[Samseau]

PUA_Rachacha: Not only are you bad at math, and not only did you fail to refute a SINGLE mathematical principle I showed you, but you're also terrible at science! I'm about to rape your peer-reviewed studies, why don't you get some lube on hand?

To start, all of your evidence comes from this page:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3481923/

Which then uses a bunch of other "peer-reviewed" science articles to justify their claims.

The first one:

Quote:

A long term study showed that drug-related sexual side effects such as decreased libido, ED, and ejaculatory disorders occurred in <2% of men.[10]

What does [10] link to?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11809594/

Quote:

BACKGROUND: Finasteride 1 mg (Propecia) is indicated for the treatment of men with androgenetic alopecia (male pattern hair loss, MPHL). However, the long-term (> 2 years) efficacy and safety of finasteride in this population has not been previously reported. Objectives. To assess the efficacy and safety of finasteride in men with MPHL compared to treatment with placebo over five years.
METHODS:
In two 1-year, Phase III trials, 1,553 men with MPHL were randomized to receive finasteride 1 mg/day or placebo, and 1,215 men continued in up to four 1-year, placebo-controlled extension studies. Efficacy was evaluated by hair counts, patient and investigator assessments, and panel review of clinical photographs.

LOL! 1 year studies? Is this shit for real? They conclude the drug is safe off 1 year studies? That's like having someone smoke cigarettes for 1-year then conclude they are safe! LOL you call this science? Peer-reviewed? Only suckers accept this.

The next line of your "peer-reviewed" article says,

Quote:

A large prospective study in as many as 17,313 patients was conducted to look into the effects of finasteride and other covariates on sexual dysfunction as part of the analysis of The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT).[11]

What does the [11] link to?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17596576/

Quote:

The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy of finasteride in preventing prostate cancer in 18,882 men aged 55 years or older. The PCPT offered an opportunity to prospectively study the effects of finasteride and other covariates on sexual dysfunction.

Damn! Using results conducted on men over the age 55 and giving it to men age 20-40? Is this for real? You call this science? Anyone who thinks this is science is either shilling or just incredibly ignorant.

Here's another "peer-reviewed" article from pub med:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22972968

Quote:

BACKGROUND: The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT)-a randomized placebo-controlled study of the efficacy of finasteride in preventing prostate cancer-offered the opportunity to prospectively study effects of finasteride and other covariates on the health-related quality of life of participants in a multiyear trial.

METHODS: We assessed three health-related quality-of-life domains (measured with the Health Survey Short Form-36: Physical Functioning, Mental Health, and Vitality scales) via questionnaires completed by PCPT participants at enrollment (3 months before randomization), at 6 months after randomization, and annually for 7 years. Covariate data obtained at enrollment from patient-completed questionnaires were included in our model. Mixed-effects model analyses and a cross-sectional presentation at three time points began at 6 months after randomization. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS: For the physical function outcome (n = 16 077), neither the finasteride main effect nor the finasteride interaction with time were statistically significant. The effects of finasteride on physical function were minor and accounted for less than a 1-point difference over time in Physical Functioning scores (mixed-effect estimate = 0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.28 to 0.42, P = .71). Comorbidities such as congestive heart failure (estimate = -5.64, 95% CI = -7.96 to -3.32, P < .001), leg pain (estimate = -2.57, 95% CI = -3.04 to -2.10, P < .001), and diabetes (estimate = -1.31, 95% CI = -2.04 to -0.57, P < .001) had statistically significant negative effects on physical function, as did current smoking (estimate = -2.34, 95% CI = -2.97 to -1.71, P < .001) and time on study (estimate = -1.20, 95% CI = -1.36 to -1.03, P < .001). Finasteride did not have a statistically significant effect on the other two dependent variables, mental health and vitality, either in the mixed-effects analyses or in the cross-sectional analysis at any of the three time points.

CONCLUSION: Finasteride did not negatively affect SF-36 Physical Functioning, Mental Health, or Vitality scores.

1. Not once is it stated the age of the participants.

2. Not once is it stated how long they took finasteride.


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.

PUA_Rachcha: Your next post needs to be either a refutation of anything I've said, or not post at all in this thread, or I'm gonna report you for shilling/trolling.