EVERYONE Will Get Finasteride Side-Effects Eventually

[Micky_007]

You don't trust studies that are conducted by pharmaceutical companies or dermatologists, and you don't trust the FDA approval process.

Are you going to hop on pyrilutamide if it is FDA approved for hair loss? It's a topical AR antagonist with a binding affinity strong enough to compete with DHT. Who knows what this will do to you if it goes systemic either immediately or slowly over time. The only studies you will have to base your decision on will either be conducted by large pharmaceutical companies or dermatologists. No one else has a financial incentive to study it.

Finasteride and Pyrilutamide are very different.

Finasteride is a 5-α-reductase inhibitor that works by decreasing production of DHT by 70%.

Pyrilutamide is an androgen receptor antagonist, that binds to HF's androgen receptors avoiding androgens doing so.

Also, I didn't say I don't trust any study, of course there are some studies from dermatologists etc that I consider, but definitely not the FDA and definitely not any study regardless of the size, quality or company that makes it seem like side effects on Finasteride are rare.

When studies make it seem like side effects on Finasteride are nothing to worry about and are almost negligible I just know it's BS.

Also, that is completely false to assume just because an entity has lots of money, it doesn't mean they can't be Bribed/corrupt by more money/financial incentive.

We see this in almost every country where some really big companies with a lot of money end up getting Bribed by the government and vice versa.

Financial incentives have always been the way the world works no matter the size and wealth of the entity.

I actually am more interested in Kintor because I know they would get approved first in China's regulatory body before it happens in the US.

Once Kintor Pharmaceuticals gets approved in China and works it will be really telling if the USA doesn't FDA approve it when it potentially works. Then it would become too obvious that the FDA is trying to slow down the process and stop high potential new drugs from entering the market.

They won't want that to happen so I'm glad there are dual trials happening in China as well.

 

[Micky_007]

What is lacking from the PFS crowd thus far are high quality studies. Ones that actually make a strong case for finasteride being the causative agent in long term sexual dysfunction. So far we've only had snipe hunts for some kind of etiology on the alleged symptoms. These studies invariably are polluted by selection bias, a lack of control groups, and really small sample sizes. What Pigeon posts is largely speculative studies, pointing at some mechanism discovered in rats or something like that. These are a start, but what we need are outcomes in humans. The clinical trials for finasteride were very thorough and make a very clear case. Side effects are indeed rare and a very small amount of people report persistent ones and it is unclear whether finasteride is actually to blame. You need double blind studies with control groups if you want to make the opposite case. Not pointing to a handful of in vitro and animal studies and claiming it is proof positive that Propecia is a castration pill. Your claims simply don't match the evidence you're citing.

And not to fixate too much on this but really, the poll is not a neutral pool. The OP of that poll admitted this. In a real study we would be sorted into a specific group of patients, hair loss forum users. Not general population. Classic reporting bias is that people who feel the need to speak out are typically those with a negative experience. This is well understood in things like hotel and job reviewing. I'm not claiming that this is an anti Propecia board. Just that we are quite divergent from the genpop. A clinician would always make note of where data like that is collected and factor it in.

I'm also genuinely curious. What hypothetical studies would you trust? You've thrown out anything that has to do with the FDA, dermatology, or Merck. So who is supposed to be the fair minded party that would conduct a study?

How exactly would the poll in this forum not be neutral? I don't know where you've seen him admit that.

Also, you fail to realize that you can have all the studies with the double blind studies with control groups but the data can STILL be MANIPULATED/falsified/data analysts/regulatory bodies/scientists bought off, etc.

For the latter part of your message I just responded to it in my message above this one to user394587

 

[Derelict]

So you believe a random poll made on a site known for having an abundance of hypochondriacs yet refuse to believe decades worth of scienctific literature because its unreliable. Ok.

 

[Micky_007]

So you believe a random poll made on a site known for having an abundance of hypochondriacs yet refuse to believe decades worth of scienctific literature because its unreliable. Ok.

"hypochondriacs"? You'd prefer if people went into a study not knowing anything about the potential side effects and not realizing they could have potentially gotten such sides from Finasteride?

Also, what difference does time have? Nothing. Just because it's been around for decades doesn't mean anything. If anything, we have seen time and time again how studies dating from long ago have been disproved, so really don't see your point in saying "decades ago".

There's literally many highly reputable publications that talk about how poor the quality of medication especially the safety, that gets FDA approved.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/05/09/health/fda-approval-drug-events-study/index.html

Serious Risks And Few New Benefits From FDA-Approved Drugs | Health Affairs Blog

Let's look at the Food and Drug Administration’s failure to protect the 170 million Americans who take prescription drugs from adverse reactions that are killing more than 2,400 people every week. Annually, prescription drugs cause over 81 million adverse reactions and result in 2.7 million...

www.healthaffairs.org

Misplaced Trust: Why FDA Approval Doesn’t Guarantee Drug Safety

Americans trust that drugs approved by the FDA are safe, but this is not always the case. We hear from advocate Kim Witczak, who lost her husband in 2003.

www.drugwatch.com

"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is supposed to protect Americans from harmful drugs. But in reality, FDA-approval does not guarantee safety. Critics say Big Pharma funds FDA reviews of new drugs, creating a conflict of interest. The agency is too focused on approving drugs to appease Big Pharma and it lacks the proper authority and funding to protect the public"

Like I always say, Big Pharma secretly funds trials. It's pretty obvious the FDA can't be trusted as well as those pro-Finasteride studies which can easily be secretly funded by Big Pharma, especially when theres so many studies that prove completely opposite results showing how bad Finasteride truly can be.

 

[royce gracie]

How exactly would the poll in this forum not be neutral? I don't know where you've seen him admit that.

Also, you fail to realize that you can have all the studies with the double blind studies with control groups but the data can STILL be MANIPULATED/falsified/data analysts/regulatory bodies/scientists bought off, etc.

For the latter part of your message I just responded to it in my message above this one to user394587

What the OP said is that he was collecting data. Which is true, but it would be data collected with a caveat. It wouldn't be from the average finasteride user. It would be from one who spent time on hair loss forums. Which is a significant difference. People on forums like these, revolving around any health topic, are much more likely to be people with issues from available treatments and are looking in other directions. I'd wager 100% of active users of this forum know what RU58841 is whereas your average finasteride user is never going to have f*****g heard of that obscure research chemical. We are in a bubble, that is my point. Any clinician would make note that this data is collected in a bubble. You seem to think that it is perfectly representative of the population at large.

I agree with your assessment that this forum is about 50/50 on finasteride, which according to the clinical trials proves my point regarding reporting bias. That is significantly more people who've had a negative reaction than in the clinical trials. But you've thrown those out entirely I guess. Skepticism of the FDA is one thing but if you're willing to dismiss anything they've been involved with then you've basically thrown out all mainstream pharmaceutical science. Which is your prerogative, but I'm not sure we have anything to talk about then. I mean, "When studies make it seem like side effects on Finasteride are nothing to worry about and are almost negligible I just know it's BS." is as red-handed an admission of confirmation bias as I've ever seen. That is basically communicating that no matter the evidence contradicting your current view, you'll refuse to believe it.

 

[Micky_007]

So you believe a random poll made on a site known for having an abundance of hypochondriacs yet refuse to believe decades worth of scienctific literature because its unreliable. Ok.

Most of those "independent" studies about Finasteride that so happen to have pro-Finasteride findings are from dermatologists aka the ones who prescribe it, there's a conflict of interest with many of them.

And a meta analysis has been done:

Adverse Event Reporting in Clinical Trials of Finasteride for Androgenic Alopecia: A Meta-analysis

Conclusions and relevance: Available toxicity information from clinical trials of finasteride in men with Androgenetic Alopecia is very limited, is of poor quality, and seems to be systematically biased. In a cohort of men prescribed finasteride for routine treatment of Androgenetic Alopecia, most would have been excluded from the pivotal studies that supported US Food and Drug Administration approval for Androgenetic Alopecia. Published reports of clinical trials provide insufficient information to establish the safety profile for finasteride in the treatment of Androgenetic Alopecia.

Adverse Event Reporting in Clinical Trials of Finasteride for Androgenic Alopecia: A Meta-analysis - PubMed

Available toxicity information from clinical trials of finasteride in men with Androgenetic Alopecia is very limited, is of poor quality, and seems to be systematically biased. In a cohort of men prescribed finasteride for routine treatment of Androgenetic Alopecia, most would have been excluded from the pivotal studies that...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Also another interesting article about the "pharma conspiracy" from Harvard:

Risky Drugs: Why The FDA Cannot Be Trusted

by Donald W. Light A forthcoming article for the special issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (JLME), edited by Marc Rodwin and supported by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, presents evidence that about 90 percent of all new drugs approved by the FDA over the past 30 years are...

ethics.harvard.edu

 

[Micky_007]

What the OP said is that he was collecting data. Which is true, but it would be data collected with a caveat. It wouldn't be from the average finasteride user. It would be from one who spent time on hair loss forums. Which is a significant difference. People on forums like these, revolving around any health topic, are much more likely to be people with issues from available treatments and are looking in other directions. I'd wager 100% of active users of this forum know what RU58841 is whereas your average finasteride user is never going to have f*****g heard of that obscure research chemical. We are in a bubble, that is my point. Any clinician would make note that this data is collected in a bubble. You seem to think that it is perfectly representative of the population at large.

I agree with your assessment that this forum is about 50/50 on finasteride, which according to the clinical trials proves my point regarding reporting bias. That is significantly more people who've had a negative reaction than in the clinical trials. But you've thrown those out entirely I guess. Skepticism of the FDA is one thing but if you're willing to dismiss anything they've been involved with then you've basically thrown out all mainstream pharmaceutical science. Which is your prerogative, but I'm not sure we have anything to talk about then. I mean, "When studies make it seem like side effects on Finasteride are nothing to worry about and are almost negligible I just know it's BS." is as red-handed an admission of confirmation bias as I've ever seen. That is basically communicating that no matter the evidence contradicting your current view, you'll refuse to believe it.

I've basically responded to your message here in my last two posts in this thread in response to @Derelict no need for me to retype it.

 

[Micky_007]

Even Merck themselves admit not knowing what the long term effects are for younger men in their official FDA approval letter:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1409709906664464385

Do dermatologists know that the long-term efficacy and risks of finasteride 1 mg for male pattern hair loss were *unknown* to FDA when it was approved in 1997? Probably not most.

Risk-benefit assessment of LT treatment "cannot be made at this time," the agency concluded.

Microsoft used to release buggy software and let customers find and report problems. Here, FDA took the same approach. Young men: #guineapigs

 

[Norwoody]

People getting mad that I’m making fun of the “coffee theory” lol. This whole forum sucks except for like maybe 5 people.

 

[JohnSmith21]

And I know literally 5 people irl (no joke) who have used Finasteride and have all gotten sides and none of them use hairloss forums nor have they recorded their sides as a statistic on any website/organization that measures those who get sides vs those who dont

Which is exactly the reason why the % of people who do get sides is far greater than those reported.

Also, Big Pharma looks at the number of prescriptions of Finasteride per year in the US (approximately 2 million annually) and just think only under 10% of people don't get sides because from that amount of prescriptions only under +-10% of people report sides to get registered as a statistic.

I know that the majority of people who get sides don't even know where to register their side effects on Finasteride as a statistic.

Most people who get sides simply stop taking Finasteride and stop going to the doctor/dermatologist about it or stop mentioning it to their medical professionals.

Millions of people take the drug without issue and just go on with their lives

 

[Jacoby77]

When did I say people should jump off a cliff?

There's other safer treatments that don't mess up with peoples hormones and sexual functions. Like Minoxidil + Microneedling is also really effective

I also always tell people of probably safer and more effective treatment on the way like Kintors. There's a lot for people to look forward for, literally don't know why you think I'd want anyone to jump off a cliff.

It's a joke, but honestly.. The thing is, like I said, life sucks, balding at 20, and you want to recommend me minoxidil and micro needling when I'm aggressively diffusing.

Those two will not stop my balding in anyway shape or form. And you can't be SURE this new hair loss treatment will be out in under 2 years man, you just can't.. So much things can change bro.

I understand finasteride has higher side effect rates than people say, I see sooo many gyno reports on reddit it makes it seem like 80% gets it. But seriously, I have no other option if I want to tackle the ROOT cause.. Might as well take a gamble? If I do what you say, and I waste valuable time and the new treatment doesn't come out, I will literally be very emotionally affected knowing I could've potentially saved my hair for more years with finasteride.

 

[Jacoby77]

Given how much stock you put in anecdote I'm surprised you recommend minoxidil. Or haven't you heard of post minoxidil syndrome?

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

Time to throw out your Kirkland foam, copers.

Can minoxidil destroy one's hair? I'm not talking about shedding either. I mean can it demolish someone's hair. I've heard people say it ruined their hair

 

[INT]

The only people who use the word "fear mongering" are guys online who are actually too scared to have that conversation secretly because they feel that if enough people start talking about it it would put drugs like Finasteride under a lot more scrutiny by regulatory bodies like what is currently happening with the law suit on Propecia/Merck.

Any reputable doctor/dermatologist you go to should always explain in detail all the possible side effects before performing any surgery or prescribing any drug, but if they were to do that which is considered basic standard practice and you tell them:

"Bro, stop telling me the possible side effects, you're just fear mongering" that would obviously sound ridiculous af. They are duty bound to say the side effects.

But it's only guys online who think it's something that shouldn't be said. People like @Pigeon and others are literally stating facts about the very possible side effects.

You literally cannot tell people to just keep quiet about it. You may be willing to take the risk but there's many people who would be greatful to know in detail what exactly happens when you block the majority of DHT.

You can't just expect people to pretend that nothing will happen by blocking 70% of the most important male hormone because a lot of us have common sense and know there must be some cascade effects.

The most important male hormone? I think you meant to say most androgenic male hormone?

 

[JohnSmith21]

If you're concerned with studies, there's literally dozens of studies that prove how bad blocking DHT is and how important DHT for males are.

Pigeon posts a lot of those studies along with others. I could also post those same studies but see no need when he's already discussed it in length. My comments here are basically a summary of those. It could take pages and pages if I were to repost those all those studies.

Also, There is no selection bias by getting information from a poll on a hairloss forum that has BOTH pro-Finasteride users and anti-Finasteride users. It's not like this poll was on the PFS website.


It's pretty obvious there's some Big Pharma funded studies that don't just come from via Merck but that claim to be "independent" or "neutral" but aren't.

It's really naive of you to believe that just because some studies that just so happen to be pro-Finasteride studies, which follow almost ideal study methods, can't have data/results that is manipulated and falsified.

I mean Merck initially even covered up sexual side effects initially and you think them understating efficacy or side effects is a reach? That's truly naive.
here's a piece from Harvard about FDA:

Risky Drugs: Why The FDA Cannot Be Trusted

by Donald W. Light A forthcoming article for the special issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (JLME), edited by Marc Rodwin and supported by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, presents evidence that about 90 percent of all new drugs approved by the FDA over the past 30 years are...

ethics.harvard.edu

"The bar for “safe” is equally low, and over the past 30 years, approved drugs have caused an epidemic of harmful side effects, even when properly prescribed. Every week, about 53,000 excess hospitalizations and about 2400 excess deaths occur in the United States among people taking properly prescribed drugs to be healthier.


Prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death.


This evidence indicates why we can no longer trust the FDA to carry out its historic mission to protect the public from harmful and ineffective drugs. Strong public demand that government “do something” about periodic drug disasters has played a central role in developing the FDA.2 Yet close, constant contact by companies with FDA staff and officials has contributed to vague, minimal criteria of what “safe” and “effective” mean."

Even those FDA approved studies don't really mean anything, the place is corrupt as hell and that's common knowledge.

And if the FDA is doing this kind of stuff, you really think the other smaller studies which paint Finasteride as mainly good and having minimal sides are accurate? LOL.

If Big Pharma can fund the expensive studies, you seriously are naive enough to believe they would only fund one or 2 studies and just end it there? LOL of course they would easily be able to fund smaller studies and even false marketing like Websites, YouTube videos, bought of scientists, and regulatory body members.

The vast majority of research shows that it does very little in adulthood. Yes it can be beneficial for neurosteroids and such, but finasteride doesn’t block all of your dht. I’ve noticed zero difference in body composition, libido, facial hair (I’m very hairy), weight lifting, etc. I could bench 225 for 12 before and during finasteride. Only thing that changed is my hair loss stopped, even regrew a bit. Derek from more plates more dates goes over finasteride pretty well. It’s my understanding that as long as you have good test levels, you shouldn’t run into many issues with suppressing dht. Test and dht fullfill the same actions in ur body, although dht is 10x more powerful, they bind to the same receptors, both are androgens. If you have lower test levels, and maybe need to lean on dht more, you can get sides from finasteride. Who knows though. The majority of studies show that dht is crucial during puberty, and much less important during adulthood. Having 30% of your original dht is most likely more then enough to maintain functions in adulthood. Even dutasteride is tolerated extremely well by adults. But again, I don’t have sides so I take it…. You don’t like it so don’t take it…. Why stay on a forum posting studies on why it’s bad lmao. You clearly post them for you to feel good about the choice you made to let your hair go. Testosterone is still the king male hormone at the end of the day, and the most important hormone for male wellbeing, and finasteride doesnt mess with ur test levels. I got a blood test before and during finasteride and my test is much higher on finasteride. My free test was on the high end of normal both before and while on finasteride, which is again, probably why I don’t have sides

 

[Norwoody]

The discussion should be, for those who cannot tolerate it, what is the optimal way to maintain hair and avoid sides? We need to discuss more about lower doses of oral, topical, topical duta, or using something like low dose OM + a topical AA as alternatives. Additionally, how much DHT needs to be blocked in order to improve hair? Almost no one improves their hair on saw palmetto but it still reduces DHT by about 30% IIRC. So is 50% from something like 0.25mg of finasteride viable for some people?

 

[kidcurry96]

The discussion should be, for those who cannot tolerate it, what is the optimal way to maintain hair and avoid sides? We need to discuss more about lower doses of oral, topical, topical duta, or using something like low dose OM + a topical AA as alternatives. Additionally, how much DHT needs to be blocked in order to improve hair? Almost no one improves their hair on saw palmetto but it still reduces DHT by about 30% IIRC. So is 50% from something like 0.25mg of finasteride viable for some people?

I did find a few anecdotes about saw palmetto stopping hair loss but no growth. One can microdose topical finasteride or topical dutasteride and see at what point it stops hairloss. I really think that is the best way.

 

[Jacoby77]

When did I say people should jump off a cliff?

There's other safer treatments that don't mess up with peoples hormones and sexual functions. Like Minoxidil + Microneedling is also really effective

I also always tell people of probably safer and more effective treatment on the way like Kintors. There's a lot for people to look forward for, literally don't know why you think I'd want anyone to jump off a cliff.

Also, "safer treatments" minoxidil isn't a treatment mate. It's a time buyer. Get your facts straight before telling others how trash finasteride is. Offer them a solution if you're so anti finasteride. Thing is, you have no solution, because minoxidil doesn't stop the balding and you're relying on a hit or miss future treatment. If I follow your advice, I'm definitely going bald.

 

[Jacoby77]

The discussion should be, for those who cannot tolerate it, what is the optimal way to maintain hair and avoid sides? We need to discuss more about lower doses of oral, topical, topical duta, or using something like low dose OM + a topical AA as alternatives. Additionally, how much DHT needs to be blocked in order to improve hair? Almost no one improves their hair on saw palmetto but it still reduces DHT by about 30% IIRC. So is 50% from something like 0.25mg of finasteride viable for some people?

Thank you bro. This is what I've been trying to find an answer for.

Apparently people who get sides on finasteride can tolerate dutasteride, or topical dutasteride. Makes no sense but somehow some people get no sides on the thing that has more impact. Crazy sh*t.

 

[Micky_007]

Now that former users of finasteride have been reporting the problems to regulators, we have not one, not two, but *three* articles suggesting these reports are (among other points) stimulated by publicity or reflecting a nocebo effect or confounding factors.

Baas et al., 2018

A Review of the FAERS Data on 5-Alpha Reductase Inhibitors: Implications for Postfinasteride Syndrome - PubMed

FAERS data suggests that finasteride exposure is reported with a diverse collection of symptoms, particularly in younger men on 1 mg dosage compared to older men on 5 mg. Many of these complaints fall well out of the realm of previously established AEs from long-term controlled studies.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Harrell et al., 2020

An evaluation of the federal adverse events reporting system data on adverse effects of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors - PubMed

Analysis of FAERS data suggests AEs of 5ARIs are dose-independent with greater likelihood of occurrence in younger patients, particularly in sexual and mental domains. The causality and the rate of AEs are not certain based on the FAERS data and future prospective studies are necessary to...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Material errors in this article were reported to the corresponding author and journal last summer. The errors remain uncorrected.

Nguyen et al., 2020

Investigation of Suicidality and Psychological Adverse Events in Patients Treated With Finasteride - PubMed

In this pharmacovigilance case-noncase study, significant RORs of suicidality and psychological adverse events were associated with finasteride use in patients younger than 45 years who used finasteride for alopecia. The sensitivity analyses suggest that these disproportional signals of adverse...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The authors suggest the AE reports of suicidality and psychological adverse to Who (World Health Organization) could be an artifact of publicity ("stimulated reporting").

But they hedge on this point, preserving plausible deniability.


The authors failed to consider that psychological adverse event reports could be both *stimulated and accurate*.

Stimulation might be needed when social stigma is a factor—as it is for depression, anxiety, panic and suicidality.


All three papers appear to be motivated reasoning—using the trappings of science to cast doubt on a consistent and alarming pattern of adverse events since the 2000s, from around the world.

2019 & 2020 saw highest levels ever of psychological adverse events among young men taking finasteride 1 mg for hair loss—without other reasons for use, suspected drugs or concomitant products.

This was not pointed out in the third paper, though it included these years.

Millions of people take the drug without issue and just go on with their lives

This narrative of millions using it without issues is false. You only think that because there's 2 million prescription annually per year in the US but it doesn't take into account that the majority of people who actually get sides from this 2 million prescriptions don't actually report their sides to register as a statistic against this number.

Heck, most people wouldn't even know where or how to register their sides as a statistic against the 2 million prescriptions from the US. And that's not even talking about people in other countries which Finasteride usage is only a tiny fraction of the prescriptions in the US and many of which don't even have places for users to register their side effects as a statistic against the number of Finasteride prescriptions per country and I know that for a fact because I know many people in many different countries and they have never heard of a way to do such.

Hence that number is greatly flawed. Big Pharma simply look at the number of prescriptions in the US/Globally and think because barely anyone reported sides officially* as a statistic, then there isn't anything to worry about, which obviously isn't the case.

 

[Micky_007]

Also, "safer treatments" minoxidil isn't a treatment mate. It's a time buyer. Get your facts straight before telling others how trash finasteride is. Offer them a solution if you're so anti finasteride. Thing is, you have no solution, because minoxidil doesn't stop the balding and you're relying on a hit or miss future treatment. If I follow your advice, I'm definitely going bald.

LOL dude, you don't know sh*t stfu. You just came here recently asking for advice because you did not know sh*t. You keep thinking Finasteride is some amazing solution which will save everyone but forget it's actually more dangerous by messing up hormones.

There have been many people who used Minoxidil and Microneedling alone and had great results. And of course I know Minoxidil alone isn't a solution hence I always say Minoxidil + Microneedling and that definitely is a good treatment.

You fail to realize that you can be using anti-androgens and it still is buying time, that's what all these treatments are for best case scenario dumbass, their not a cure, they all are for buying time including Finasteride.

Even most studies show that Finasteride (in the times when it even does occasionally work) it reaches its peak effect at the 1 or 2 year mark and then gradually declines in efficacy.

I recommended the 2nd most used treatment for Hairloss globally which is topical Minoxidil with Microneedling and anyone who has any doubt about it working probably doesn't know sh*t in the first place.

You are looking for someone to tell you something will guaranteed work for you and guess what kido? Not a single person in this world can give you a guarantee based on the current treatments we have. You literally gotta do trial and error.

Something might work for you and something might not. Heck you could possibly even use finasteride, dutasteride, Microneedling + Minoxidil and they may all not work for you.

You may use finasteride and get reflex hyper androgenicity, upregulation of AR and make sh*t worse or you may be one of the people who can tolerate the drug but it does not do anything significant, or you could potentially tolerate it and it works or you get sides, and possibly permanently.

And regarding Kintor Pharmaceuticals Pyrilutamide, they have been the first drug in hairloss history to fly through the clinical trials process at this speed. Unprecedented speed. They are also running dual trials in both China and the US and the company has said that the trial 2 in China was good and they are planning to initiate Phase 3 before the end of this year and release results of Phase 2 trials before Phase 3.

Its the most highly anticipated treatment we have in the pipeline based on its current track record to be released on time. Unlike almost every other hairloss drug in the pipeline, Kintors drug have always met timelines if not exceeded expectations which is rare af, so it's only logical to predict that it would continue to more or less keep timelines.