[PUA_Rachacha]

(06-02-2015 05:50 AM)Kdog Wrote:  

Screw these sketchy medications with brutal side effects. You guys know how affordable hair transplants are in SEA?!

When you get a hair transplant, the surgeon generally tells you to take Propecia so that further thinning won't affect the look of the transplant.

[TheKantian]

On April 11, 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced changes to the professional labels for Propecia (finasteride 1 mg) and Proscar (finasteride 5 mg) to expand the list of sexual adverse events reported to FDA as some of these events have been reported to continue after the drug is no longer being used (note that erectile dysfunction after stopping use of these drugs was added as a known event in 2011). The new label changes include:

A revision to the Propecia label to include libido disorders, ejaculation disorders, and orgasm disorders that continued after discontinuation of the drug.
A revision to the Proscar label to include decreased libido that continued after discontinuation of the drug.
A revision to both the Propecia and Proscar labels to include a description of reports of male infertility and/or poor semen quality that normalized or improved after drug discontinuation.

Despite the fact that clear causal links between finasteride (Propecia and Proscar) and sexual adverse events have NOT been established, the cases suggest a broader range of adverse effects than previously reported in patients taking these drugs. Information about these adverse events may be important to individual patients. Therefore, prescribers and patients need to be aware of them, as part of a discussion of risk and benefits of finasteride when determining the best treatment options.
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/Info...299754.htm

[PhDre]

(06-01-2015 01:50 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

All I've learned today is that the medical industry is extremely corrupted, and personally I won't be using any medicine that hasn't been proven to work at least 50 years ago.

(06-01-2015 02:59 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Studies in our times have to be analysed strongly. Finasteride in contrast to a cold medicine is to be taken for years and decades even. Peer-review means little nowadays and you have to take a hard look into the study design.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...octor.aspx

Quote:

Bias #1: Unwanted Results are Not Published
Bias #2: Bad Results are Submitted as Good
Bias #3: A Favorable Study is Submitted Multiple Times
Bias #4: Follow-Up Reviews Done by Biased Experts
Bias #5: Ghostwriting
Bias #6: Journal Bias
Bias #7: Drug Companies Masquerading as Educators

You can read the article and check out the links in it. One of my best friends is an MD and highly successful as a country manager for a large pharmaceutical company. He confirmed all the points to me in private. In a way he does not care too much and on the other hand he claims that is still the best system we've got. Well - I would say, it's better than the primitive times 100 years ago, but it could be 100 times better. But that is my opinion - we don't even debate much on the topic, since he says that it wouldn't even matter much to him if everything I say about medicine is true. He follows the guidelines and has to believe in it to a certain degree to do his job well. A healthy detachment of all helps with this.

(06-01-2015 06:15 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Again and again you find here guys defending the pharma cartel to the bone as if their livelihood depended on it.

Doesn't matter if it pleases you so much - better agree to disagree and move on. In my opinion most of the current pharmaceutical practices are semi-quackeries. Trauma treatment and surgeries have my full admiration and support - the majority of the rest is fraudulent, corrupt, misguided or outright criminal. Sometimes the criminal activity is just focused on suppressing cheap by far superior alternatives just because it would cost billions in revenue loss. Also - I do not accuse MDs - they can only act upon what they are taught in school.

This.

I work in scientific research myself and I notice that fraud is common. A friend of mine used to work in scientific research in the life sciences. He has told me multiple times that fraud is not only common, it is the norm.

Scientific research is a joke, especially in the life sciences. Always remember that somebody has to pay for these studies and that somebody are the same companies that develop the drug. The Mercola article is spot on. Scientists that are unwilling to participate in this farce are labeled quacks and their careers and even lives are destroyed.

Isn’t it remarkable how these peer-reviewed studies always come to conclusions that defy instinct and many years of human experience?
-acné because of poor eating habits and bad gut health? Not true, just take some topical medicine.
-catched a common cold because of wet feet? Not true, here have some syrup and a nose spray.

Isn’t it remarkable how they always bash alternative therapies that have helped many people (and for which there is also evidence that they do work)?
-acupuncture? Bullshit.
-homeopathy? Bullshit.
-osteopathy? Bullshit.
-orthomolecular medicine? Bullshit.
-anti-aging therapy through hormones? Bullshit.
-liver detox? Bullshit.

Isn’t it remarkable how some artificial patented molecule always performs way better than a natural substance?
-testosterone for depression in males? Doesn’t work, take some ssri’s.
-extra vitamin C to strengthen your immune system? Doesn’t work, take some antibiotics.

The list is endless. If you blindly believe the approved peer-reviewed studies in medicine, then you are simply ill-informed. Stop respecting professors, scientists, academics… They do not deserve your respect. They are just as corrupt as anyone else and they only care about money and prestige.

[PhDre]

(06-01-2015 03:50 PM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:  

Additionally, my understanding of the drug's mechanism of action is that it inhibits the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone (DHT); DHT in turn can cause hair follicles to thin and slowly die.

This is the typical limited understanding that is also displayed by most doctors when it comes to the human body.
Read here:
http://blog.alanjacobsmd.com/alan-jacobs...n-men.html
http://blog.alanjacobsmd.com/alan-jacobs...eride.html

5-alfa reductase does far more in your body than converting testosterone to DHT. It acts on different hormones, on neurotransmitters etc. Many people report that restoring all hormone levels (test, DHT, estradiol, DHEA, pregnenolone,...) to optimal values after discontinuing finasteride does not solve their problems.

[PUA_Rachacha]

(06-02-2015 11:46 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

This is the typical limited understanding that is also displayed by most doctors when it comes to the human body.
Read here:
http://blog.alanjacobsmd.com/alan-jacobs...n-men.html
http://blog.alanjacobsmd.com/alan-jacobs...eride.html

5-alfa reductase does far more in your body than converting testosterone to DHT. It acts on different hormones, on neurotransmitters etc. Many people report that restoring all hormone levels (test, DHT, estradiol, DHEA, pregnenolone,...) to optimal values after discontinuing finasteride does not solve their problems.

Interesting that this doctor states on his homepage that out of ~300 men who had come to his practice over the last few years complaining of post-finasteride sexual side effects, 60% of them had the side effects on account of either a pituitary tumor (10%) or a family history of depression (50%). For the latter group, when the sexual side effects first hit, the men became so distressed that their mental anguish "appeared strong enough to suppress their HPG axis such that they had a separate reason to not be able to raise their LH and FSH when their testosterone declined, presumably initially from the finasteride."

The other 40% actually had physical symptoms due to the finasteride alone, but "could most often be treated successfully by using medications to raise LH and FSH directly and letting their testicles follow suit and make more testosterone."

In other words, sexual symptoms that appeared in 60% of the patients that Dr. Jacobs treated were not ultimately tied to Propecia. The other 40% could most often be treated successfully.

Conclusion: ~2% of Propecia users experience side effects (as referenced in an above post). According to this doctor's experience sexual symptoms that appeared in 60% of the patients were not ultimately tied to Propecia. The other 40% could most often be treated successfully with the use of HRT until their testes functioned properly again. This is a small portion of the population.

@ Samseau: nowhere in your posts could I tell if you actually went to a doctor to have your condition treated. Did you actually go?

And if you make disparaging remarks again, I'll report you.

@ everyone else: if you get anxious easily or depressed, you should probably shy away from taking this drug.

[PhDre]

(06-02-2015 12:46 PM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:  

Interesting that this doctor states on his homepage that out of ~300 men who had come to his practice over the last few years complaining of post-finasteride sexual side effects, 60% of them had the side effects on account of either a pituitary tumor (10%) or a family history of depression (50%). For the latter group, when the sexual side effects first hit, the men became so distressed that their mental anguish "appeared strong enough to suppress their HPG axis such that they had a separate reason to not be able to raise their LH and FSH when their testosterone declined, presumably initially from the finasteride."

The other 40% actually had physical symptoms due to the finasteride alone, but "could most often be treated successfully by using medications to raise LH and FSH directly and letting their testicles follow suit and make more testosterone."

In other words, sexual symptoms that appeared in 60% of the patients that Dr. Jacobs treated were not ultimately tied to Propecia. The other 40% could most often be treated successfully.

Conclusion: ~2% of Propecia users experience side effects (as referenced in an above post). According to this doctor's experience sexual symptoms that appeared in 60% of the patients were not ultimately tied to Propecia. The other 40% could most often be treated successfully with the use of HRT until their testes functioned properly again. This is a small portion of the population.

Good catch.

However, don't you think that it is very disturbing that 40% of patients need hormone replacement therapy after using a drug for hair loss? And that 2% suffer from irreversible endocrine/neurological damage?

If this would be a drug to treat a debilitating or life threatening disease, these numbers would maybe be acceptable. But for something like hair loss?

I don't know if you have ever had your hormones fucked up but I have and I can tell you that it is extremely unpleasant.
All of a sudden you don't feel like having sex anymore.
You cannot get it up, even with the help of viagra.
All your joints hurt.
You get sick after every gym workout.
You cannot focus on your job.
You fall asleep at your desk.
You fall asleep when you are with your friends in a bar.
You sleep 12 hours a day yet you are yawning all the time.
Your colleagues start gossiping that you are a drug addict.
If it lasts for long enough it makes you lose your strength, your physique, your friends, your girlfriend, your job, everything...

Do you think that these are acceptable side effects for a hair loss drug?

[Samseau]

(06-02-2015 12:46 PM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:  

Conclusion: ~2% of Propecia users experience side effects (as referenced in an above post).

Unsupported conclusion with zero evidence for this claim in anything you've presented. Massive amounts of evidence to the contrary however you've continued to ignore.

Quote:

According to this doctor's experience sexual symptoms that appeared in 60% of the patients were not ultimately tied to Propecia. The other 40% could most often be treated successfully with the use of HRT until their testes functioned properly again. This is a small portion of the population.

All this doctor found was that to treat some of the men destroyed by propecia, he needed to stabilize their emotional health because the loss of their manhood also caused near-permanent damage to their emotional health.

This does not contradict the fact that propecia causes lasting harm after one stops taking the pill. Propecia caused them the emotional harm so it follows that propecia was responsible for 90% of the patients that walked into his office.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

The drug is used by trannies as they transition from male to female - that tells it all really. Men should definitely keep a distance from that.

Orthomolecular approach against hair-loss:

Diet change - cutting out processed sugars and carbs
Omega 3-6-9 1000-2000mg
Lecithin (best from Sunflower) 2000mg
Multivitamin (high potency one - includes the essential Vitamin B group that is necessary for keeping hair)
Zinc (50mg-75mg for most men - if you work out, fuck a lot, then even more)

All of this with zero side-effects. Personally I haven't had much hairloss since I started supplementing a couple of years ago.

Also - the statement that ALL DRUGS HAVE side effects - even natural ones - is just plain propaganda. Current toxic drugs created out of petroleum have side effects. High dosage vitamins and minerals and some herbs have saturation levels, but not actual side-effects. The difference is like comparing water with which you can kill yourself (if you drink x gallons) to something that is toxic at any level (sodium fluoride). So no - medical treatments don't need to have side effects.

[civpro]

Just LOL at what men have to do to remain competitive in today's dating market - straight up mutilate themselves, even alter their biochemistry.

- Lifting: Pummel your joints and wrench your back for years on end, possibly crippling yourself.
- Roids: Inject foreign chemicals into your bloodstream and watch your hair fall out, your tits grow, your nuts die, your skin flare up, your face bloat.
- Tats: Literally etch stupid symbols onto your body that will stay there forever, until you are DEAD.
- Fin: Chemically castrate yourself and kill your dick to hang on to a few hairs.

And all for what? A few extra Tinder likes? Meanwhile all a girl has to do is grow her hair out and not stuff herself with Haagen Dasz. Just that, despite even having shit bones and facial development (which bone development would render a male version of herself, i.e. her brother, a hard case incel) ... and she can be treated like a princess. Hell, she can not grow her hair out and eat to her heart's content and still be treated... like a duchess.

LOL just lol. If there is any positive to this miserable state of affairs, it is that it will have a eugenic effect - women will screen out ugly/unfit men hard. This is assuming that all the handsome alphas aren't busting all of their nuts in condoms though.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/editor-in-c...se/5451305

This article is a bummer:

Quote:

Editor In Chief Of World’s Best Known Medical Journal: Half Of All The Literature Is False

"Science has taken a turn towards Darkness"

In the past few years more professionals have come forward to share a truth that, for many people, proves difficult to swallow. One such authority is Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet – considered to be one of the most well respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.

Dr. Horton recently published a statement declaring that a lot of published research is in fact unreliable at best, if not completely false.

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” (source)

This is quite disturbing, given the fact that all of these studies (which are industry sponsored) are used to develop drugs/vaccines to supposedly help people, train medical staff, educate medical students and more.

It’s common for many to dismiss a lot of great work by experts and researchers at various institutions around the globe which isn’t “peer-reviewed” and doesn’t appear in a “credible” medical journal, but as we can see, “peer-reviewed” doesn’t really mean much anymore. “Credible” medical journals continue to lose their tenability in the eyes of experts and employees of the journals themselves, like Dr. Horton.

He also went on to call himself out in a sense, stating that journal editors aid and abet the worst behaviours, that the amount of bad research is alarming, that data is sculpted to fit a preferred theory. He goes on to observe that important confirmations are often rejected and little is done to correct bad practices. What’s worse, much of what goes on could even be considered borderline misconduct.

Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), which is considered to another one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, makes her view of the subject quite plain:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine” (source)

I apologize if you have seen it before in my articles, but it is quite the statement, and it comes from someone who also held a position similiar to Dr. Horton.

There is much more than anecdotal evidence to support these claims, however, including documents obtained by Lucija Tomljenovic, PhD, from the Neural Dynamics Research Group in the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of British Columbia, which reveal that vaccine manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, and health authorities have known about multiple dangers associated with vaccines but chose to withhold them from the public. This is scientific fraud, and their complicity suggests that this practice continues to this day. (source)

This is just one of many examples, and alludes to one point Dr. Horton is referring to, the ommision of data. For the sake of time, I encourage you to do your own research on this subject. I just wanted to provide some food for thought about something that is not often considered when it comes to medical research, and the resulting products and theories which are then sold to us based on that research.

It’s truly a remarkable time to be alive. Over the course of human history, our planet has experienced multiple paradigm shifting realizations, all of which were met with harsh resistence at the time of their revelation. One great example is when we realized the Earth was not flat. Today, we are seeing these kinds of revelatory shifts in thinking happen in multiple spheres, all at one time. It can seem overwhelming for those who are paying attention, especially given the fact that a lot of these ideas go against current belief systems. There will always be resistance to new information which does not fit into the current framework, regardless of how reasonable (or factual) that information might be.

You can find links and sources of the article there.

But yeah - chief editor of the Lancet is mistrusting most data, but guys here are defending it like wonderbread.

[Hardy Daytona]

I'm going to have to play devil's advocate on this one.
Currently in my mid-20's and suffer from MPB. It's not hereditary but the effect can be seen cumulatively in my older siblings in their progressive ages.

I've been on finasteride for about a year now and I've had none of the side effects mentioned in the thread or on the forum.
Now it's possible that we have different regulations in the UK for the private prescription market - I don't know, I'm not a lawyer or a doctor. But I will say this - I encourage every man here to do their own research and make an informed decision based on your own precepts. Information is the key, but it's what you choose to do with it that makes the difference.

[HenryHill]

Researched all the anti-hairloss drugs about 6 months ago, and very glad I decided to stay away from it completely.

Using the good looking loser as an example. Guy is on what? At least a dosin different types of drugs, gets hair transplants, uses steroids, has a facial regiment to look young etc.

It does not seem worth it, and who knows about the long term side-effects. Maybe I will never be an 8 in the looks deparment, but it seems much better to just buzz your head, lift weights and trim the beard and live healthy and simplistic as a 6.

Like the poster above mentioned, is the pursuit of that perfect appearance really worth it for the average guy? Maybe if you make a living/career out of it, but otherwise? Doubt it.

[Killer Joe]

(06-03-2015 02:46 AM)civpro Wrote:  

Just LOL at what men have to do to remain competitive in today's dating market - straight up mutilate themselves, even alter their biochemistry.

- Lifting: Pummel your joints and wrench your back for years on end, possibly crippling yourself.
- Roids: Inject foreign chemicals into your bloodstream and watch your hair fall out, your tits grow, your nuts die, your skin flare up, your face bloat.
- Tats: Literally etch stupid symbols onto your body that will stay there forever, until you are DEAD.
- Fin: Chemically castrate yourself and kill your dick to hang on to a few hairs.

And all for what? A few extra Tinder likes? Meanwhile all a girl has to do is grow her hair out and not stuff herself with Haagen Dasz. Just that, despite even having shit bones and facial development (which bone development would render a male version of herself, i.e. her brother, a hard case incel) ... and she can be treated like a princess. Hell, she can not grow her hair out and eat to her heart's content and still be treated... like a duchess.

LOL just lol. If there is any positive to this miserable state of affairs, it is that it will have a eugenic effect - women will screen out ugly/unfit men hard. This is assuming that all the handsome alphas aren't busting all of their nuts in condoms though.

To lose weight? To gain muscle? To look good? To be more confident? To expand my lifespan? The benefits of weight lifting have been amply proven.

Should I never self-improve, just because women are entitled cunts? Does that make sense? You can't be serious.

(06-03-2015 01:31 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

The drug is used by trannies as they transition from male to female - that tells it all really. Men should definitely keep a distance from that.

Orthomolecular approach against hair-loss:

Diet change - cutting out processed sugars and carbs
Omega 3-6-9 1000-2000mg
Lecithin (best from Sunflower) 2000mg
Multivitamin (high potency one - includes the essential Vitamin B group that is necessary for keeping hair)
Zinc (50mg-75mg for most men - if you work out, fuck a lot, then even more)

All of this with zero side-effects. Personally I haven't had much hairloss since I started supplementing a couple of years ago.

Also - the statement that ALL DRUGS HAVE side effects - even natural ones - is just plain propaganda. Current toxic drugs created out of petroleum have side effects. High dosage vitamins and minerals and some herbs have saturation levels, but not actual side-effects. The difference is like comparing water with which you can kill yourself (if you drink x gallons) to something that is toxic at any level (sodium fluoride). So no - medical treatments don't need to have side effects.

This drug is also used in larger doses by men to treat Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Your point being?

Also, are any of those ingredients listed proven to work against male pattern baldness? Do they destroy or stop the DHT? Sure, taking all that shit is healthy, but if you have genetic male pattern baldness, unless you take something SPECIFICALLY designed for that, your hair will continue falling off. That would probably only work if you had hair loss due to pulling your hair, having stress, having dandruff, etc.

I'm seeing a lot of downright tinfoil conspiracy theory viewpoints here. Almost as if there was an agenda behind all of this. It's only a matter of time until someone blames the creation of the drug on the Cultural Marxists, in order to emasculate and castrate men to make them subservient to women and SJW's or something.

IIRC it was the same shit with circumcision: A horrible atrocity inflicted on millions of babies, permanently destroying their genitals beyond all recognition. A procedure so evil, it was created by Satan himself.

I think I'll give Propecia a try: If it has so many haters, it must be doing something right. If I get the nasty side effects I'll just stop. There's always a risk, as with everything.

Also, is anyone using ru58841? I've heard great things about it.

[Samseau]

(06-03-2015 04:55 AM)Hardy Daytona Wrote:  

I'm going to have to play devil's advocate on this one.
Currently in my mid-20's and suffer from MPB. It's not hereditary but the effect can be seen cumulatively in my older siblings in their progressive ages.

I've been on finasteride for about a year now and I've had none of the side effects mentioned in the thread or on the forum.
Now it's possible that we have different regulations in the UK for the private prescription market - I don't know, I'm not a lawyer or a doctor. But I will say this - I encourage every man here to do their own research and make an informed decision based on your own precepts. Information is the key, but it's what you choose to do with it that makes the difference.

"I've been smoking cigs for a year now, and I've had none of the side effects mentioned by others so I'll keep smoking."

[The_CEO]

If anyone believes they have been harmed by this medication, there are many lawyers who would be interested to hear from you.

Just do a 'search' and several firms come up.

http://www.simmonspharmalaw.com/cases-we.../propecia/

[Sherman]

There are also lawsuits against viagra for causing hearing loss. So if you don't have problems should you stop using viagra? The reality is all drugs have side effects and it is impossible with current technology to make a safe one-size-fits-all drug that accomodates everyone's body type. In the future they are working on designer drugs that can adopt to the individual variations in the human body.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/viagra

[PhDre]

(06-03-2015 11:12 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

There are also lawsuits against viagra for causing hearing loss. So if you don't have problems should you stop using viagra?

Yes. If viagra works, it means that your erectile dysfunction is not caused by nerve, vein or pelvic muscle damage, but by a lack of cGMP. This means that you lack certain neurotransmitters or have endothelial dysfunction. Supplementing with the correct hormones and nutrients and changing your diet can usually correct this. Viagra is a great band aid while you search for the real cause of your problem, but you should not rely on it for the rest of your life.

Unfortunately, 99.99% of doctors are not capable of doing this or not interested in it. And it is strongly discouraged by their professional association, the pharma companies, ...

(06-03-2015 11:12 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

The reality is all drugs have side effects and it is impossible with current technology to make a safe one-size-fits-all drug that accomodates everyone's body type.

No. Natural products (vitamins, minerals, hormones, herbs, healthy foods) do not have undesirable side effects when their dosing is low enough because they simply replenish chemicals that naturally occur in your body. It is only the artificial molecules that are foreign to your body that have side effects irrespective of dosing.

[Sherman]

(06-03-2015 11:52 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

[quote] (06-03-2015 11:12 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

There are also lawsuits against viagra for causing hearing loss. So if you don't have problems should you stop using viagra?

The reality is all drugs have side effects and it is impossible with current technology to make a safe one-size-fits-all drug that accomodates everyone's body type.

No. Natural products (vitamins, minerals, hormones, herbs, healthy foods) do not have undesirable side effects when their dosing is low enough because they simply replenish chemicals that naturally occur in your body. It is only the artificial molecules that are foreign to your body that have side effects irrespective of dosing.

The problem is there may be no evidence that the natural products work. Saw Palmetto is a natural product that is claimed to cure BPH, but large scale studies say that it is no more effective than a placebo. I still remember when Linus Pauling was pushing mega doses of vitamins and that can to toxic and doesn't improve your health.

[PUA_Rachacha]

(06-02-2015 01:24 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

I don't know if you have ever had your hormones fucked up but I have and I can tell you that it is extremely unpleasant.
All of a sudden you don't feel like having sex anymore.
You cannot get it up, even with the help of viagra.
All your joints hurt.
You get sick after every gym workout.
You cannot focus on your job.
You fall asleep at your desk.
You fall asleep when you are with your friends in a bar.
You sleep 12 hours a day yet you are yawning all the time.
Your colleagues start gossiping that you are a drug addict.
If it lasts for long enough it makes you lose your strength, your physique, your friends, your girlfriend, your job, everything...

Do you think that these are acceptable side effects for a hair loss drug?

No, I don't, hence why I'm not taking the medication. I'm prone to anxiety (from genetic load, at least according to Dr. Jacobs), so if I started getting sides, I'd probably start panicking and develop more serious issues, just like 50% of the men that Dr. Jacobs saw.

I keep saying here that every drug has pros and cons. The vast majority of men would derive a lot of benefit w/o actual side effects. A small minority (and until Samseau evidences the 10-20% of users have lasting side effects from an actual study, I'll assume 2% what's stated in the literature) don't react to the drug and get off. Out of the 2% that react harshly with lasting side effects, 0.8% may need HRT to restart their HPA axis.

Propecia's ultimately a drug for vanity, and thus the sides are unacceptable for my vainness. They may not be for a guy who has a real identity with his hair. I'll let each man here decide since we are all men and are agents of our owns actions. What I take issue with is with people who state "EVERYONE SHOULD GET OFF OF THIS NOW" without stating the full facts, because he reacted negatively to the drug. It smacks as alarmist and should be argued against.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(06-03-2015 02:04 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

The problem is there may be no evidence that the natural products work. Saw Palmetto is a natural product that is claimed to cure BPH, but large scale studies say that it is no more effective than a placebo. I still remember when Linus Pauling was pushing mega doses of vitamins and that can to toxic and doesn't improve your health.

Seriously - you remember nothing.

I can prove to you with 100% efficacy how effective megadose of vitamin C is. I will get 100 patients and have 100% efficacy for various colds, the real flu, infections etc. I can guarantee you that it works on 100.000 of 100.000 patients with zero side effects.

Anyone who claims crap like that has drunk the cool-aid with full abandon.

Linus Pauling (double Nobel price laureate by the way vs. your zero prices) wasn't the only one who claimed those things, but there have been thousands of MDs - some of them like Dr. Cathcart holding multiple multi-million dollar patents as a researcher (not vitamin-related).

Your quackery claims are frankly 100% the arguments used by the pharma lobby and their various shills and PR agency funded forum commentators.

[Sherman]

(06-03-2015 04:41 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(06-03-2015 02:04 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

"The problem is there may be no evidence that the natural products work. Saw Palmetto is a natural product that is claimed to cure BPH, but large scale studies say that it is no more effective than a placebo. I still remember when Linus Pauling was pushing mega doses of vitamins and that can to toxic and doesn't improve your health.

Seriously - you remember nothing.

I can prove to you with 100% efficacy how effective megadose of vitamin C is. I will get 100 patients and have 100% efficacy for various colds, the real flu, infections etc. I can guarantee you that it works on 100.000 of 100.000 patients with zero side effects.

Anyone who claims crap like that has drunk the cool-aid with full abandon.

Linus Pauling (double Nobel price laureate by the way vs. your zero prices) wasn't the only one who claimed those things, but there have been thousands of MDs - some of them like Dr. Cathcart holding multiple multi-million dollar patents as a researcher (not vitamin-related).

Your quackery claims are frankly 100% the arguments used by the pharma lobby and their various shills and PR agency funded forum commentators.

"At least 16 well-designed, double-blind studies have shown that supplementation with vitamin C does not prevent colds and at best may slightly reduce the symptoms of a cold"

"Although Pauling's megavitamin claims lacked the evidence needed for acceptance by the scientific community, they have been accepted by large numbers of people who lack the scientific expertise to evaluate them."


http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRela...uling.html

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(06-03-2015 09:35 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

"At least 16 well-designed, double-blind studies have shown that supplementation with vitamin C does not prevent colds and at best may slightly reduce the symptoms of a cold"

"Although Pauling's megavitamin claims lacked the evidence needed for acceptance by the scientific community, they have been accepted by large numbers of people who lack the scientific expertise to evaluate them."


http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRela...uling.html

I actually looked in some of those "studies" and saw terrible study design, faulty products or in most instances too small doses. One even tried their best to decrease the dosis to 500mg and not go beyond.

This discussion is ridiculous. You are defending the pharma industry and not knowing that everyone can prove the efficacy himself. My entire close family incl. many of my close friends have started taking supplements and have vitamin C in bulk at home. It was not because of my smart argumentation, but because they tried it and saw immediate massive results. While having a cold is the easiest thing, because the symptom reduction is not small (at best as they claim) - the symptom reduction is incredible. And a cold is the least of the applications, but the easiest.

And you are actually using quackwatch, which has close ties to the pharmaceutical industry after we have also posted links with statements by bloody LANCET journalists that at least 50% of all studies are false? http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html

I won't respond anymore frankly, because this does not make sense. I have not only researched it, but tested it out myself and many others. It is similar to discussing the fact that I have fucked a girl, while you claim again and again that you believe that I haven't. Sorry - but plenty of people have and all you have is hearsay and beliefs.

The funny thing is that when I discuss some of those things with my two MD friends, then they are less antagonistic towards it than people that hear about it online.

Besides - let's agree to disagree. I can cite you studies that prove my points. If we ever meet in real life and you have a cold, a sore throat or pneumonia and are willing to give vitamin c megadoses a test-run, then you will be surprised how fast that stuff works when applied with a modicum of knowledge. It is extremely cheap, it is easy, it is without side effects and it cannot be patented at all. Sounds like a perfect drug to throw the entire weight of the medical cartel against it.

[Samseau]

Zelcorpian - isn't strange that people who defend current medical science sound awfully like game denialists?

[PhDre]

^^ It's basically the same thing: they are so emotionally attached to the blue pill worldview that has been fed to them their entire lives that they simply refuse to see real world evidence.

Blue pill view on dating: just be yourself, be nice to women, do what they want, only your personality matters, there is a woman out there that will love you for who you are, ...

Real world observation (red pill view): Women fall for confident, arrogant, masculine men that act like they don't need them. Moreover looks, money and status are important.

Blue pill view on medicine: Your GP knows best. The only way to treat disease is through pharma medicines. Alternative treatments are proven to be frauds. Common home remedies don't work and are old wives' tales.

Real world observation (red pill view): your GP knows very little about the amazingly complex human body. Pharma medicines often have (possibly serious) side effects. Medical treatment is structured to provide maximum financial benefit to pharma companies and doctors. Chronic diseases are the result of incorrect hormone/vitamin/mineral/neurotransmitter levels and can be helped by supplementation of these products. Alternative treatments do have an effect.

[Sherman]

Red Pill view on treatment with drugs, vitamins or any other substance: The only reliable method of knowing whether a treatment is effective or not is a controlled experiment designed to measure a significant statistical difference. Anecdotal evidence and testimonies are notoriously inaccurate. Science is determined by measurement and even the opinions of double noble prize winners are given less weight than a validly run experiment. The alternative to controlled studies is to waste a lot of time and money pissing nutritionally fertile urine into a toilet.