The generic for Proscar and Fincar and also Propecia is called finasteride. Proscar and Fincar are 5 mg finasteride while Propecia is only 1 mg. I began taking Propecia in 1998 or 1999 and switched to generic finasteride 5mg in 2009 (it's less expensive to treat a medical condition such as enlarged prostate then a cosmetic one such as hair loss). I've had no loss of libido, but what I have experienced is a reduction in the quantity of ejaculate. I have no idea if that's the result of the finasteride or simply the result of aging.
As for price, I take my prescription to Walmart and have them process it without bothering my insurance company. Believe it or not, it's less expensive for me to pay cash than to use my insurance when buying generics at Walmart. $9 for 30 pills which works out to 30 cents each. My prescription is for 90 pills (3 month supply) and I think I might even pay a little less than that. Since I initially got Propecia/Finasteride to handle male pattern baldness I used to split the Finasteride figuring that if the Propecia was 1 mg per day, then 2 1/2 mg per day should do the trick, even if the second day's cut pill deteriorates some with exposure to air. After a while I noticed that the hair on my crown was thinning again. It might have been psychological, but after going back to the full 5 mg Finasteride each day, the hair returned and both my hair and I are happy again. Even if the thinning was imaginary, it wasn't worth 5 dollars per month to risk it being real.
As for price, I take my prescription to Walmart and have them process it without bothering my insurance company. Believe it or not, it's less expensive for me to pay cash than to use my insurance when buying generics at Walmart. $9 for 30 pills which works out to 30 cents each. My prescription is for 90 pills (3 month supply) and I think I might even pay a little less than that. Since I initially got Propecia/Finasteride to handle male pattern baldness I used to split the Finasteride figuring that if the Propecia was 1 mg per day, then 2 1/2 mg per day should do the trick, even if the second day's cut pill deteriorates some with exposure to air. After a while I noticed that the hair on my crown was thinning again. It might have been psychological, but after going back to the full 5 mg Finasteride each day, the hair returned and both my hair and I are happy again. Even if the thinning was imaginary, it wasn't worth 5 dollars per month to risk it being real.
(04-05-2012, 12:53 AM)EricaB Wrote: The generic for Proscar and Fincar and also Propecia is called finasteride. Proscar and Fincar are 5 mg finasteride while Propecia is only 1 mg. I began taking Propecia in 1998 or 1999 and switched to generic finasteride 5mg in 2009 (it's less expensive to treat a medical condition such as enlarged prostate then a cosmetic one such as hair loss). I've had no loss of libido, but what I have experienced is a reduction in the quantity of ejaculate. I have no idea if that's the result of the finasteride or simply the result of aging.but do u need a prescription for that finasteride? and it does block dht then? hrm..and i agree that with pm im not constantly bothered by my libido lol which is nice. tho a main reason im trying to grow breasts is purely for sexual fun lol..i find it very erotic for men to have boobs, i have no illusions of being a tranny or anything..yet after i masturbate or whatever i find myself second guessing this.. i dunno what to do lol
As for price, I take my prescription to Walmart and have them process it without bothering my insurance company. Believe it or not, it's less expensive for me to pay cash than to use my insurance when buying generics at Walmart. $9 for 30 pills which works out to 30 cents each. My prescription is for 90 pills (3 month supply) and I think I might even pay a little less than that. Since I initially got Propecia/Finasteride to handle male pattern baldness I used to split the Finasteride figuring that if the Propecia was 1 mg per day, then 2 1/2 mg per day should do the trick, even if the second day's cut pill deteriorates some with exposure to air. After a while I noticed that the hair on my crown was thinning again. It might have been psychological, but after going back to the full 5 mg Finasteride each day, the hair returned and both my hair and I are happy again. Even if the thinning was imaginary, it wasn't worth 5 dollars per month to risk it being real.
OK, for those out there, if any, who are considering a non-herbal route, corrections are in order, in order that you not be confused .
Proscar is a patented drug, Fincar is it's generic. Both are 5mg
Propecia is a patented drug, Finpecia is it's generic. Both are 1mg.
The active ingredient in all of the above is: finasteride.
There are no "fillers" in any of them, so you will either get 1mg or 5mg of pure unadulterated finasteride, depending on your selection.
Their purpose is to block DHT. Period. I agree with Erica on the point that none of them will cause loss of libido. As for her suggestion that the decrease in amount of ejaculate may be due to age, I concur totally. If that were not the case, I sincerely doubt any of them would have seen the marketplace. How many vain males among us would sacrifice the ability to procreate in favor of a better head of hair?? Age has to be a factor here.
Moobdood, as for your next to last reply, you ask what you can take to block DHT and not affect your libido? Erica answered that. Finasteride. As did I, in a post a day or 2 ago. All these threads are updated when a new reply is posted. They are highlighted and moved to the top of the forum page. My answer was posted in a thread titled "DHT question" . Bryony recently answered here that testerone blocking will lower your libido. VERY true. Anything you use to lower T will result in lowering of your libido. Anything. However, you may block DHT production with no such effect. Yes, these DHT blockers will require a prescription. Not a big deal, if you have hair loss and a doctor that will agree. Or, you may do as I did, and get them from the good ole UK, which will send them without a prescription. Quite easy, and low cost. As far as what size to use, as Erica said, 5mg was needed in the end to maintain hair. If your goal is simply to block DHT, then my guess would be less. Again, age may be a factor, but 1mg-2mg daily was all I ever needed. 2mg to get the show on the road, and 1mg to maintain when you get DHT to where you want it. As to the subject of tablet splitting. When you break a pill, or sometimes just take one out of the bottle, a process called "oxidation" begins. Yes, that's the same process that causes iron to "rust. In this case, an ingredient may start to change, or slowly vaporize, or "gas off", or absorb humidity, or whatever. All medicines do this at different rates. As a result, the medicine will lose some effectiveness over time. In the particular case of finasteride, I inquired, and was told it was no concern, unless I left it outdoors on a humid day. When a bottle says "keep in a cool, dry place out of sunlight", that's why. That's why your bottle of PM has a dessicant packed with the pills, to absorb any moisture, so your pills will stay dry and at their full strength. Hopefully, any of us that are buying just the powder are also receiving it packed with dessicant.
As the topic here was originally "testerone blockers", but DHT has been thrown in, may I ask, just for clarity, which one it really is that you are still interested in?
Proscar is a patented drug, Fincar is it's generic. Both are 5mg
Propecia is a patented drug, Finpecia is it's generic. Both are 1mg.
The active ingredient in all of the above is: finasteride.
There are no "fillers" in any of them, so you will either get 1mg or 5mg of pure unadulterated finasteride, depending on your selection.
Their purpose is to block DHT. Period. I agree with Erica on the point that none of them will cause loss of libido. As for her suggestion that the decrease in amount of ejaculate may be due to age, I concur totally. If that were not the case, I sincerely doubt any of them would have seen the marketplace. How many vain males among us would sacrifice the ability to procreate in favor of a better head of hair?? Age has to be a factor here.
Moobdood, as for your next to last reply, you ask what you can take to block DHT and not affect your libido? Erica answered that. Finasteride. As did I, in a post a day or 2 ago. All these threads are updated when a new reply is posted. They are highlighted and moved to the top of the forum page. My answer was posted in a thread titled "DHT question" . Bryony recently answered here that testerone blocking will lower your libido. VERY true. Anything you use to lower T will result in lowering of your libido. Anything. However, you may block DHT production with no such effect. Yes, these DHT blockers will require a prescription. Not a big deal, if you have hair loss and a doctor that will agree. Or, you may do as I did, and get them from the good ole UK, which will send them without a prescription. Quite easy, and low cost. As far as what size to use, as Erica said, 5mg was needed in the end to maintain hair. If your goal is simply to block DHT, then my guess would be less. Again, age may be a factor, but 1mg-2mg daily was all I ever needed. 2mg to get the show on the road, and 1mg to maintain when you get DHT to where you want it. As to the subject of tablet splitting. When you break a pill, or sometimes just take one out of the bottle, a process called "oxidation" begins. Yes, that's the same process that causes iron to "rust. In this case, an ingredient may start to change, or slowly vaporize, or "gas off", or absorb humidity, or whatever. All medicines do this at different rates. As a result, the medicine will lose some effectiveness over time. In the particular case of finasteride, I inquired, and was told it was no concern, unless I left it outdoors on a humid day. When a bottle says "keep in a cool, dry place out of sunlight", that's why. That's why your bottle of PM has a dessicant packed with the pills, to absorb any moisture, so your pills will stay dry and at their full strength. Hopefully, any of us that are buying just the powder are also receiving it packed with dessicant.
As the topic here was originally "testerone blockers", but DHT has been thrown in, may I ask, just for clarity, which one it really is that you are still interested in?
And the answer is: no, or yes, or kinda sorta.
Yes, you can take a DHT blocker, and keep sexual function but, it will not cause you to grow boobs. If you ONLY take the DHT blocker, and no PM, you get to keep the sex part. Or, you can take the DHT blocker and PM. In which case you also get your boobs, BUT you will lose some sexual function. I could tell you to only take a small dose of PM, which would probably keep "most" of your functionality, but at the low dosage required to allow that, you will probably never grow boobs. That may confuse you, but the simple fact is: you can't have it both ways. If you Take only the DHT blocker, everything is cool. To grow boobs, you need to add some estrogenic compound. PM is one. However, to cause boob growth, you're going to need a PM dosage large enough and long enough that it will simultaneously cause a loss in sexual function, since estrogens will overide a certain amount of testerone. How much function you may lose depends on a number of factors, age being one. And another is your T level. In most cases age and T level go hand in hand. Younger men usually have higher T levels. Older men have less. Nature is smart enough to know that us older fellas have no business fathering younguns. Besides raising kids being a real pain in the ass for older guys, it also weakens the gene pool. Thus, us older folks really do have a bit of an advantage, as we require less estrogen flooding and T or Dht blocking to produce results.
A T blocker will simply accelerate your results, as it will block the T AND the DHT. And accelerate your function loss. "The frosting has truly slid right off your cake."
Still confused?
The fact remains: You can't have your jelly beans and eat them too.
A more in-depth explanation may come from another here, but that's the best I can offer.
Yes, you can take a DHT blocker, and keep sexual function but, it will not cause you to grow boobs. If you ONLY take the DHT blocker, and no PM, you get to keep the sex part. Or, you can take the DHT blocker and PM. In which case you also get your boobs, BUT you will lose some sexual function. I could tell you to only take a small dose of PM, which would probably keep "most" of your functionality, but at the low dosage required to allow that, you will probably never grow boobs. That may confuse you, but the simple fact is: you can't have it both ways. If you Take only the DHT blocker, everything is cool. To grow boobs, you need to add some estrogenic compound. PM is one. However, to cause boob growth, you're going to need a PM dosage large enough and long enough that it will simultaneously cause a loss in sexual function, since estrogens will overide a certain amount of testerone. How much function you may lose depends on a number of factors, age being one. And another is your T level. In most cases age and T level go hand in hand. Younger men usually have higher T levels. Older men have less. Nature is smart enough to know that us older fellas have no business fathering younguns. Besides raising kids being a real pain in the ass for older guys, it also weakens the gene pool. Thus, us older folks really do have a bit of an advantage, as we require less estrogen flooding and T or Dht blocking to produce results.
A T blocker will simply accelerate your results, as it will block the T AND the DHT. And accelerate your function loss. "The frosting has truly slid right off your cake."
Still confused?
The fact remains: You can't have your jelly beans and eat them too.
A more in-depth explanation may come from another here, but that's the best I can offer.
i personally take 2000 to 3000 mg a day of saw palmetto. I am not worried about libido, since i have the sex drive of a squash anyway... its actually kind of a relief not being sexually active.. leaves me to persue other avenues of excitement.. such as gardening and my artistry.. but hey thats me.. i am "unique" 
. dont get me wrong, the thought of sex is appealing but not really a major drive in my life anymore...hmm its been like 3 years or so...
. dont get me wrong, the thought of sex is appealing but not really a major drive in my life anymore...hmm its been like 3 years or so...
Ignoring the morality question which is the bigger one, older people having babies is actually good for the gene pool. If you make it to old age, you have demonstrated that your genetic makeup is good for survival and longevity. Just what you would want in a gene pool. I don't think the morality side of it belongs on this forum. And it's always better to eat someone else's jelly beans, if they eat them with you.
(17-05-2012, 05:15 PM)sfem Wrote: Ignoring the morality question which is the bigger one, older people having babies is actually good for the gene pool. If you make it to old age, you have demonstrated that your genetic makeup is good for survival and longevity. Just what you would want in a gene pool. I don't think the morality side of it belongs on this forum. And it's always better to eat someone else's jelly beans, if they eat them with you.
Hmmm. If you have that genetic makeup, you don't need to wait until old age to father the kids, because they will inherit those qualities if you start early; but I'm sure I've read that sperm from older people tends to be more deformed. (God knows what the sperm from older people who take estrogen is like).
Of course, if you want to be a really harsh Darwinist, you could say that if every father waited until old age, then the ones who produce deformed sperm in old age will die out, and that _will_ strengthen the gene pool. But, as long as young people keep breeding, the ones who wait until old age, in my view, will be disadvantaged.
It's all rather moot, as modern society promotes reverse evolution; in high-welfare countries, successful genes produce productive, intelligent people who work hard and pay taxes, and usually restrict the number of kids they have in order to care better for the ones that they do have; they generally can't afford more because they pay so much tax in order to provide for the inheritors of the less successful genes. These people are actively encouraged by the state to breed endlessly as it becomes their major form of income, and they will very soon outnumber the useful members of society, in the UK at least. That's probably why we have opened the doors to mass immigration, but the joke is that many of them come here to claim benefit.
The time of the "Marching Morons" is upon us; and we've made a head start by electing them to represent us in our parliament.
B. (not in any way discussing morality)
(18-05-2012, 12:42 AM)bryony Wrote:(17-05-2012, 05:15 PM)sfem Wrote: Ignoring the morality question which is the bigger one, older people having babies is actually good for the gene pool. If you make it to old age, you have demonstrated that your genetic makeup is good for survival and longevity. Just what you would want in a gene pool. I don't think the morality side of it belongs on this forum. And it's always better to eat someone else's jelly beans, if they eat them with you.
Hmmm. If you have that genetic makeup, you don't need to wait until old age to father the kids, because they will inherit those qualities if you start early; but I'm sure I've read that sperm from older people tends to be more deformed. (God knows what the sperm from older people who take estrogen is like).
Of course, if you want to be a really harsh Darwinist, you could say that if every father waited until old age, then the ones who produce deformed sperm in old age will die out, and that _will_ strengthen the gene pool. But, as long as young people keep breeding, the ones who wait until old age, in my view, will be disadvantaged.
It's all rather moot, as modern society promotes reverse evolution; in high-welfare countries, successful genes produce productive, intelligent people who work hard and pay taxes, and usually restrict the number of kids they have in order to care better for the ones that they do have; they generally can't afford more because they pay so much tax in order to provide for the inheritors of the less successful genes. The less intelligent, but manual labor/welfare class. These people are actively encouraged by the state to breed endlessly as it becomes their major form of income, and they will very soon outnumber the useful members of society, in the UK at least. That's probably why we have opened the doors to mass immigration, but the joke is that many of them come here to claim benefit.
The time of the "Marching Morons" is upon us; and we've made a head start by electing them to represent us in our parliament.
B. (not in any way discussing morality)
I don't think this has anything to do with morality. This is also true in America. The intelligent people are choosing not to have children while we export all of our manual labor to people that breed like rabbits. This is backfiring in America as well. I think we are well on our way to Idiocracy. (stupid movie, but excellent premise)
(advertisement)