out of trying again. Maybe I'll try the Hassan one again at a very very low dose. Like 1 pump a week. But I doubt i'll continue. 

The Italian pharmacy doesn’t carry the new XYONHealth topical with the siloxysystem gel.

[Savemyhairline]

Voted no. I recall at the very beginning I had VERY mild testicular pain but it was so minor that I didn’t even realize that could’ve been the finasteride until after the fact. I think it went away very quickly, I thought I just slept funny or something at the time. I wouldn’t even really count that as a side effect it was so minor. Sex drive is just as high as it was, nipples look the same, no brain fog, I think those are the usual suspects for people.

[GoliGoliGoli]

Most people who talk about sides from Fin focus on the sexual/cognitive stuff but there is a lot of research about the importance of DHT in a variety on functions. Just because you aren't experincing noticeable side effects doesn't necessarily mean you aren't doing damage. I only stopped posting links because I got tired of copying and pasting I could've gone on for another 10-20

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308241/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308241/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25268392/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24257908/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16317058/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308241/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21079217/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308241/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308241/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19040620/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6459338/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31074799/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12826696/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4629627/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23509861/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24764121/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5964967/

Edited August 7, 2022 by GoliGoliGoli

[HairRun]

4 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

The Italian pharmacy doesn’t carry the new XYONHealth topical with the siloxysystem gel.

Yeah, whoops, meant to put a comma, i've tried 3 brands.