http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8019.2011.01441.x/abstract
Anyone have the full text for this?
Longest Recorded Study of Finasteride Confirms Its Efficacy
Finasteride is an oral medication taken to treat androgenic alopecia, the most common form of hair loss. Until recently, no study longer than 5 years has confirmed the efficacy and safety of Finasteride (commercially known as Propecia). The results of a 10-year study have now been released and confirming the prolonged usefulness of Finasteride.
Rossi et al, in a study published in Dermatologic Therapy, reviewed 1mg of daily Finasteride use in 118 men between 20 and 61 years old. They used pictures and statistical analysis, as well as patient reports, to judge the effectiveness and side effects of the treatment over 10 years.
Important observations from the study include:
-
The effectiveness of Finasteride is not reduced over time
-
The daily intake of 1mg of Finasteride “produced significant and durable increases in hair growth in men with AGA”
-
Subjects over 30-years of age showed better hair growth in the long-term than younger subjects
-
Over 10 years, 14% of patients had decreased rates of hair growth, while 86% had increased or stable rates of hair growth
-
5.9% of patients reported side effects; many of these patients still continued taking Finasteride because of its benefits
The researchers conclude their study as follows:
“[F]inasteride is a safe and effective treatment for controlling male pattern baldness with long-term daily use even in men over the age of 40 years. The satisfactory clinical results, the few side effects observed, and the lack of alternative medications, led us to consider finasteride an effective treatment especially if taken in the early stages of AGA.”
Thanks for posting.
I’m not on fin yet, but plan on getting on sometime in the next year. Efficacy numbers pretty much parallel what the 5year studies did. Only difference is the 6% side effect rate is higher than the 2% number I’ve seen elsewhere. It seems we have a reasonable answer to stopping MPB now, keeping most of what you have over a 10 year period isn’t bad, and should tide most men over until one of the next gen treatments comes out (in 10 years time one of these companies, or a newcomer even, has to turn into something). Also hopefully that 6% sides number helps dispel some of the propecia fear mongering that is all to present on all the various hair loss forums.
Fin causes frequent sexual side effects that severely limits is usefulness. No amount of research data to the contrary is going to change that problem. Men are still going to try the drug in massive numbers, and they are still going to quietly quit it in massive numbers like they have been doing since the drug hit the market.
» Fin causes frequent sexual side effects that severely limits is usefulness.
» No amount of research data to the contrary is going to change that
» problem. Men are still going to try the drug in massive numbers, and they
» are still going to quietly quit it in massive numbers like they have been
» doing since the drug hit the market.
Agreed. When proscar gained notoriety for its application to MPB, it was hugely popular and propecia ensued shortly afterwards. Around 2000, the rogaine/finesteride combo was the best commercial way to stop mpb, and probably still is. But back then, like every other pill on the market, the side effects of finesteride reportedly only affected < 2% of users (…ahem-bullsh*t).
Today we still see rogaine ads everywhere/everyday (now in foam!), but by comparison, when’s the last time anyone saw a propecia ad? It was being touted as vastly superior to minox! Perhaps fewer ads is due to the requirement that they disclose all potential side effects in their ads, which would make the product sound dangerous on a freakish level. You simply can’t block male hormones and still feel/act/look like the same man.
“Better improvements are observed in patients older than 30 years (42.8% aged between 20 and 30 years did not improve also after 10 years)”
What do they mean by that?? Subjects younger than 30 started losing their hair again after less than 10 years?
» “Better improvements are observed in patients older than 30 years (42.8%
» aged between 20 and 30 years did not improve also after 10 years)”
»
» What do they mean by that?? Subjects younger than 30 started losing their
» hair again after less than 10 years?
I think they mean it is less effective in younger men. Makes sense.
What’s interesting is that they report better improvement in higher NW classes. Perhaps it is because they’ve lost most of their hair already.
» » “Better improvements are observed in patients older than 30 years
» (42.8%
» » aged between 20 and 30 years did not improve also after 10 years)”
» »
» » What do they mean by that?? Subjects younger than 30 started losing
» their
» » hair again after less than 10 years?
»
» I think they mean it is less effective in younger men. Makes sense.
»
» What’s interesting is that they report better improvement in higher NW
» classes. Perhaps it is because they’ve lost most of their hair already.
yes but what does that sentence that mean? 42% of people between 20-30 started LOSING hair after 5 years?
» » » “Better improvements are observed in patients older than 30 years
» » (42.8%
» » » aged between 20 and 30 years did not improve also after 10 years)”
» » »
» » » What do they mean by that?? Subjects younger than 30 started losing
» » their
» » » hair again after less than 10 years?
» »
» » I think they mean it is less effective in younger men. Makes sense.
» »
» » What’s interesting is that they report better improvement in higher NW
» » classes. Perhaps it is because they’ve lost most of their hair already.
»
»
» yes but what does that sentence that mean? 42% of people between 20-30
» started LOSING hair after 5 years?
I think they mean 42% of people in that group lost hair. AKA didnt improve. I’m probably one of them.
» I think they mean 42% of people in that group lost hair. AKA didnt improve.
» I’m probably one of them.
so you took fin and it hasn’t done anything for your hair? How long you been taking it?
» » I think they mean 42% of people in that group lost hair. AKA didnt
» improve.
» » I’m probably one of them.
»
» so you took fin and it hasn’t done anything for your hair? How long you
» been taking it?
I’m in my 5th month. Been hit with what I believe is reflex hyperandro (oily skin, acne, etc). Don’t see any improvement.
A few years ago I experimented with fin, tried it for 7 months, and quit, and suddenly got a lot balder 2-3 weeks later. I don’t know if that was just a coincidence, because catchup loss takes more than 2 weeks…
i been doing it for about 7 years. it definately slows down the rate of hair loss by a factor of 3. prior to that i was losing hair like crazy.
once you lose your hair, its hard if not impossible to get it back.
keep your follicles alive even if you got to put them in intensive care. because when ARI or Replicel comes around, you will have something left to revive.
» i been doing it for about 7 years. it definately slows down the rate of
» hair loss by a factor of 3. prior to that i was losing hair like crazy.
»
» once you lose your hair, its hard if not impossible to get it back.
»
» keep your follicles alive even if you got to put them in intensive care.
» because when ARI or Replicel comes around, you will have something left to
» revive.
True, there is no harm in continuing fin. Even if all else fails, I’m less likely to get prostate cancer.
» http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8019.2011.01441.x/abstract
»
» Anyone have the full text for this?
yep