"Preclinical data of another oral antiandrogen, an N-substituted aryl hydantoin, RU-58841, suggested topical safety since the cutaneous resorption was low, however, one of the metabolites proved stable and strongly anti-androgenic, and further development was abandoned". http://hairsite2.com/flu.pdf
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
WHAT ANTIANDROGEN DO YOU THINK TAKES THE CAKE?
- Thread starter Empire
- Start date
It was in phase 2 trials, but the results were never revealed publicly. They tested a 2.5% and 5% solution on humans, and found the 5% solution to be more effective. According to the patent on the Kraemer & Bohn solutions, it appears as the R&D was discontinued due to variable results with the solution that they were using (probably 70% ethanol and 30% PG), a problem with systemic absorption, and a safety concern for pregnant women. The Kraemer & Bohn solutions addresses these issues.abcdefg said:Its well studied as in it has the double blind 5 year study and optimal dosage graphs like propecia has? If it does it seems they have a lot of the work for FDA approval already done.
Propecia may have been more studied, but it hasn't been as thoroughly studied as RU58841. RU58841 is a pure anti-androgen, and it's metabolized to two different substances in the body, one of which is a potent anti-androgen with much longer half-life than RU58841. This may cause some typical anti-androgen side effects in sensitive individuals, but they're only temporary. According to Merck, Propecia is only supposed to decrease the DHT level, and increase the testosterone- (it actually decreases the free testosterone level in everyone) and estrogen level, yet a lot of independent studies have shown that the drug affects a lot more hormones - not to mention PFS. Moreover, Propecia is an oral drug, while RU58841 is a topical drug - so which drug is more safe - do you think?
enden the last 20 years proved the opposite! propecia went on the market in 1992 and clinical study after clinincal study has proven propecia to be very safe. on the other hand, ru was abandoned because antiandrogen side effects. If RU would have had any potential for approval it would have never been abandoned. in fact it was never even close to getting fda approval
The drug was marketed in 1997, and 14 years of post marketing experience with Propecia has shown that the drug is NOT safe. As I said, several independent studies have proven that the drug does a lot more than just reducing the level of DHT, and increasing the total testosterone- and estrogen level as Merck claims.
RU58841 was abandoned for several reasons. The most obvious one is; drug trials costs a lot of money, and apparently - there is no reason to use a lot of money to bring a product to the market, which 1) isn't more effective than Propecia in the short term, 2) is as inconvenient as Rogaine to use, and 3) is supposedly safe, and only 2% of the users experience any side effects - which will subside when you quit the treatment. Prostrakan abandoned RU58841 many years ago, but other people have been working on it too. Aventis Pharma filed a patent on some new solutions that addresses the issues with RU58841, in November 2010.
Another thing, local treatment is always safer than systemic treatment.
RU58841 was abandoned for several reasons. The most obvious one is; drug trials costs a lot of money, and apparently - there is no reason to use a lot of money to bring a product to the market, which 1) isn't more effective than Propecia in the short term, 2) is as inconvenient as Rogaine to use, and 3) is supposedly safe, and only 2% of the users experience any side effects - which will subside when you quit the treatment. Prostrakan abandoned RU58841 many years ago, but other people have been working on it too. Aventis Pharma filed a patent on some new solutions that addresses the issues with RU58841, in November 2010.
Another thing, local treatment is always safer than systemic treatment.
Enden said:The drug was marketed in 1997, and 14 years of post marketing experience with Propecia has shown that the drug is NOT safe. As I said, several independent studies have proven that the drug does a lot more than just reducing the level of DHT, and increasing the total testosterone- and estrogen level as Merck claims.
RU58841 was abandoned for several reasons. The most obvious one is; drug trials costs a lot of money, and apparently - there is no reason to use a lot of money to bring a product to the market, which 1) isn't more effective than Propecia in the short term, 2) is as inconvenient as Rogaine to use, and 3) is supposedly safe, and only 2% of the users experience any side effects - which will subside when you quit the treatment. Prostrakan abandoned RU58841 many years ago, but other people have been working on it too. Aventis Pharma filed a patent on some new solutions that addresses the issues with RU58841, in November 2010.
Another thing, local treatment is always safer than systemic treatment.
enden i respect u but disagree with u
That's alright. FDA approval doesn't mean that a drug is safe, btw. Whether or not a drug is safe depends on how it's administered, how it works, and most importantly; the individual's tolerance. What an FDA approval does, is to make it nearly impossible for you to get proper medical attention if the drug does something it's not supposed to - because studies have shown that the drug is safe. That said, something is up with Merck and the FDA. Check out the story about Vioxx, and do some research on the post marketing experience with Propecia and Singulair. All drugs are manufactured by Merck, and approved by the FDA.
I just saw that I got the 3. point wrong, btw. I was talking about Propecia, and how safe it appears to be. Marketing RU58841 to compete with Propecia would be stupid, if Propecia actually was as safe as Merck and the FDA claims it is. We don't know how many people that experienced side effects in the RU58841 trials, or the severity of those.
no offense enden thats like comparing apples with oranges. vioxx was pulled because it was unsafe. in fact the fda issued merck a warning in 2001 for misrepresenting the safety of Vioxx by downplaying the cardiovascular risks associated with the drug's use. propecia is still on the market and CLINICAL studies have shown 98% of people have no sides. the side effects people claim to have with propecia are permenant erectile dysfunction, impotence, low libido and gynecomestica. how can it be proved in a court of law that propecia caused these side effects? do you drop your pants in front of a jury and have some hot chick play with your ding dong? As many as 50 million men in the US and Europe suffer from erectile dysfunction thats why v**** is so popular.
Fortunately, some people have baseline values, and new values which shows that they developed secondary hypogonadism while using Propecia. The possibility of permanent erectile dysfunction is now described in the Propecia prescribing information leaflet. As if that wasn't enough, Merck is now stating that you should contact a doctor immediately, if you notice any signs of gynecomastia. Why? Because estrogen dominance is a common reason for secondary hypogonadism, and they're well aware of that in some cases, the estrogen gets way out of control.
I wouldn't drop my pants in the court like you suggest, but I would gladly demonstrate how PFS is induced, on one of the Merck representatives.
I wouldn't drop my pants in the court like you suggest, but I would gladly demonstrate how PFS is induced, on one of the Merck representatives.
Gyno is a very rare thing so if it did pop up while on propecia its probably likely the propecia is the reason. We need another topical on the shelf next to rogaine like RU or CB because there is little doubt a powerful topical like these is the answer to preventing male pattern baldness possibly forever and with little or no risk except money. We need something like one of these because I would use them no hesitation but propecia causes me lots of hesitation and my doubts cause me to not try it even though my itch would probably go away.