Taka wrote:
- quote -

The thing is, it never occurred to me I could halt the hair loss and
get rid of a whisker on the bridge of my nose (!) until about halfway
through my 44-day fast, when I realized my hair had stopped coming out
and was quickly getting thicker, the whisker fell out and didn't come
back, my libido definitely grew stronger, a few fast-growing hairs
appeared on my forehead (which worried me at first), and about thirty
other unpleasant symptoms disappeared.

All this occurred without any prescription drugs or any increase in
physical activity (but more sleep) -- but alas, I also took various
dietary supplements, which complicate the issue. Among them were the
"fat burners" recommended by Nicholas Perricone, but there were others, too.

I didn't keep a decent food or supplement diary.

Now, most of the problems (at least the obviously hormone-related
ones) seem to be coming back. I'm tempted to fast again, but don't want
to over-do it.

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

Ted wrote:
- quote -

That's an issue I can't afford to investigate.

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

Ted wrote:
- quote -

From Wikipedia, /sub verbum/ "5-alpha-reductase inhibitor":

-----
Adverse drug reactions experienced with 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors are
generally dose-dependent. Common [ones] include impotence, decreased
libido, [and] decreased ejaculate volume. Rare [ones] include breast
tenderness and enlargement and allergic reaction. (Rossi, 2004)

The enzyme 5-alpha-reductase is involved in the conversion of
testosterone to the active form dihydrotestosterone by reducing the
delta-4,5 double bond. In benign prostatic hyperplasia,
dihydrotestosterone acts as a potent cellular androgen and promotes
prostate growth. Inhibiting the enzyme reduces the excessive prostate
growth. In alopecia, pattern-baldness is one of the effects of
androgenic receptor activation. Reducing the levels of
dihydrotestosterone thus reduces alopecia.
-----

I take it that (1) DHT stimulates libido and the production of
"ejaculate volume" (mainly from the seminal vesicles?) more than
testosterone, that (2) blocking 5-alpha-reductase raises the
testosterone level, that (3) the mechanism whereby 5-alpha-reductase is
up-regulated and its effects on emotions are poorly understood, and that
(4) "cellular androgen" is synonymous with "androgen"?

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

trigonometry1972[at]gmail.com | wrote:
- quote -

I don't subscribe to that belief.

I suspect there are at least as many long-lived people who lose
interest in sex as there are of those who keep at it.

I doubt that continent monks and eunuchs who avoid bad habits die young.

It's not that I don't agree that chronic health problems aren't often
reflected in declining libido, but rather that the correlation obscures
statistics which otherwise might answer the question, Is it *unhealthy*
to abstain from (or to lose interest in) sexual activity?

(I abstained from sex for almost a year around 1983, and fearing that
it may have done me some harm, I discovered that my fears were utterly
unwarranted.)

In any case, I personally have no paucity of libido or sexual
activity, but I learned about 25 years ago that although my sex hormone
levels were normal, my spermine and spermidine levels were low. To this
day, I don't know what to make of it. If those levels are still low,
perhaps it may indicate that they're not related to male pattern baldness.

My family history suggests that I'm the first to have the problem.
All the male ancestors I know of lived long lives and retained their
hair, except for my father, who died at 63 of a heart attack.

(He had very bad habits and a type A personality, and died after
"knocking himself out" in a very special performance onstage, drinking
and smoking a lot, and "celebrating" all night with his mistress. He'd
recently gotten divorced, sold all his many possessions, lost a lot of
money, abandoned his prestigious career of thirty years, and moved from
a gigantic house in the country into a tiny room in midtown Manhattan.)


--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

trigonometry1972[at]gmail.com | wrote:
- quote -

You assume there is an "optimal healthy range"?

Does the alpha male silverback in a mountain gorilla troop have the
same "optimal healthy ranges" of androgens as peaceable, uncompetitive
males, and is it likely to be constant over time? I doubt that very much!

Isn't it more likely that (as Roger Williams demonstrated in
/Biochemical Individuality/) such hormones vary widely among
individuals, and over time, without implying any sort of pathology?

Intuitively, I fear that my hair loss is indicative of some turn for
the worse in my lifestyle.

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

Ted wrote:
- quote -

I'm reading a fascinating book right now, /Molecules of Emotion/ by
neuroscientist Candace B. Pert. She says that neurotransmitters "are
just one part of a much more far-flung network of information carried by
neuropeptides and their bodywide receptors. We are now ready to explore
my theory that these biochemicals are the physiological substrates of
emotion, the molecular underpinnings of what we experience as feelings,
sensations, thoughts, drives, perhaps even spirit or soul."

In other words, she expands upon the (implicit) conventional
understanding of the physiology of emotions as simply involving
electrical activity among neurons in the brain. Instead, she includes
not only locally-acting neurotransmitters, but numerous peptide ligands
and receptors throughout the body as involved essentially in the
phenomena of emotions.

Surely, both testosterone and dihydrotestosterone must affect our
emotions somehow. I wonder how.

I wonder, also, how and when they are cleared from the bloodstream,
and whether the assumptions you make above might be flawed, or at least
less universal than you suppose, that is, that the "good" properties you
mention actually are good -- at all times, and in all places and
circumstances.

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

On May 21, 10:43 pm, David <david.spro...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

Awesome!

On May 21, 2:52 pm, "trigonometry1...[at]gmail.com |"
<trigonometry1...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

In have been to all of the MPB forums (from about 7 years ago)....long
enough to know that people attribute all kinds of things to a drug
just because they can't figure out anything else to blame it on. One
guy even said that he started having gay thoughts after taking
finasteride....and that he had never had those thoughts before. LOL!!!
I trust double blind studies. In the finasteride studies, people
reported all kinds of side effects.who were NOT taking
finasteride....including sexual side effects. I think they are rare
with finasteride and I also believe that they will subside in most
people after a few months.

On May 21, 10:17 pm, Taka <taka0...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -


New Data Show Benefit of Finasteride in Preventing Prostate Cancer

May 18, 2008 (American Association for Cancer Research)

Link between finasteride and high grade prostate cancer questioned

PHILADELPHIA - A comprehensive re-evaluation of the largest prostate
cancer prevention study ever completed produced new findings
suggesting that men and their doctors should consider a more
aggressive approach that includes finasteride to prevent the
development of prostate cancer.

A pathologic analysis of that same study sheds light on the
significance of the cancers found in that study. Additionally, this
study highlights the role of prostate specific antigen (PSA) scores in
treatment decision-making. Researchers found that even those men who
have a low PSA screening value can have cancer that is difficult to
cure.

The two studies will be published online in advanced of the June 2008
issue of Cancer Prevention Research, a journal of the American
Association for Cancer Research.

The original study, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT), had
randomized 18,822 men to receive either a placebo or an agent known as
finasteride, currently approved to control prostate growth, for seven
years. Results showed that while finasteride reduced prostate cancer
risk by 25 percent, it appeared to increase development of more
aggressive prostate cancer in some men. Because of this finding and
concerns that tumors detected had low PSA values and might be of
little risk to patients, since the study's original publication in
2003, few doctors have recommended finasteride for prostate cancer
prevention.

From a new analysis of PCPT data using advanced statistical modeling
techniques and a complete assessment of prostate tissue biopsies, they
concluded that these concerns are now resolved: finasteride actually
reduced the risk of developing prostate cancer more than researchers
had originally thought, did not increase development of more
aggressive cancers, and the majority of tumors prevented were those
that could spread and cause death.

These new findings suggest that men should take an "individualized"
approach to prostate cancer prevention, said Ian M. Thompson, M.D.,
Chair of the Department of Urology at the University of Texas Health
Sciences Center at San Antonio, who is senior author on both studies,
and was also lead author for the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) on
the original PCPT results paper, which was published in July 2003.

"Because we now know that men with even low PSAs can develop prostate
tumors, if a man is worried about his risk, regardless of PSA score,
he can take an agent that is now proven to be effective in lowering
that risk," Thompson said.

Researchers looked at whether finasteride actually increased
aggressive cancers in some men, and by studying biopsies and prostate
gland tissue that had been removed, concluding that it did not.
"Finasteride actually shrank the prostate gland, so it appeared in
initial studies that more cancer was being found in biopsies of men
who took the drug," said Mary Redman, Ph.D., a biostatistician at the
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.

"What that means is that the cancer took up more prostate tissue in
men who were treated, and that is why it was easier to find in a
biopsy. Cancer was probably missed more often in biopsies of men on a
placebo drug because the prostate gland itself was larger," Redman
said.

Redman found that in addition to a 25 to 30 percent reduction in
prostate cancer development overall in men taking finasteride, there
was no evidence that the drug increased the rate of aggressive tumors
and likely decreased their rate by 27 percent. "We think men should
not be concerned about finasteride increasing their risk of these
aggressive tumors" she said.

The second study examined whether the cancers detected in the men in
the trial who had a low PSA level had clinically significant disease.
With about 75 percent of the tumors detected on the study were
classified as those which could potentially take a man's life,
researchers concluded that there is no clear-cut PSA threshold that
can be considered normal.

All patients in PCPT were to have a biopsy of their prostate gland at
some point during the seven-year trial, so investigators evaluated
characteristics of the biopsy in relation to each man's PSA score.
Current practice is to consider a PSA score of below four as normal
and above four as abnormal.

What they found, according to lead author Scott Lucia, M.D., a
pathologist at the University of Colorado, Denver, was that while a
large majority of the participants diagnosed with prostate cancer had
a PSA that was considered normal, 72 percent of all tumors diagnosed
from biopsies in both treated and untreated men were considered
significant. In short, the finding of significant disease couldn't be
predicted by the PSA score, he said. Most patients in the study who
had a PSA score of four or less and then had prostate cancer diagnosed
by a routine biopsy were found to have significant prostate cancer,
while some men who had a high PSA were found to have insignificant
cancer.

That doesn't mean that the researchers support reducing the level by
which PSA scoring should trigger therapeutic intervention, Lucia said.
"Over 90 percent of men in the country diagnosed with prostate cancer
opt for treatment, yet we also found that even at higher PSA levels,
men are being treated for tumors that would not have threatened their
health," he said. "This is the dilemma of PSA screening. While lower
cut-off levels, those below four, increase risk of detection of
insignificant disease, cure is more likely; conversely, more
significant disease is detected with higher levels but at a greater
risk of incurable disease."

It does mean that men need to speak with their physicians about their
PSA, when they should be biopsied, and about potential use of
finasteride, which can reduce their risk, so that they will make a
decision that is right for them, researchers say. For example, Lucia
says, a man whose family members have been diagnosed with the disease
may decide to have a biopsy even though his PSA is below four. If
cancer is found then may opt to undergo treatment; if cancer is not
found, he may choose to use finasteride to prevent the cancer from
developing. Another man may decide to put off a biopsy, regardless of
PSA score, if he is worried about side effects of treatment.

"These are not easy decisions, especially when we know now that we
cannot rely on what the PSA looks like it is telling us," Lucia said.

Emphasizing the importance of prevention, "if given the option of
having my prostate cancer found early, getting it treated and then
getting over the side effects of treatment or never getting cancer in
the first place, I'd choose prevention any day," said Thompson

On May 22, 4:12 am, "trigonometry1...[at]gmail.com |"
<trigonometry1...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

AFAIK garlic can help the sexual issues a lot because it has
vasodilatatory effects. It's not all about the DHT effects ...

Taka

On May 20, 6:39*pm, Taka <taka0...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

Or you could try a different tack and lower your AA intake while
increasing your medium chain saturated fats and you omega
3 fatty acid intake. It seems to have quicker results.
But of course I loaded on antioxidants and I started from
a far different diet than did TAKA.

Further, I am considering avoiding tomatoes, garlic and any other
food known to lower T or DHT. I doubt they are the primary
problem in overall health. Plus I've taken a dietary step that is
said to lower estradiol levels that is the use of a very
generous dose of betaine (N-trimethylglycine).

- quote -

I won't expect any change. For starters eggs are a highly
inflammatory food. The coconut grease wouldn't
contribute further to this problem unlike canola, corn,
sunflower or soya oil. Eggs are a rich source
of archidonic fatty acid as is FARMED salmon
a reason to avoid both. A home raised egg
from a bird given the run of a green yard area
might be somewhat better.

- quote -

MPB = male pattern baldness

On May 20, 6:47*am, Marshall Price <d0213...[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

Doc = Doctor = physician
I suppose I watched Bugs Bunny on the television too much
as a kid. One of his tag lines was "What's up Doc."

Anti-DHT meds = finasteride and dutasteride
These two meds are antiandrogens which acts by inhibiting type II 5-
alpha reductase.
(meds = medications)

"Finasteride is under investigation by the Swedish Medical Products
Agency for possibly causing irreversible sexual side
effects." ...Wikipedia

If you hangsout in the proper forums here on the web, you'll read
alot of angry former finasteride users. Nor are all the side effects
sexual in nature as I recall.

The loss of sexual function is a clear indice of physical decline
and advancing pathology. Or expressed another way,
youthful sexual function is aspect of health.

On May 17, 3:41*pm, Ted <chuckfras...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

I heard enough first person accounts of adverse effects to
put me off of any idea to use this class of medication.

And I know I don't trust and disagree with some of rxlist
content on some other points.

Further, I'd assume the longer one is on this medication the
more likely adverse effects are to become manifest. Nor would
I assume there would be recovery in all subjects after
the drug is discontinued especially as some men
already have marginal levels of testosterone to begin
with. The so-called reference ranges for the various
androgens does not represent the optimal healty
range but are only a statistical artifact though
most physicians are too stupid to realize this point.

On May 20, 10:58 pm, Marshall Price <d0213...[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

Too much soluble fiber has antinutrient properties - it binds other
essential nutrients as it binds cholesterol. Also depends on what you
consider fiber, some may have quite high carbohydrate content and if
you are sedentary that may be a problem.

- quote -

Depends on what change you are aiming at, if you want to eliminate/
reduce AA/Omega-6/3 from the body to reduce T/estrogen production and
inflammation it takes at least 1 year and results in worsening of some
symptoms at the beginning which you can counteract by taking
supplemental antioxidants.

If I were you I would try putting the DHT to some better use e.g. in
the gym and cut the artificial lights except for summertime.

Taka

On May 20, 9:58 am, Marshall Price <d0213...[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

The effect that DHT has on the hair follicles is genetic.

On May 20, 9:48 am, Marshall Price <d0213...[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

Male Pattern Baldness

Taka wrote:
- quote -

I eat very little carbohydrate, except for fiber. I do eat tomato
paste and fruit, but not much. It's puzzling.

I just started eating eggs again last week (for cholesterol, sulfur,
lecithin, and methionine), and I bought some coconut oil and am putting
it on scrambled eggs along with curry powder. I don't know what to
expect, but I'm hoping for a change!

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

Ted wrote:
- quote -

MPB?

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c