Is that an early presentation of what the Baylor study would be?
Does anyone know how many participants Baylor had and if any of the participants have committed suicide? If yes, then this is the same sample.
So it basically says we are fucked forever, and that it needs further investigation, hmm nothing new to me for that conclusion they needed almost 7 years, what a joke.
4 Likes
2 suicides in their series, exclamation point! and it gets a like. Talk about a disconnect.
Ive somewhat been paying attention to this. This has to be the Baylor study. I wouldnt get too discouraged, Ive seen hundreds of studies on Accutane. Lets keep moving.
I am interested in the opinions of the admins who were involved in this study. Are we wrong about this being the baylor study, and this being the outcome? Sorry for bothering, I am too curious. @axolotl @awor
This definitely looks like the Baylor study, or some form of it.
1 Like
Hi, yes. This is an additional publication with regards to the same cohort. They have also conducted a full genome expression analysis per a further protocol.
2 Likes
So it looks like the long wait is over. There we have it: the Baylor study (part 1).
2 Likes
Let the waiting game begin again! @MOONCHILD was right in the end. He told us this would happen, and was critisised for doing so.
3 Likes
I would say based on what happened during the course of this study it would have a lasting impact on this Dr to continue to pursue things or not let this go for the long-term.
Except he isn’t? This appears to be a paper from them but isn’t the study itself, part 1 or 2. Do you really think they spent all this time writing a single page?
No, this is the abstract, they wrote more ofcourse, this is just the summary, but the conclusion is nothing new. What else would it be? They describe the methods, results, conclusions, this is a study. Did they do more studies, and is this one of the several they did? I thought they only did one? I think this is part 1, and part 2 will be about the epigenome. I hope I am totally wrong and stupid for concluding this.
1 Like
I’d be shocked if this is part I.
25 guys filling out a questionnaire and getting penile test took 7 years with all those doctors involved on the cover? I doubt it
No need to talk about being stupid, but perhaps it’s best not be so keen to draw immediate conclusions, as - as with any thread on this subject - it’s already getting misleading. To clarify: this is not the research that had been previously announced long ago, it is an additional clinical research paper involving the same cohort from the same investigative process. Papers are stand alone affairs. So, “A study from Baylor” is more appropriate than “the Baylor study”, which would surely imply this is the final result of the expression analysis Awor helped design and had been announced by the foundation as the focus of the project.
Hope this helps.
6 Likes
At Baylors pace it will take another 100 years. 
2 Likes
I guess this correlates back to the September 14th seminar that Khera gave titled “The reality of post finasteride syndrome” That no one could ever find out anymore about either…Why it took this long? No clue and the reality of pfs for those of us who have it appears to be…Grim.
1 Like
There were 2 suicides in Dr. Khera’s sample. Apparently that did not result in a big sense of urgency for Dr. Khera as it took him 7 years to complete the preliminary stage of the study.
3 Likes
I was actually thinking something like that could have really held up this study for ethical and legal reasons when people talk about why did it take so long. Its still sad one of the top specialists studying PFS couldnt help these people in time. Hopefully now though there’s a group of Drs willing to fight for this cause and see this through.
I really wonder where all the more significant findings are that were promised to us many months ago? Did Dr. Khera’s cat eat them?
I.e., part one of the baylor study, just like @MOONCHILD said. Or are we to believe that Baylor wants to publish 3 parts??
1 Like
Is this a somewhat criptive way of saying this abstract is one part, and the other more significant part (epigenome) will also be released, and I assume, later? I get this part above is not what was previously anounced long ago, but still, this is exactly the 2 part story @MOONCHILD was talking about. He said, first some irrelavant part comes out, and 2ndly the epigenome part. This seems to be exactly what is happening here, with the study above being the irrelevant one. I mean no offence by this btw, just want things clear, since u seem to have more information on this then we do.
2 Likes