What do you think is a realistic expectation for the study findings?
1 Like
Hi @dj91,
The following is my opinion and I would not read anything more into what I say than is explicitly here. I do not know precise specifics and in that regard need to wait for the paper like everyone else, as what matters is what is published. That said, I do consider this the most important and promising PFS research undertaken. I expect, due to the science that underpins the reasoning for the study in the first place, the history of patient experiences and previous primary findings, that there is site specific persistent dysregulation of gene expression that varies between patients in terms of affected sites, number of genes and magnitude for reasons I’m working on contextually explaining. So I expect to see this in the site and cell lines they are looking at. Just as we see in the decade of this forum, there is a clear phenotypical variance in the symptoms and severity of the patients who have discussed their participation in the study. Having reviewed posts and subsequent letters from family, two patients in the study have since taken their own lives (that I’m aware of), while others were still quite able to get on with their lives and described a more functional impairment.
In terms of realistic expectation: I am personally cautiously optimistic of significant insight, with caveats. This is more complicated than many appreciate and a lot will depend on what they are able to conclude from the data in terms of mechanistic factors. It could be groundbreaking, it could be vague. It really depends how far they’ve gone. Sadly, I can’t pretend concerns are unreasonable regarding the potential for externally influential factors affecting the publication. More than one scientist has told me personally of a wider obstruction, and the fact of the matter is there’s money involved with this issue, as with many injustices. I will say that nothing I have heard points to a concern regarding that in this instance, however. I am pleased by a conclusive view in the literature review the chief researcher published.
22 Likes
Cheers to the good guys!
7 Likes
Some time I think that so more many people need to bee fucked by Finasteride before the government, others medical institutions and the international community take cards in the issue.
1 Like
I read somewhere that only 20% of peer reviewed studies are accepted.
Does anyone know if that’s true ?
The only worry I have is that even if they find something, will this explain all the symptoms? Neurological problems, etc.
Do you guys know when the study is coming out?
To the speed that is moving maybe next year or so, probably Merck and news press are reviewing to approval the release, possible trying to negotiate to modify the data.
1 Like
someone said a couple months. look up some posts, cant remember when exactly, but recently.
1 Like
It’s in peer review so no set timeline, but usually it’s a 3-6 month process that started a month or so ago
1 Like
I think people with chronic diseases go through similar motions when major studies relating to their condition are close to being released. We went through something similar with the Havard study. Folk heading to Harvard to be part of the study were hoping to get some answers while they were there. Unfortunately, the outcome was not what we expected.
It’s important that as many people as possible take part in the survey. That maybe our best shot at getting a major study completed on our condition.
Still we had the prep medication surprise and some folk here are seriously looking into stem cells and other treatments so who knows what the future might bring. We are a curious bunch and some of us have the means and motivation to make things happen. People will continue to take Fin and new members will arrive with their own journeys that we may learn from. Let’s just not take any unnecessary risks in the meantime and stay safe.
8 Likes
Any updates on the study ?
I don’t know if I should feel optimistic about the Baylor study or if it would be better not to have high expectations to avoid more disappointments…
I think I’ll cross fingers and forget about it for a while
In my personal opinion, Baylor will have ZERO finding, believe me.
I have been there several times with the " lead doctor", the last time was less than a month. I know what I am talking about.
I got zero treatment advice.
I got more fucking hormone test that I need none one.
I just went there and been charged just to see his face, I won’t see him no more.
I don’t want to kill your hope on that study, but I just have none one.
4 Likes
Well, if as you say they find nothing, I hope they have a good reason for having needed 6 years to finish a study in which they end up finding nothing.
I was 23 when they launched that study, I will turn 30 in two months. It’s almost impossible to believe that they needed so much time.
The study will probably be published during the next weeks, so let’s hope you are wrong.
9 Likes
I heard someone mention Baylor found “significant findings” back when the study was launched I wonder if they have since retracted their claims?
1 Like
Think about it, 7000 genes, so far 35 participants, 6 years, and now is when they are analyzing the data, and comparing with the control.
1- What technology are they using?
80’s computers operating with DOS?
With today computers all those genes of the 35 people are analyzed in just one week, and I know what I am taking about.
6 years …this is embarrassing.
I feel pity for those that paid $2000 for participate, I am glad that I didn’t.
4 Likes
No offence man but why would they give you treatment advice based on the results of the study before it’s even been released?
1 Like
I’m hopelessly optimistic but I agree I really don’t think this study is going to provide anything of much value at least in terms of treatment. Best we have coming is Sage.
2 Likes