RonLev
10.05.2008, 20:29 |
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics (Topicals) |
MDF is a new topical treatment for hair loss, composed of the highest doses available of minoxidil, dutasteride and flutamide in a convenient, single-bottle formulation. Easy, once-a-day dosing. No worry about whether ingredients are genuine (all 3 agents are submitted to U.S. analytic lab testing for content, dose and stability). See samsontherapeutics.com for more info.
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
helpmeout
11.05.2008, 22:51
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» MDF is a new topical treatment for hair loss, composed of the highest doses
» available of minoxidil, dutasteride and flutamide in a convenient,
» single-bottle formulation. Easy, once-a-day dosing. No worry about
» whether ingredients are genuine (all 3 agents are submitted to U.S.
» analytic lab testing for content, dose and stability). See
» samsontherapeutics.com for more info.
how much does it cost? you have before and after pics? what concentration is minox, dutas and flutamide?
helpmeout is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
Propecia, Remox, Nizoral. |
Jtelecom
12.05.2008, 13:32
@ helpmeout
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
Seems like a huge hassle just to get minoxidil and a couple of unproven DHT inhibitors. What's more, I'll bet that it is outrageously expensive.
Jtelecom is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
Jtelecom
5 Strip Surgeries (4 Bosley, 1 AlviArmani)
3 FUE Surgeries (2 Undisclosed, 1 AlviArmani)
(Latest FUE Surgery: June 6, 2008 - AlviArmani Los Angeles) |
benji
12.05.2008, 14:24
@ Jtelecom
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» Seems like a huge hassle just to get minoxidil and a couple of unproven DHT
» inhibitors. What's more, I'll bet that it is outrageously expensive.
topical dutasteride and topical flutamide are systemically absorbed, and have never been shown to be otherwise...........
there is a new "flutagel" out that supposedly suspends flutamide in the dermis, but flutamide is supposed to have to be processed in the bod to become hyrdroxyflutamide to really work effectively.
I dont see how this topical would be any different from taking dutasteride and flutamide internally...................there would probably be some real side effects with this that a man would not want at all
benji is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
ipod
13.05.2008, 23:48
@ Jtelecom
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» Seems like a huge hassle just to get minoxidil and a couple of unproven DHT
» inhibitors. What's more, I'll bet that it is outrageously expensive.
I agree, also there are countless dht inhibitors and antiandrogens on the market, it s safe to say that using anti dht products alone is not enough otherwise all of us would have regrown all our hair back already. There's gotta be more to it than DHT alone. DHT is old school.
ipod is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
NW3 -
Propecia /Saw Palmetto
Topical Spiro / Rogaine Foam (quit REMOX IV)
High does vitamin C / Lysine / Nizoral / Tea Tree Oil Shampoo |
brm
his room,
14.05.2008, 10:08
@ ipod
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
Price is 240$ for 3 months.
brm is located in HIS ROOM and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting. |
cal
14.05.2008, 21:16
@ brm
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
It's true that there's tons of topical DHT inhibitors on the market but they pretty much all suck.
This one is too systemic, that one is too badly absorbed to work, the next one stinks like hippopatamus ass, the one after that can't even be bought in a consistent stable product form, etc.
cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
21.05.2008, 14:40
@ Jtelecom
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» Seems like a huge hassle just to get minoxidil and a couple of unproven DHT
» inhibitors. What's more, I'll bet that it is outrageously expensive.
MDF is specfically formulated to take advantage of the most potent DHT inhibitor (dutasteride) and the most potent DHT blocker (flutamide). To say that they are "unproven" means that you have ignored the medical literature for the past 25 years (in the case of flutamide) and 12 years (in the case of dutasteride). The minoxidil is provided at a dose (15%) that makes it possible to avoid commonly used absorption enchancers which are really the cause of most patients' complaints.
RonLev
Samson Therapeutics
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Jtelecom
21.05.2008, 19:13
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
Unproven TOPICALLY, Ron. Please cite the studies you are referring to.
Jtelecom is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
Jtelecom
5 Strip Surgeries (4 Bosley, 1 AlviArmani)
3 FUE Surgeries (2 Undisclosed, 1 AlviArmani)
(Latest FUE Surgery: June 6, 2008 - AlviArmani Los Angeles) |
Bryan
22.05.2008, 00:35
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» MDF is specfically formulated to take advantage of the most potent DHT
» inhibitor (dutasteride) and the most potent DHT blocker (flutamide).
» To say that they are "unproven" means that you have ignored the medical
» literature for the past 25 years (in the case of flutamide) and 12 years
» (in the case of dutasteride).
As far as I know, there is not so much as even a SINGLE report in the medical literature of dutasteride being used topically. Furthermore, even after some 25 years, the experience with topical flutamide in humans has also been extremely sparse, with (to my knowledge) only a couple of published studies on that. Even worse, the studies with topical flutamide in animals have shown very serious problems with systemic absorption of the drug. Are you and your company aware of all that, and are you prepared for the posssible legal consequences that may well occur from the use of your product by your trusting customers?
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RNORAM
23.05.2008, 15:15
@ Bryan
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» » MDF is specfically formulated to take advantage of the most potent DHT
» » inhibitor (dutasteride) and the most potent DHT blocker (flutamide).
» » To say that they are "unproven" means that you have ignored the medical
» » literature for the past 25 years (in the case of flutamide) and 12
» years
» » (in the case of dutasteride).
»
» As far as I know, there is not so much as even a SINGLE report in the
» medical literature of dutasteride being used topically. Furthermore, even
» after some 25 years, the experience with topical flutamide in humans has
» also been extremely sparse, with (to my knowledge) only a couple of
» published studies on that. Even worse, the studies with topical flutamide
» in animals have shown very serious problems with systemic absorption of the
» drug. Are you and your company aware of all that, and are you prepared for
» the posssible legal consequences that may well occur from the use of your
» product by your trusting customers?
»
»
Bryan- I believe Goingallout has posted about his progress with using Dut topically. However, he is the only one I've seen on this forum that is currently using it. I am thinking of going that route as well, as I'm hoping the side effects will be less than taking orally. What do you think? .
RNORAM is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
HairSite Admin
24.05.2008, 12:34
@ Bryan
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
I was able to find out one study regarding topical flutamide (an old study though)
Analysis of 0-120 hr urine shows at least 16% of the applied flutamide is absorbed.
J Invest Dermatol. 1976 Jun;66(6):379-82
Percutaneous penetration and metabolism of topical (14C)flutamide in men
This study was designed to determine the fate of the nonsteroid antiandrogen flutamide in men following a single 6-hr topical application of 5 mg 14C-labeled drug dissolved in 50% ethanol/50% propylene glycol.
Analysis of 0-120 hr urine shows at least 16% of the applied flutamide is absorbed. Fifty-six percent of the dose is recovered from the site of application with cotton swabs moistened with 50% ethanol/50% propylene glycol.
Flutamide plasma levels peak in 4 to 6 hr at about 1.3 ng/ml and then decline rapidly to about 0.08 ng/ml 24 hr after application. Only 13% of plasma 14C is associated with flutamide 6 hr after drug application.
There are at least 10 plasma metabolites, of which 6 have been tentatively identified. These are alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-4'-amino-m-acetotoluidide (A); alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-4'-amino-2-methyl-m-lactotoluidide (B); alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-4'-nitro-m-acetotoluidide (C); alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-2-methyl-4'-nitro-m-lactotoluidide (D); alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-4'-amino-2-methyl-m-propionotoluidide (E); and alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-6-nitro-m-toluidine (F).
(D) is the major plasma metabolite, and its concentration exceeds flutamide's between 8 and 24 hr after drug. All the plasma metabolites are found in 0-24 hr urine in minor amounts. An additional metabolite, alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-amino-5-nitro-p-cresol (G), accounts for 27% of urine 14C.
HairSite Admin is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
I offer research assistance for HairSite.
email: hairsite@aol.com for free consultations
=====================================
reminder:
1. Help China Earthquake Victims
2. Free hair replacement system for men & women |
Bryan
24.05.2008, 12:48
@ HairSite Admin
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» I was able to find out one study regarding topical flutamide
» (an old study though)
» Analysis of 0-120 hr urine shows at least 16% of the applied flutamide
» is absorbed.
»
» J Invest Dermatol. 1976 Jun;66(6):379-82
»
» Percutaneous penetration and metabolism of topical (14C)flutamide in
» men
Yep. That's one of the two! 
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
24.05.2008, 20:01
@ Bryan
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» » MDF is specfically formulated to take advantage of the most potent DHT
» » inhibitor (dutasteride) and the most potent DHT blocker (flutamide).
» » To say that they are "unproven" means that you have ignored the medical
» » literature for the past 25 years (in the case of flutamide) and 12
» years
» » (in the case of dutasteride).
»
» As far as I know, there is not so much as even a SINGLE report in the
» medical literature of dutasteride being used topically. Furthermore, even
» after some 25 years, the experience with topical flutamide in humans has
» also been extremely sparse, with (to my knowledge) only a couple of
» published studies on that. Even worse, the studies with topical flutamide
» in animals have shown very serious problems with systemic absorption of the
» drug. Are you and your company aware of all that, and are you prepared for
» the posssible legal consequences that may well occur from the use of your
» product by your trusting customers?
»
»
It is well known that flutamide has a relatively high rate of percutaneous absorption (16% in the study you are undoubtedly referring to, Katchen, 1976), but those studies were using the dosage level for oncologic indications (pro-rated in animal models from a base of 750 mg in humans). In subsequent years, investigators have titrated the dose downward to determine its safe level for nononcologic use. These series of studies were conducted by Muderris in 1999 and 2000, who found that using levels <250 mg were entirely safe (we use the very lowest dose Muderris found that was still effective at 62.5 mg and created the topical equivalent, which results in a systemic absorption of only 10.3 mg--far below the level that produces any systemic effect).
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Jtelecom
24.05.2008, 21:10
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
Okay, Ronnie. Now that we have those unpleasantries out of the way, do tell us where it says that either Flutamide or Dutasteride are effective TOPICALLY at treating HAIR LOSS. Get it now? I don't give two sh*ts about how effectively it is absorbed through the skin. A lot of things are absorbed very well through the skin and don't do squat for hair loss. Tell us how your prescription-only, $200/month concoction works for hair loss. Seems to me that you have an overly-expensive minoxidil product. By the way, how DID you get 15% minoxidil into solution? Minoxidil does not work all that well when it just "sits" (in crystalline form) on the top of the skin
Jtelecom is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
Jtelecom
5 Strip Surgeries (4 Bosley, 1 AlviArmani)
3 FUE Surgeries (2 Undisclosed, 1 AlviArmani)
(Latest FUE Surgery: June 6, 2008 - AlviArmani Los Angeles) |
RonLev
24.05.2008, 22:15
@ Jtelecom
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» Okay, Ronnie. Now that we have those unpleasantries out of the way, do tell
» us where it says that either Flutamide or Dutasteride are effective
» TOPICALLY at treating HAIR LOSS. Get it now? I don't give two sh*ts about
» how effectively it is absorbed through the skin. A lot of things are
» absorbed very well through the skin and don't do squat for hair loss. Tell
» us how your prescription-only, $200/month concoction works for hair loss.
» Seems to me that you have an overly-expensive minoxidil product. By the
» way, how DID you get 15% minoxidil into solution? Minoxidil does not work
» all that well when it just "sits" (in crystalline form) on the top of the
» skin
It seems that you are "loaded for bear", but I'll take the bait, anyway.
First, it is standard practice for dermatologists to prescribe compounded topical versions of drugs that are normally only available for oral use for a large variety of disorders. This is because most medical studies (and virtually all clinical trials) are funded by pharma companies, and the pharma industry does not consider topical doseforms (particularly for chronic disorders) to have a sufficiently large market to invest in. Therefore, we relied on our clinical consultants to provide topical alternatives for oral antiandrogens and anti-reductase blockers as they would in their normal practice.
Second, if you took the time to visit our website, you would see that $240 buys you 3 months of medication, not 1 month, and pro-rating this on a daily basis ($2.61) is relatively cost-effective considering the number and amount of medications you are getting.
Third, "How did we get 15% in solution", well that took almost 2 years of development and delayed our launch until our analytic labs gave us absolute assurance that it would remain stable and suitable for absorption. (You might notice that some less ethical compounders would charge about the same amount for their high-dose minox and you would find that the minoxidil would precipitate out of solution exactly as you describe!)
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Hairloss_in_bed
24.05.2008, 22:38
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» » Okay, Ronnie. Now that we have those unpleasantries out of the way, do
» tell
» » us where it says that either Flutamide or Dutasteride are effective
» » TOPICALLY at treating HAIR LOSS. Get it now? I don't give two sh*ts
» about
» » how effectively it is absorbed through the skin. A lot of things are
» » absorbed very well through the skin and don't do squat for hair loss.
» Tell
» » us how your prescription-only, $200/month concoction works for hair
» loss.
» » Seems to me that you have an overly-expensive minoxidil product. By the
» » way, how DID you get 15% minoxidil into solution? Minoxidil does not
» work
» » all that well when it just "sits" (in crystalline form) on the top of
» the
» » skin
»
» It seems that you are "loaded for bear", but I'll take the bait, anyway.
»
»
» First, it is standard practice for dermatologists to prescribe compounded
» topical versions of drugs that are normally only available for oral use for
» a large variety of disorders. This is because most medical studies (and
» virtually all clinical trials) are funded by pharma companies, and the
» pharma industry does not consider topical doseforms (particularly for
» chronic disorders) to have a sufficiently large market to invest in.
» Therefore, we relied on our clinical consultants to provide topical
» alternatives for oral antiandrogens and anti-reductase blockers as they
» would in their normal practice.
»
» Second, if you took the time to visit our website, you would see that $240
» buys you 3 months of medication, not 1 month, and pro-rating this on a
» daily basis ($2.61) is relatively cost-effective considering the number and
» amount of medications you are getting.
»
» Third, "How did we get 15% in solution", well that took almost 2 years of
» development and delayed our launch until our analytic labs gave us absolute
» assurance that it would remain stable and suitable for absorption. (You
» might notice that some less ethical compounders would charge about the same
» amount for their high-dose minox and you would find that the minoxidil
» would precipitate out of solution exactly as you describe!)
»
» RonLev
Hmm.. somehow i don't find anything convincing in this topical.... you got real life trial result with photos?
Hairloss_in_bed is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Bryan
25.05.2008, 14:13
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» » Even worse, the studies with topical flutamide
» » in animals have shown very serious problems with
» » systemic absorption of the drug.
»
» It is well known that flutamide has a relatively high rate of percutaneous
» absorption (16% in the study you are undoubtedly referring to, Katchen,
» 1976), but those studies were using the dosage level for oncologic
» indications (pro-rated in animal models from a base of 750 mg in humans).
» In subsequent years, investigators have titrated the dose downward to
» determine its safe level for nononcologic use. These series of studies
» were conducted by Muderris in 1999 and 2000, who found that using levels
» <250 mg were entirely safe (we use the very lowest dose Muderris found that
» was still effective at 62.5 mg and created the topical equivalent, which
» results in a systemic absorption of only 10.3 mg--far below the level that
» produces any systemic effect).
I'm pleased to know that the ABSOLUTE quantity of absorbed flutamide from a typical application/dose of your product is probably low enough not to present any obvious toxic symptoms, but nevertheless I was mainly referring in my post above to the animal studies(1,2) showing that topically-applied flutamide works entirely by SYSTEMIC absorption. In other words, I'm not aware of any scientific studies showing a "local" effect of topical flutamide except for that one Sintov study, and I don't consider that one to be entirely persuasive. Do you and your company realize that what you're doing is putting out a VERY expensive product which uses a potentially VERY toxic drug which is based on exactly ONE rather questionable animal experiment claiming a certain degree of "local" efficacy?
1) "Local and systemic reduction by topical finasteride or flutamide of hamster flank organ size and enzyme activity." J Invest Dermatol 1995 Nov;105(5):678-82.
2) "The effects of a nonsteroid antiandrogen, flutamide, on sebaceous gland activity". J Invest Dermatol 64:412-417, 1975.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Bryan
25.05.2008, 14:27
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» Second, if you took the time to visit our website, you would see that $240
» buys you 3 months of medication, not 1 month, and pro-rating this on a
» daily basis ($2.61) is relatively cost-effective considering the number and
» amount of medications you are getting.
One could say the same thing about prescription Proxiphen: at a cost of $100 a month, it's even a little more expensive than YOUR product, although it also contains a larger number of individual medications (about a dozen or so, I believe). It also has the advantage of being used, and its effects observed, for a VASTLY longer period of time, like on the order of the last 20 years or so! 
» Third, "How did we get 15% in solution", well that took almost 2 years of
» development and delayed our launch until our analytic labs gave us absolute
» assurance that it would remain stable and suitable for absorption. (You
» might notice that some less ethical compounders would charge about the same
» amount for their high-dose minox and you would find that the minoxidil
» would precipitate out of solution exactly as you describe!)
So what vehicle are you using that supposedly dissolves minoxidil to a concentration of 15%? Is it glycerin, like that other unnamed product? 
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
25.05.2008, 15:40
@ Bryan
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
» » » Even worse, the studies with topical flutamide
» » » in animals have shown very serious problems with
» » » systemic absorption of the drug.
» »
» » It is well known that flutamide has a relatively high rate of
» percutaneous
» » absorption (16% in the study you are undoubtedly referring to, Katchen,
» » 1976), but those studies were using the dosage level for oncologic
» » indications (pro-rated in animal models from a base of 750 mg in
» humans).
» » In subsequent years, investigators have titrated the dose downward to
» » determine its safe level for nononcologic use. These series of studies
» » were conducted by Muderris in 1999 and 2000, who found that using
» levels
» » <250 mg were entirely safe (we use the very lowest dose Muderris found
» that
» » was still effective at 62.5 mg and created the topical equivalent,
» which
» » results in a systemic absorption of only 10.3 mg--far below the level
» that
» » produces any systemic effect).
»
» I'm pleased to know that the ABSOLUTE quantity of absorbed flutamide from
» a typical application/dose of your product is probably low enough not to
» present any obvious toxic symptoms, but nevertheless I was mainly
» referring in my post above to the animal studies(1,2) showing that
» topically-applied flutamide works entirely by SYSTEMIC absorption. In
» other words, I'm not aware of any scientific studies showing a "local"
» effect of topical flutamide except for that one Sintov study, and I don't
» consider that one to be entirely persuasive. Do you and your company
» realize that what you're doing is putting out a VERY expensive product
» which uses a potentially VERY toxic drug which is based on exactly ONE
» rather questionable animal experiment claiming a certain degree of "local"
» efficacy?
»
» 1) "Local and systemic reduction by topical finasteride or flutamide of
» hamster flank organ size and enzyme activity." J Invest Dermatol 1995
» Nov;105(5):678-82.
»
» 2) "The effects of a nonsteroid antiandrogen, flutamide, on sebaceous
» gland activity". J Invest Dermatol 64:412-417, 1975.
Bryan,
I appreciate your "dedication" to questioning us on a holiday! Let me answer your assertions directly,
1. “VERY EXPENSIVE”. As I noted earlier, we are providing 3 potent agents at a per-day price of $1.61, a cost that is well within the normal market range of such products. I should mention that the raw-materials cost of most drugs constitute a very small portion of their cost to the patient. For big pharma, much of the cost is invested in marketing. The bulk of our cost is sunk into the vehicle development, our ongoing quality controls and the cost of custom compounding each Rx individually by a skilled pharmacy technician. That is why the price of the 1-month size of MDF is not much lower than the price of the 3-month size—most of the cost is fixed, there is little variable cost by volume in our operation.
2. You seem to have contradictory views about effectiveness. You (correctly) state that flutamide has shown a systemic effect, but then you assert that no local effect can be assumed without clinical studies. However, normal pharmacokinetic partitioning requires a drug to traverse the dermis (where the hair follicles reside) and cumulate a significant concentration there before it can pass into the systemic circulation. Therefore, a drug that demonstrates a systemic effect MUST have a local effect, if there are susceptible receptors there. As I mentioned earlier, pharma companies are not interested in pursuing topical studies, so dermatologists have traditionally adapted many products for topical use on the basis of the oral and systemic pharmacology that is available.
3. “VERY TOXIC” (?) As a result of titration studies throughout the past 9 years, the safety of flutamide has been well established, and doses up to 250 mg qd have been used ORALLY (where the systemic absorption is nearly 100%) in women with hair growth disorders by dermatologists with no ill effects. By contrast, we are using 62.5 mg topically in men (where the systemic absorption is 16%) yielding a systemic exposure of only 10.3 mg.
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Jtelecom
25.05.2008, 16:21
(edited by Jtelecom, 25.05.2008, 16:29)
@ RonLev
|
MDF topical from Samson Therapeutics |
Uh oh, Ron. Now you've done it. Prepare for the public flogging to come
I take it that you have not been here before. You MUST see things from our perspective. We get BOMBARDED by magic lotions and potions claiming to be the "next" generation hair loss treatment and NOT ONE has ever come to fruition.
Secondly, you don't EVER mess with Bryan when it comes to medical literature. He knows more about it than anyone here (including ALL of the doctors who frequent this site). It is just like messing with Texas - it aint done!
Jtelecom is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO ---
Jtelecom
5 Strip Surgeries (4 Bosley, 1 AlviArmani)
3 FUE Surgeries (2 Undisclosed, 1 AlviArmani)
(Latest FUE Surgery: June 6, 2008 - AlviArmani Los Angeles) |
Bryan
25.05.2008, 19:20
@ RonLev
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» 2. You seem to have contradictory views about effectiveness. You
» (correctly) state that flutamide has shown a systemic effect, but then
» you assert that no local effect can be assumed without clinical studies.
» However, normal pharmacokinetic partitioning requires a drug to traverse
» the dermis (where the hair follicles reside) and cumulate a significant
» concentration there before it can pass into the systemic circulation.
» Therefore, a drug that demonstrates a systemic effect MUST have a local
» effect, if there are susceptible receptors there.
I'm going to explain to you EXACTLY what I mean by a "local" effect, so that there can be no further misunderstanding: when a drug has the intended effect ONLY where it is physically applied and not in any other location, then that is a "local" effect. Take a look at the following graph which is a part of the Chen et al topical flutamide study which I cited in my previous post:
http://img479.imageshack.us/my.php?image=flutamide8la7.jpg
As you can see, they applied three different doses of flutamide ONLY to the right flank organs of the hamsters, while the left flank organs received only a control vehicle without the drug. But both flank organs were reduced IDENTICALLY by the flutamide, and at all three doses!! Clearly, the flutamide was getting absorbed systemically, and then got spread to both flank organs through the bloodstream (and notice that the same thing happened with the topical finasteride). There was no "local" effect at all. And the other topical flutamide study from 1975, which I previously cited, had a similar result.
As I said in my other post, the Sintov study is the only one I know of which claimed to find a "local" effect from the topical application of flutamide, but I find it to be less than fully persuasive. I think it's rather strange that you and your company would go to so much time and trouble to develop a very expensive product based (mostly) on such rather flimsy evidence as the Sintov study (and I'll add here that any evidence for using topical dutasteride is ENTIRELY absent from the medical literature).
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
25.05.2008, 20:08
@ Bryan
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» » 2. You seem to have contradictory views about effectiveness. You
» » (correctly) state that flutamide has shown a systemic effect, but then
» » you assert that no local effect can be assumed without clinical
» studies.
» » However, normal pharmacokinetic partitioning requires a drug to
» traverse
» » the dermis (where the hair follicles reside) and cumulate a significant
» » concentration there before it can pass into the systemic circulation.
» » Therefore, a drug that demonstrates a systemic effect MUST have a local
» » effect, if there are susceptible receptors there.
»
» I'm going to explain to you EXACTLY what I mean by a "local" effect, so
» that there can be no further misunderstanding: when a drug has the
» intended effect ONLY where it is physically applied and not in any other
» location, then that is a "local" effect. Take a look at the following
» graph which is a part of the Chen et al topical flutamide study
» which I cited in my previous post:
»
» http://img479.imageshack.us/my.php?image=flutamide8la7.jpg
»
» As you can see, they applied three different doses of flutamide ONLY to
» the right flank organs of the hamsters, while the left flank organs
» received only a control vehicle without the drug. But both flank organs
» were reduced IDENTICALLY by the flutamide, and at all three doses!!
» Clearly, the flutamide was getting absorbed systemically, and then got
» spread to both flank organs through the bloodstream (and notice that the
» same thing happened with the topical finasteride). There was no "local"
» effect at all. And the other topical flutamide study from 1975, which I
» previously cited, had a similar result.
»
» As I said in my other post, the Sintov study is the only one I know of
» which claimed to find a "local" effect from the topical application of
» flutamide, but I find it to be less than fully persuasive. I think it's
» rather strange that you and your company would go to so much time and
» trouble to develop a very expensive product based (mostly) on such rather
» flimsy evidence as the Sintov study (and I'll add here that any evidence
» for using topical dutasteride is ENTIRELY absent from the medical
» literature).
Bryan,
I don't see where we disagree. Flutamide has a systemic effect, end of story. But in biological systems, dose is everything. At doses used in dermatologic practice, the distal response has not been demonstrated at the doses used. For example, women taking oral doses of Flutamide at 250 mg or less do not manifest changes in fertility, sexual function or elevated liver function tests, which are the hallmarks of flutamide toxicity--and those systemically absorbed levels are 25 times what we see with topical administration (@62.5 mg).
RonLev
» .
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Bryan
25.05.2008, 21:19
(edited by Bryan, 25.05.2008, 21:30)
@ RonLev
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» Bryan,
»
» I don't see where we disagree. Flutamide has a systemic effect, end of
» story. But in biological systems, dose is everything. At doses used in
» dermatologic practice, the distal response has not been demonstrated at
» the doses used.
If I'm understanding you correctly, I think you're grossly misusing the term "distal response" here! 
In the context of whether or not an antiandrogenic drug has a "local" effect where applied topically, flutamide has been demonstrated NOT to have any local effect in most of the existing studies; only in the (questionable?) Sintov study has there been a claim to the contrary.
What you seem to be talking about above is something entirely different, though, which is whether or not you can get a decent antiandrogenic effect from flutamide without nasty side effects of other kinds, REGARDLESS of how you get the flutamide inside you. If that's really all you're claiming here, and you're admitting that flutamide will inevitably go systemic regardless of how you apply it, then there's no particular reason to use it topically. You might as well just go ahead and SWALLOW it!
Certain other antiandrogens _do_ in fact have local effects, though. Two obvious examples are spironolactone and RU58841. When those antiandrogens are applied to only one hamster flank organ, ONLY that one flank organ is affected. The other one on the other side isn't. In other words, there is no "distal response" at the site of the other flank organ, antiandrogenic or otherwise.
» For example, women taking oral doses of Flutamide at 250 mg or
» less do not manifest changes in fertility, sexual function or elevated
» liver function tests, which are the hallmarks of flutamide toxicity--and
» those systemically absorbed levels are 25 times what we see with topical
» administration (@62.5 mg).
Well, there you go: so are you really admitting that topical flutamide (even when used in the form of your new product) has no local effect at all, and it's entirely systemic?? What exactly is the point of using it topically in the first place?? Why not just go ahead and swallow the proper dose of flutamide?
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
25.05.2008, 22:03
@ Bryan
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» » Bryan,
» »
» » I don't see where we disagree. Flutamide has a systemic effect, end of
» » story. But in biological systems, dose is everything. At doses used
» in
» » dermatologic practice, the distal response has not been demonstrated at
» » the doses used.
»
» If I'm understanding you correctly, I think you're grossly misusing the
» term "distal response" here!
»
» In the context of whether or not an antiandrogenic drug has a "local"
» effect where applied topically, flutamide has been demonstrated NOT to have
» any local effect in most of the existing studies; only in the
» (questionable?) Sintov study has there been a claim to the contrary.
»
» What you seem to be talking about above is something entirely different,
» though, which is whether or not you can get a decent antiandrogenic effect
» from flutamide without nasty side effects of other kinds, REGARDLESS of how
» you get the flutamide inside you. If that's really all you're claiming
» here, and you're admitting that flutamide will inevitably go
» systemic regardless of how you apply it, then there's no particular reason
» to use it topically. You might as well just go ahead and SWALLOW it!
»
» Certain other antiandrogens _do_ in fact have local effects, though. Two
» obvious examples are spironolactone and RU58841. When those antiandrogens
» are applied to only one hamster flank organ, ONLY that one flank organ is
» affected. The other one on the other side isn't. In other words, there is
» no "distal response" at the site of the other flank organ, antiandrogenic
» or otherwise.
»
» » For example, women taking oral doses of Flutamide at 250 mg or
» » less do not manifest changes in fertility, sexual function or elevated
» » liver function tests, which are the hallmarks of flutamide
» toxicity--and
» » those systemically absorbed levels are 25 times what we see with
» topical
» » administration (@62.5 mg).
»
» Well, there you go: so are you really admitting that topical flutamide
» (even when used in the form of your new product) has no local effect at
» all, and it's entirely systemic?? What exactly is the point of using it
» topically in the first place?? Why not just go ahead and swallow
» the proper dose of flutamide?
»
»
Bryan,
It appears that you stand, on principle, that any drug that is systemically absorbed would make topical application worthless since, as you say "you might as well just take it orally" and be done with it. However, that flies in the face of standard dermatologic practice. Drugs in multiple therapeutic classes (all manifesting systemtic absorption) are compounded in topical formulations to concentrate the effect at the point of application. For example, topical corticosteroids all manifest systemic absorption, but dermatologists use topical formulations because they can use lower doses and still obtain effectiveness in the skin (for treating eczema, allergic dermatitis, etc.), GRANTED that some of the steroids will be systemtically absorbed. The same applies to topical antibiotics, et al.
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
benji
26.05.2008, 00:16
@ RonLev
|
Ron Lev, topical flutamide robbed me of hard ons............ |
I used topical flutamide gel (and NOT MUCH EITHER) for one week once. I had the limp noodle in three days, and no sex drive for the last four days WHATSOEVER. I felt nauseous, had diarreah (every time I went), didn't feel like working out.........................in other words, I felt like shiiiit.
This is why topical dutasteride and topical finasteride forumlations need to measure the SERUM LEVELS OF DHT in TESTING before being ALLOWED to be sold. Nobody knows how much is sytemically absorbed. Ive been on finas a long time and can handle it, but obviously a few men really have unpleasant side effects. Flutamide, which can basically chemically block your very manhood, isn't something to fool with if you want a high quality of life. Unless some entity can perform a big test in humans and prove their topical forulation isn't sytstemically absorbed........................why in the hell would they sell the stuff?
benji is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Bryan
26.05.2008, 00:52
@ RonLev
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» Bryan,
»
» It appears that you stand, on principle, that any drug that is
» systemically absorbed would make topical application worthless since, as
» you say "you might as well just take it orally" and be done with it.
» However, that flies in the face of standard dermatologic practice. Drugs
» in multiple therapeutic classes (all manifesting systemtic absorption) are
» compounded in topical formulations to concentrate the effect at the point
» of application. For example, topical corticosteroids all manifest systemic
» absorption, but dermatologists use topical formulations because they can
» use lower doses and still obtain effectiveness in the skin (for treating
» eczema, allergic dermatitis, etc.), GRANTED that some of the steroids will
» be systemtically absorbed. The same applies to topical antibiotics, et
» al.
Did you miss the whole point of my previous posts? I demonstrated to you with the graph from the Chen et al study that the effect of the topical flutamide was absolutely, positively NOT concentrated at the point of application. I took pains to point out that the results on both flank organs were IDENTICAL, even though the drug was applied only to one flank organ. Now do you understand the point that I've been making all along? The flutamide was acting in those rodent studies EXCLUSIVELY by a systemic route.
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
26.05.2008, 11:29
@ Bryan
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» » Bryan,
» »
» » It appears that you stand, on principle, that any drug that is
» » systemically absorbed would make topical application worthless since,
» as
» » you say "you might as well just take it orally" and be done with it.
» » However, that flies in the face of standard dermatologic practice.
» Drugs
» » in multiple therapeutic classes (all manifesting systemtic absorption)
» are
» » compounded in topical formulations to concentrate the effect at the
» point
» » of application. For example, topical corticosteroids all manifest
» systemic
» » absorption, but dermatologists use topical formulations because they
» can
» » use lower doses and still obtain effectiveness in the skin (for
» treating
» » eczema, allergic dermatitis, etc.), GRANTED that some of the steroids
» will
» » be systemtically absorbed. The same applies to topical antibiotics, et
» » al.
»
» Did you miss the whole point of my previous posts? I demonstrated to you
» with the graph from the Chen et al study that the effect of the
» topical flutamide was absolutely, positively NOT concentrated at the point
» of application. I took pains to point out that the results on both flank
» organs were IDENTICAL, even though the drug was applied only to one flank
» organ. Now do you understand the point that I've been making all along?
» The flutamide was acting in those rodent studies EXCLUSIVELY by a systemic
» route.
»
» Likewise, you are missing my point; I am not concerned about systemic activity at the flank organ--I already acknowledged that flutamide is systemically absorbed. What a dermatologist wants to know is: what is the activity of flutamide at the skin site of administration and what happens to that activity in the skin when the dose is titrated downward so that systemic activity is extinguished? (That was not the objective of Chen's experiment.)
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
26.05.2008, 11:43
@ benji
|
Ron Lev, topical flutamide robbed me of hard ons............ |
» I used topical flutamide gel (and NOT MUCH EITHER) for one week once. I had
» the limp noodle in three days, and no sex drive for the last four days
» WHATSOEVER. I felt nauseous, had diarreah (every time I went), didn't feel
» like working out.........................in other words, I felt like
» shiiiit.
»
»
»
» This is why topical dutasteride and topical finasteride forumlations need
» to measure the SERUM LEVELS OF DHT in TESTING before being ALLOWED to be
» sold. Nobody knows how much is sytemically absorbed. Ive been on finas a
» long time and can handle it, but obviously a few men really have unpleasant
» side effects. Flutamide, which can basically chemically block your very
» manhood, isn't something to fool with if you want a high quality of life.
» Unless some entity can perform a big test in humans and prove their topical
» forulation isn't sytstemically absorbed........................why in the
» hell would they sell the stuff?
Benji,
It is regrettable that you experienced sexual side effects from topical dutasteride and finasteride. However, no drug is perfect and I don't claim otherwise. Every drug presents a profile of desired and undesirable effects; it is how the balance tips in one direction or the other that occurs in each particular patient that determines whether it is worthwhile. It is important to note that GSk admits in its information for healthcare professionals statement that Avodart(R)--a fully FDA-approved oral version of dutasteride--has detectable side effects (including sexual dysfunction) in many patients taking it and significant sexual side effects in 4.7% of patients (although it does decline to 1% after 12 months, if one can tolerate the waiting time). Is this unusual? Should Avodart (and our topical preparation) be taken off the market? No. Because ALL drugs have risk/benefits. If you are looking for a perfect drug for hair loss, or hypertension, or cholesterol, or whatever--it just doesn't exist. I wish I could advise you of a better solution now. Hopefully, in the future a nonpharmaceutical treatment for hair loss will make this discussion unnecessary, such as hair cloning.
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
Bryan
26.05.2008, 14:48
@ RonLev
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» » Did you miss the whole point of my previous posts?
» » I demonstrated to you with the graph from the Chen
» » et al study that the effect of the topical
» » flutamide was absolutely, positively NOT concentrated
» » at the point of application. I took pains to point out
» » that the results on both flank organs were IDENTICAL,
» » even though the drug was applied only to one flank organ.
» » Now do you understand the point that I've been making all along?
» » The flutamide was acting in those rodent studies EXCLUSIVELY
» » by a systemic route.
»
» Likewise, you are missing my point; I am not concerned about systemic
» activity at the flank organ--I already acknowledged that flutamide is
» systemically absorbed. What a dermatologist wants to know is: what is the
» activity of flutamide at the skin site of administration and what happens
» to that activity in the skin when the dose is titrated downward so that
» systemic activity is extinguished? (That was not the objective of Chen's
» experiment.)
Ahhh...but that _was_ an objective of Chen's experiment! I think now you're also beginning to understand why I made such a big point before of the fact that Chen et al tested THREE separate doses: a large dose which strongly reduced flank organ size (identical effect on both sides); a medium dose which moderately reduced flank organ size (identical effect on both sides); and a small dose which had only a very minimal effect on flank organ size (identical effect on both sides).
Sorry about pressing you on all this, but there's just no way to put a favorable "spin" of any kind on the animal experiments with topical flutamide. They demonstrate that (1) topical flutamide works EXCLUSIVELY by a systemic route, and (2) titrating the dose up or down doesn't alter the systemic nature of how it works.
The animal experiments are clearly DISASTROUS for anybody who wants to develop a topical flutamide product for human use. Any rationale one can conjure up for how such a product might be great for humans is soundly contradicted by the results of these animal experiments (with the possible exception of the Sintov study, as I explained before). All you can do now is hope against hope that topical flutamide works by some substantially different mechanism in humans than it does in rodents; and frankly, I consider that to be a pretty weak foundation on which to develop a new product for human use. It doesn't inspire one with confidence.
.
Bryan is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
benji
26.05.2008, 16:48
@ Bryan
|
Topical FLUTAMIDE will rob you of erections. It did to me |
Topical FLUTAMIDE gave me the limp noodle, diarreah, and no energy, and no sex drive.
RonLev has tried to spin this and accuse to other drugs. I smell dishonesty. Be sure I will check back here again and again and remind others that the quickest path to no erections is TOPICAL or INTERNAL flutamide.
benji is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
27.05.2008, 16:52
@ Bryan
|
Let's carefully specify the meaning of a "local" effect! |
» » » Did you miss the whole point of my previous posts?
» » » I demonstrated to you with the graph from the Chen
» » » et al study that the effect of the topical
» » » flutamide was absolutely, positively NOT concentrated
» » » at the point of application. I took pains to point out
» » » that the results on both flank organs were IDENTICAL,
» » » even though the drug was applied only to one flank organ.
» » » Now do you understand the point that I've been making all along?
» » » The flutamide was acting in those rodent studies EXCLUSIVELY
» » » by a systemic route.
» »
» » Likewise, you are missing my point; I am not concerned about systemic
» » activity at the flank organ--I already acknowledged that flutamide is
» » systemically absorbed. What a dermatologist wants to know is: what is
» the
» » activity of flutamide at the skin site of administration and what
» happens
» » to that activity in the skin when the dose is titrated downward so that
» » systemic activity is extinguished? (That was not the objective of
» Chen's
» » experiment.)
»
» Ahhh...but that _was_ an objective of Chen's experiment! I think now
» you're also beginning to understand why I made such a big point before of
» the fact that Chen et al tested THREE separate doses: a large
» dose which strongly reduced flank organ size (identical effect on both
» sides); a medium dose which moderately reduced flank organ size
» (identical effect on both sides); and a small dose which had only a
» very minimal effect on flank organ size (identical effect on both sides).
»
» Sorry about pressing you on all this, but there's just no way to put a
» favorable "spin" of any kind on the animal experiments with topical
» flutamide. They demonstrate that (1) topical flutamide works EXCLUSIVELY
» by a systemic route, and (2) titrating the dose up or down doesn't alter
» the systemic nature of how it works.
»
» The animal experiments are clearly DISASTROUS for anybody who wants to
» develop a topical flutamide product for human use. Any rationale one can
» conjure up for how such a product might be great for humans is soundly
» contradicted by the results of these animal experiments (with the possible
» exception of the Sintov study, as I explained before). All you can do now
» is hope against hope that topical flutamide works by some substantially
» different mechanism in humans than it does in rodents; and frankly, I
» consider that to be a pretty weak foundation on which to develop a new
» product for human use. It doesn't inspire one with confidence.
»
» Bryan,
I appreciate your spirited and scientifically rigorous rebuttals. I would only add as a coda to this discussion that many drugs in this field (and I am including ALL hormonal modulators in this discussion, not just antiandrogens for treatment of hair disorders) are developed with an acknowledgement of some risk as a part of their side effect profile. As I mentioned in response to Benji's unfortunate experience with finasteride and dutasteride, even well-established, fully FDA-approved drugs will not pass muster by your standard. That is not to say that your standard is wrong, it is just that the state of the art currently puts us in a position where antiandrogenic control cannot be absolutely locally restricted. If you want truly effective control of DHT in the here-and-now, this is the risk that patients and their doctors must weigh, and for most the benefits outweigh the risks.
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
benji
27.05.2008, 18:39
@ RonLev
|
NOBODY IS CLAIMING Dutasteride or Finasteride only have local effects |
» » Bryan,
»
». As I
» mentioned in response to Benji's unfortunate experience with finasteride
» and dutasteride, even well-established, fully FDA-approved drugs will not
» pass muster by your standard. BENJI HAS BEEN ON FINASTERIDE FOR 12 YEARS WITH NO PROBLEM. FLUTAMIDE TOPICALLY IS WHAT GAVE HIM NO ERECTIONS, NAUSEA, NO SEX DRIVE, DIARREAH, and you know this.............youre simply lying as Ive pointed it out to you the FIRST time you tried to intentionally misinterpret what I clearly stated and blame finasteride........
That is not to say that your standard is
» wrong, it is just that the state of the art currently puts us in a position
» where antiandrogenic control cannot be absolutely locally restricted. If
» you want truly effective control of DHT in the here-and-now, this is the
» risk that patients and their doctors must weigh, and for most the benefits
» outweigh the risks. OF DUTASTERIDE, MAYBE. NOT FLUTAMIDE. You are worried about sales of your product, most people who buy it will only use it a month or two and stop because of the FLUTAMIDE side effects. You should have tried to formulate topical dutasteride and minoxidil along with some topical ketoconazole and the sides would have been small enough for many to keep with it. The FLUTAMIDE sides will make them quit. They will feel like shiiiit. Furthermore, Flutamide probably has to be metabolized to even work directly as Docjo77 has pointed out at HLT. »
The makers of finasteride (MERK) and Dutasteride (Glaxo-Smith-Kline) do not claim that their drugs work by any other means than systemic absorption. They do not sell topical forumlations thereof. No tests anywhere have suggested that these drugs can be used topically and be useful unless serum levels of DHT are also affected by the makers. Some claim that finasteride can be suspended topically in the right vehicle, but its never been proven. Nobody that I know of claims that for dutasteride, but even if it worked, one could just drain dutasteride capsules in a bottle of minoxidil and get the same effect. If you think you have a topical vehicle that can suspend dutasteride topically where it does not cross into the bloodstream and only has local effects, commission a study and treat AGA topically with it and show no serum changes in DHT. But you dont and we both know it.
You are trying to turn a buck on people's ignorance. Im trying to save men from a pretty miserable month or so of life..............which they will have if they use flutamide topically.
benji is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
RonLev
27.05.2008, 20:55
@ benji
|
NOBODY IS CLAIMING Dutasteride or Finasteride only have local effects |
» » » Bryan,
» »
» ». As I
» » mentioned in response to Benji's unfortunate experience with
» finasteride
» » and dutasteride, even well-established, fully FDA-approved drugs will
» not
» » pass muster by your standard. BENJI HAS BEEN ON
» FINASTERIDE FOR 12 YEARS WITH NO PROBLEM. FLUTAMIDE TOPICALLY IS WHAT GAVE
» HIM NO ERECTIONS, NAUSEA, NO SEX DRIVE, DIARREAH, and you know
» this.............youre simply lying as Ive pointed it out to you the FIRST
» time you tried to intentionally misinterpret what I clearly stated and
» blame finasteride........
»
» That is not to say that your standard is
» » wrong, it is just that the state of the art currently puts us in a
» position
» » where antiandrogenic control cannot be absolutely locally restricted.
» If
» » you want truly effective control of DHT in the here-and-now, this is
» the
» » risk that patients and their doctors must weigh, and for most the
» benefits
» » outweigh the risks. OF DUTASTERIDE, MAYBE. NOT
» FLUTAMIDE. You are worried about sales of your product, most people who buy
» it will only use it a month or two and stop because of the FLUTAMIDE side
» effects. You should have tried to formulate topical dutasteride and
» minoxidil along with some topical ketoconazole and the sides would have
» been small enough for many to keep with it. The FLUTAMIDE sides will make
» them quit. They will feel like shiiiit. Furthermore, Flutamide probably has
» to be metabolized to even work directly as Docjo77 has pointed out at HLT.
» »
»
»
»
»
» The makers of finasteride (MERK) and Dutasteride
» (Glaxo-Smith-Kline) do not claim that their drugs work by any other means
» than systemic absorption. They do not sell topical forumlations thereof. No
» tests anywhere have suggested that these drugs can be used topically and be
» useful unless serum levels of DHT are also affected by the makers. Some
» claim that finasteride can be suspended topically in the right vehicle, but
» its never been proven. Nobody that I know of claims that for dutasteride,
» but even if it worked, one could just drain dutasteride capsules in a
» bottle of minoxidil and get the same effect. If you think you have a
» topical vehicle that can suspend dutasteride topically where it does not
» cross into the bloodstream and only has local effects, commission a study
» and treat AGA topically with it and show no serum changes in DHT. But you
» dont and we both know it.
»
»
»
» You are trying to turn a buck on people's ignorance. Im trying to save men
» from a pretty miserable month or so of life..............which they will
» have if they use flutamide topically.
Benji,
Hold your horses. I never claimed that MDF was not systemically absorbed. The point I want to make is that your treatment with these FDA-approved products by Glaxo TAKEN AS DIRECTED was responsible for significant sexual side effects, yet you direct all of your criticism at MDF. The one claim we can make (aside from the development of a stable solution of these components, which was quite difficult) is that the systemic exposure of these components is lower with MDF than with oral doseforms (10.3 mg of flutamide topically vs. 62.5 mg orally; and 0.25 mg of dutasteride vs. 0.5 mg orally). One issue that mystifies me is why you obsess over flutamide when, on a dose-response basis, there is a greater likelihood of experiencing sexual side effects from dutasteride (since both agents are in MDF, I can comment on this issue without bias).
I regret that you had such a poor experience with dutasteride (and finasteride, as you noted earlier). While you appear to be quite sensitive to antiandrogens, others who have less sensitivity may experience fewer side effects from MDF. Notice I said "may", not "will".
RonLev
RonLev is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO |
benji
27.05.2008, 23:36
@ RonLev
|
RonLev is lying about my side effects with FLUTAMIDE |
Three Time Ron Lev has tried to claim I had bad experiences with duta |
Thread view
Order