Call to action! PFS Denial Article!

General Discussion Media & Awareness
#1

Can we all please comment in response to this idiot’s article?

While I applaud efforts to obtain better evidence about the possible side effects of finasteride and communicate that information to patients, the public discussion about this issue seems to be troublingly skewed toward worst-case scenarios and personal stories highlighting speculative harms of the drug. The JAMA Dermatology meta-analysis did not find any evidence for a life-altering impact of finasteride, just that studies consistently failed to provide sufficient data to adequately characterize the potential harms of the drug. And yet the media coverage of the topic, based on these individual stories, presents an extremely dire portrait.

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2015/08/advocacy-group-spins-harms-from-post-finasteride-syndrome/

1 Like
#2

Not sure if my comment will go through so posting it here.

Dear Dr. David Hoffman,

I work in the hair transplant industry and advise against the use of Propecia. Too many men are coming forward exhibiting signs of sexual dysfunction as a consequence of taking this drug. I am at a loss to understand your article, when even eminent hair transplant physicians acknowledge the damage this drug can cause.

Check out the following forum topic, which contradicts your dismissive attitude towards this very real syndrome: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180442-long-term-side-effects-propecia-post-finasteride-syndrome-does-exist.html

It is an insult to the men who’ve lost their lives or experienced the spectrum of side effects associated with this drug to say that this is all “speculative”. I suggest you read up on the topic some more before writing in any authoritative tone about it again.

Check out this map for over a thousand individual stories which are taken from PropeciaHelp.com: http://j.mp/1hyUSQu

Check out the PFS Foundation’s website and read about the medical support for PFS and the ongoing clinical trials, three of which are ongoing and due to release in the next year, in conjunction with litigation against Merck: http://www.pfsfoundation.org/

#3

Probably on Merck’s payroll. Suffice to say he’s never talked to a victim and I really don’t care what he thinks… people have killed themselves from this and some of their families are speaking out. The thing with PFS is, you can get hit with it and it can be extremely dire, because the side effects are often times permanent if you get it. There isn’t much go between, your stuck with it or not (apart from a handful of self reported cases on here with recoveries), anytime someone risks permanent side effects for their hair… yeah thats pretty dire I’d say.

1 Like
#4

On a side note someone sent a message here awhile back, now I don’t know who this person really is in real life, or even remember their user name here. But it was something to the extent of this: “Oh you’ve been off Propecia for several years now, you should be almost 100% recovered then?”

It’s times like that I wish I could virtually slap someone through my computer screen. Moronic; the sexual side effects haven’t gotten better at all, the mental ones have only improved, the mind is such a subjective thing regardless I do not think any of the side effects I will ever truly 100% recover from.

#5

Let’s hope when the studies are released they are held accountable for their dangerous words.

And if they have a shred of moral integrity, I wish them many a sleepless night, but they probably don’t.

#6

Hi everyone,

I see a few comments are already being approved on this article. PLEASE be aware that if you are hostile, your comment WILL NOT be approved, so consider being diplomatic and civil, as difficult as that might be!

In addition to commenting, I think it would be effective to email the guy doctor for this article.

His name and contact is:

Richard M. Hoffman, MD, MPH
rhoffman@unm.edu

If you can tell him your experience and perhaps ask questions like, what he thinks we should be doing if not warning others about this dangerous drug?

I am sure we all have 10-15 minutes in the day to do these two small tasks, so please do this!

#7

I commented again since the first one didn’t get approved:

Dr. Richard Hoffman,
I thought it was important to clarify some points in your article.
You write that Dr. Santmann is “described as an emergency medicine-trained physician and health informaticist.” I’d like to point out that Dr. Santmann – as is clearly stated in his bio on the website – “earned his M.D. from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and his B.A., in biophysics, from the Johns Hopkins University.” If you doubted that this was true, you could simply call those schools – or the hospitals he worked at – to confirm it. In addition, if you doubt that he runs a medical-software company, they only need to Google him – or even drive to his office – to see that he has been in that position for over a decade. Hence, Dr. Santmann is not “described” as those things. He IS those things.
You also note that Dr. Belknap’s study was published in “JAMA Dermatology (not the more prestigious JAMA).” First of all, the email advisory issued by the PFS Foundation links directly to the JAMA Dermatology page, so anyone going to that page can see the actual source. Secondly, JAMA Dermatology is the exact same publisher as as JAMA, so trying to imply there’s any difference in the public’s mind is like saying Diet Coke is a less impactful brand than regular Coke.

#8

Just read Dr. Hoffman’s column and had to laugh at how absurd it is.

As just one example, he writes:

"In highlighting the growing concerns about this condition, the Foundation cites ongoing studies at prominent institutions–implying that this has become a priority research issue. However, these studies were actually funded by the Foundation, in part to “‘help establish PFS as a bona fide condition.’”

With the words “actually funded” he’s implying he has exposed some truth here – like the foundation had been hiding some evil deed. But – duh! – right on the advisory itself, it says:

“Please note that there are currently no effective treatments for PFS. However, the PFS Foundation has to date funded three research initiatives seeking to identify the root causes of the condition.”

So his “investigative reporting” is to tell the world what the foundation itself said?

Moreover, he makes no mention of ALL the other, non-foundation-funded research clearly housed on the foundation’s website. If he were look over all that research, would he come to the conclusion that 10 or so highly reputable researchers who have published studies in highly reputable journals are all liars? That there’s zero truth to the fact that finasteride causes persistent damage?

#9

Good points PR, make sure you post them on the article. Be nice though, or they won’t be approved :wink:

#10

I stole your comments PR123, just in case you wondered :laughing:

#11

Happy to see you use anything.

Dr. Hoffman, needs to be brought down a notch.

It’s hard imagine a medical doctor being a psychopath, but that’s what we have here.

What’s worse is that Kenneth C. Frazier isn’t even man enough to do his own dirty work. So he gets these bozos to do it form him.

Always remember: Frazier = Cosby. They are cut from the same cloth.

#12

All the comments have been negative, and that’s the ones they APPROVED, so imagine those that weren’t.

At least we’re being talked about and at least we have a strong voice to fight back.

#13

Agreed! If lowlifes like this want to try and shift attention away from Merck’s manslaughter by attacking the heroic forces that are doing their best to clean up the company’s mess, let them try.

But we shall march out in great numbers each and every time.

And we shall say unto the victims of ALL Merck’s pernicious medications:

“Out of the courtrooms and into the streets!”

We shall overcome the evil force that is Kenneth C. Frazier. And we shall look upon this corporate creature with pity. For he has no soul and can never be redeemed.

Then we shall stand before all of humanity, vindicated and once again dignified.

(Can ah gets me a big fat Amen?)

#14

And one more thing.

I read the Health News Review story yet again, and am still unable to believe how absurd it is.

Case in point: the story is billed as a “guest post” by Dr. Hoffman, clearly implying that this is both the opinion of Dr. Hoffman and was produced 100% by his own hand. That is the definition of such a piece of journalism, be it an op-ed in the New York Times or contribution to the Huffington Post by a guest blogger.

The only edits that can ethically be made on such a piece of journalism are for length and clarity. And even that should be generally disclosed within the respective section of the media outlet.

However…

At the end of Dr. Hoffman’s post, we read that “Additional reporting for this post was contributed by Kevin Lomangino,” who is the managing editor of Health News Review.

Several questions:

-If Dr. Hoffman is such a wise man, why does he need someone to help him with his “reporting” – on an opinion piece, no less?

-So in the end, is it an editorial or a hard-news story featuring original reporting?

-Who had the initial idea for this “post”? Was it Lomangino or Dr. Hoffman? As is general practice, the lead author (Hoffman in this case) is basically the boss of the contributor. So Dr. Hoffman says to Lomangino (I am speculating), “Here’s an interesting story, but I need you to do some legwork for me – namely, call the NIH and ask them how they interpret what they themselves clearly posted on their own website. Also, comb through the PFS Foundation site looking for any little thing we can possible hold up and raise questions about as MAYBE skewing ‘discussion on finasteride side effects’”? If any of that is the case, it’s not really a GUEST post, is it? It’s the publication using Dr. Hoffman to try and validate ideas it wants to put forth, specifically to raise doubts on the validity of the foundation’s efforts to prevent men the world over from ruining their lives or even TAKING their own lives.

#15

Yes it would seem they are using Hoffman as their token medical professional to add credibility to their publications potentially biased opinion on Finasteride. I wonder if Merck supplies funding for this publication in some way.

#16

Good point – and one I already thought of.

This publication is funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation:

arnoldfoundation.org/

If you cross-reference the Arnolds with Merck, you will see that they travel in the same milieu, shall we say. So there’s probably a good chance that Kenneth C. Frazier has made a donation to their foundation, or vice-versa.

But as I said earlier, if you’re not rocking the giant, you’re now making progress.

So it’s safe to assume we are making progress.

And we will KEEP making progress until justice is done and Kenneth C. Frazier is behind bars – along with his merry band of Dr. Josef Mengele wanna-bes.

Go tell it on the mountain,
Over the hill and everywhere…