Latest headlines

Loading...

Propecia Generic For Male Pattern Baldness

The drug propecia generic was originally intended for treating prostate enlargement or benign prostatic hyperplasia. When its branded name Proscar was released in the market, it was noticed that men who were suffering from androgenic alopecia were also being treated by the drug.  It was then that the manufacturer took notice and created some clinical studies and found out that Proscar, which came at 5mg, which at lowered dosage, particularly 1mg, could help fight androgenic alopecia.  Several years later, the brand Propecia, an offshoot of the drug Proscar was approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a treatment for androgenic alopecia.

Who is propecia generic intended for?

Propecia generic is meant for men suffering from male pattern baldness and want to stop the progression of their hair loss.  Signs of male pattern baldness would be the thinning of hair on the front, the receding of hairline on the temples, and the formation of a bald spot on the crown.  In due time, this type of baldness will let you end up bald from top to front with a rim of hair at the sides and back.  propecia generic is effective against this type of hair loss because it is able to treat it at the root of the cause – the formation of the hormone dihydrotestosterone (DHT).  Basically, this hair loss treatment prevents your hair loss from getting any worse.  If your hair loss is due to androgenic alopecia, then this is the medication for you.  Consult your doctor to know what type of hair loss you are having. Read more…

Publishing Rorschach info lands SK doc in hot water


Most complaints against rural Saskatchewan doctors go unremarked upon in the pages of the United States's paper of record, the New York Times. But not the ones just recently filed with the provincial regulatory college against Moose Jaw emergency physician James Heilman.

According to the Times article, two psychologists have filed complaints against Dr Heilman because he added to Wikipedia the ten famous Rorschach inkblots and common responses and interpretations of those responses -- images and information which some think should have been kept secret from patients to preserve the test's viability. (It should be noted that the images are in the public domain, and Dr Heilman has done nothing illegal.)

It's a fascinating situation. Can the test really be rendered impotent by the publication of the images online? Is Dr Heilman's decision to expand public understanding unethical because of the consequences some psychologists allege it may have? Are those allegations reasonable? Is this Rorschach matter somehow distinguishable from, say, the publication of DSM diagnostic criteria, particularly the criteria that could conceivably garner patients prescriptions to powerful drugs?

None of these are easy questions to answer, but they may be important ones to address as patients increasingly consult the internet about medical questions, and other privileged professional information makes its way online.

For those who are interested, this is the Wikipedia page where the inkblots and information bout them appear. An entire page at Wikipedia is devoted to debating the inclusion of the images, and itself some interesting material to think about.

Get Canadian Medicine news by email or in an RSS reader

5 comments:

  1. sharonAugust 31, 2009 at 9:44 AM

    This paste from the wikipedia puts the good doctor's actions into perspective:

    'outlines of the ten official inkblots were first made publicly available by William Poundstone in his 1983 book Big Secrets, which also described the method of administering the test. The blots are in the public domain in most countries, particularly those with a copyright term of up to 70 years "post mortem auctoris"'

    end of paste

    One might liken these gestures to the times when the Bible and Foxes' Book of Martyrs were" chained to the church pews". The thinking was too easily labelled as " ignorance is bliss" when the truth was the " toothless wolf syndrome"in the clergy.

    As for me, I fear the "bits and bytes" appetite of the medical consumer puts them into the category of " a little learning is a dangerous thing".

    But I also fear that many physicians fit into that category and patient discomfort ends up labelling all physicians under the title " a liitle leaven leavens the whole lump".

    Yikes.... 30 years ago physicians would freak at the concept of the Merck Manual ( their Bible) being available to the public...as it is now.

    What to do?

    The medical practitioner now has a discerning audience...the real challenge is to be skilled enough to meet their challenges and expectations in diagnostic and treatment skill.

    Delete
  2. sharonOctober 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM

    P.S. Inkblot shown is definately a " puppy mill" bat ( too many wings) :)

    Delete
  3. OBAT KUATOctober 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM

    greetings for the success of your content creators. I thank you. obat perangsang wanita
    obat kuat pria
    obat kuat alami
    resep obat kuat
    jual obat kuat
    ramuan obat kuat
    obat kuat tradisional
    obat kuat herbal

    Delete
  4. mainanOctober 3, 2014 at 10:00 AM

    very interesting info that I personally really like all

    Delete
  5. alat sexOctober 3, 2014 at 10:00 AM

    thanks for the info friend or content you created here, I sukali it. greetings from us in obat perangsang wanita
    alat sex wanita
    alat vital wanita
    alat bantu sex
    alat sex murah
    jual alat sex
    toko obat sex
    jual alat bantu wanita
    toko alat bantu wanita
    jual beli wanita
    alat bantu pria wanita
    kondom wanita
    alat bantu vital
    alat bantu wanita dewasa
    cara pakai alat bantu wanita

    Delete