Study photos

[Johnny24601]

So I have read the studies from Merck on propecia. I do think absolutely everyone involved in the study have extreme bias. Getting aproval of the drugs earns Merck millions and the dermatologists on the board thousands. That is why I barely trust anything they say and think the actual users of these drugs and educated consumers are the real pros. There just is so much crap concerning male pattern baldness because on one side we have people desperate for hair and looking at their hair in the mirror every hour to see if there is changes and then we have these companies selling half truths and products that MAY work or MAY not and telling us to pay hundreds of dollars a year for the product and also telling us the product must be taken forever.
Anyways, that was just a rant. My real question is in regards to the thousands of photos that were taken by Merck as they conducted these studies. If we are to take this drug then we should be able to see every single one of these photos. It should be ublic record? All they show are like 6 photos, where are the rest?

 

[itsjustaphase]

thats a really good question.

only thing i can think of is they may need approval from the people whose pictures they took. but these should be easy to get since they still retain annonymity of the people b/c its taken from an angle that doesnt show the face.

dunno dude...

 

[Petchsky]

It's a good question, only way you can get an answer...email Merck...They reply pretty fast.

 

[lossing my hair]

This is a company that's not accurate at all on their claims. If you go to their site to search about Propecia you will buy the product thinking your going to get a cosmetic look similar to those pics they show. They market the Product as a growth stimulant more than what it really is, a product that halts hair loss. the same way they claim 2% of side effect, such as, gynecomestasia, and sexual sides. which is BS. the same way they BS about thier 86% success. Who know how many things are occult. I don't want to seem negative but the above statements makes me have reasons. I wish i'm wrong.
I'm taking the product because that's all we got. but i hope one day we will get our moneys and side effects worth.

 

[juststarting]

This is a company that's not accurate at all on their claims. If you go to their site to search about Propecia you will buy the product thinking your going to get a cosmetic look similar to those pics they show. They market the Product as a growth stimulant more than what it really is, a product that halts hair loss. the same way they claim 2% of side effect, such as, gynecomestasia, and sexual sides. which is BS. the same way they BS about thier 86% success. Who know how many things are occult. I don't want to seem negative but the above statements makes me have reasons. I wish i'm wrong.
I'm taking the product because that's all we got. but i hope one day we will get our moneys and side effects worth.

You say "BS"?

Could you please provide links to clinical trials that prove your statements that sides are more prevalent then Merck published in a peer reviewed journal? Otherwise, you should really stop saying such things.

Clinical studies, and their study population designs, are VERY complicated statistics to design -- usually with hundreds of VERY intelligent people involved. Please remember, this forum is in NO WAY a proper study population -- people come here with problems and don't come if they don't have problems. I am not denying that there may be *higher* numbers then found in that study, but that is what they found in that study population -- other study populations may end up changing these numbers. But, please remember, other studies not by merck have found about the same % level of participants with sides.

If you are having sides, I am in no way trying to dispute or discount them! But please remember, 2% of the several million people on finasteride adds up to a lot of people with sides in total, but not as a percentage of the total population on finasteride. Also, consider that 1.3% of people in the Merck studies of the PLACEBO group had sides as well with obvious implications on the non-placebo finasteride group.

Cheers!

 

[Johnny24601]

re:

Based on my research I think the sides are a little higher then the 2%, but we are kind of splitting hairs (ha ha) because all you can do it see how the drug effects your own body and decide whether the drug is worth it for you. I am not going to even reference the merck studies because it is full of so much bias. Absolutely everyone involved wanted the result to be "well we think it can work and it does not seem to have too many side effects, so give us our $50 a month and take your chance. If it does not work for you, then we can at least suck a few hundred out of you and use the excuse that you were just one of the 16% that it did not work for." That is really a crappy business plan and consumers are getting screwed. But again, balding men are desperate and when we hear "FDA approved" we buy in. We are talking about the same FDA that approved rogain and said "we don't know why it works but it seems to" Thanks. The FDA is more concerned that the drug is not harmfull then if it actually works. Sure you have to provide some sort of positive results, but we are only talking about a +/- a few hundred hairs. For me, Merck and the FDA are almost useless on this issue. The only peole to ask are the people taking the drug, who are educated on every aspect of the drug, use it properly and examine there results. What makes it tough is that most of the people who take the drug are too embarressed to discuss is, are older and don't know how to turn on the computer yet alone join a discussion forum and even the people who visit the forum are there because they are seeing negative results and screwing up the data. Not to mention that people taking the drug think it should work overnight and regrow all their hair, anything else they consider a failure.
I will contact Merck to get the photos and others should try to. I am sure they will provide a lame excuse why they cannot share them, which is evidence of a cover up of sort. This just sucks....

 

[juststarting]

Re: re:

Valid points. :shock: Though I think the people taking propecia are on the younger side (if you think under 40 is younger as I do). And for most part can use a computer

Also, I think you are correct about Merck improperly skewing the marketing towards re-growth rather then maintenance.

Based on my research I think the sides are a little higher then the 2%, but we are kind of splitting hairs (ha ha) because all you can do it see how the drug effects your own body and decide whether the drug is worth it for you. I am not going to even reference the merck studies because it is full of so much bias. Absolutely everyone involved wanted the result to be "well we think it can work and it does not seem to have too many side effects, so give us our $50 a month and take your chance. If it does not work for you, then we can at least suck a few hundred out of you and use the excuse that you were just one of the 16% that it did not work for." That is really a crappy business plan and consumers are getting screwed. But again, balding men are desperate and when we hear "FDA approved" we buy in. We are talking about the same FDA that approved rogain and said "we don't know why it works but it seems to" Thanks. The FDA is more concerned that the drug is not harmfull then if it actually works. Sure you have to provide some sort of positive results, but we are only talking about a +/- a few hundred hairs. For me, Merck and the FDA are almost useless on this issue. The only peole to ask are the people taking the drug, who are educated on every aspect of the drug, use it properly and examine there results. What makes it tough is that most of the people who take the drug are too embarressed to discuss is, are older and don't know how to turn on the computer yet alone join a discussion forum and even the people who visit the forum are there because they are seeing negative results and screwing up the data. Not to mention that people taking the drug think it should work overnight and regrow all their hair, anything else they consider a failure.
I will contact Merck to get the photos and others should try to. I am sure they will provide a lame excuse why they cannot share them, which is evidence of a cover up of sort. This just sucks....

 

[lossing my hair]

Juststarting, the statement i posted is just my opinion. My point is many of us including doctors like DR. Lee, believe that the 2% sideeffects is not accurate. What i'm saying is if they are occulting the real percentage of sides how i know they aint occulting the percentage of success, etc. I believe all of us here are adults and just like ya i'm suffering because my hair loss but if my opinion causes stress well it's just my opinion. Don't take it personal just because i have a little doubt on things.
I been on propecia for almost 2 month with out no noticible side effects however is still to early to tell. so far so good, but i still have my personal belief. Once again it's just my opinion. 8) [/url][/list][/code][/list][/quote]