44 replies to this topic

[Sheefa]

Have a sex drive and no problems at the moment whilst on Tane?? Great, but as proven research shows men are very likely to suffer later on during or after treatment. See the below extract from an excellent book I am reading to try and counteract my post-tane serious side effects.

Dr Pezzi – Science of Sex

While there are many drugs that interfere with one or more aspects of sexuality while the user is taking them, with few exceptions all of these problems resolve once the drug is discontinued. One drug that can permanently affect libido and sexual pleasure in some people is Accutane® (isotretinoin) used in the treatment of severe recalcitrant nodular acne.

Roche Laboratories, the manufacturer of Accutane, claims to be unaware of any such adverse effects. However, I have firsthand knowledge that their ignorance of this matter is, well, fishy. I called Roche in January of 1991 to discuss this problem, and they claimed to have never heard of any link between Accutane and long-term sexual dysfunction. When I called again in March of 1999 I was told the same thing, which caused me to question their credibility. They’d never heard of it? Bull. I’ve heard of several cases, and I am not exactly the clearinghouse for the adverse effects of Accutane. Roche states that the “exact mechanism of action of Accutane is unknown.” Well, if they don’t even know how it suppresses acne, perhaps they are equally unaware of how it affects the body in other ways. The case that I presented to Roche in 1991 was one that should have caused them to seriously consider that Accutane’s sexual effects were a cause for concern. In this case, the patient took several courses of Accutane over a period of years. With each course of treatment, the patient experienced reduced libido and altered sexual sensation. Instead of being pleasant, his sexual sensation was markedly unpleasant and felt similar to the sensation that people perceive when they strike their “funny bone” (ulnar nerve at the elbow). These symptoms would decrease somewhat when the patient stopped taking Accutane, but they never totally resolved. The patient concluded that the problems would abate entirely once he had been off Accutane for a longer time. The patient took additional courses of Accutane over the following years to control his acne, each time experiencing an exacerbation of the symptoms while on the Accutane and a reduction in the symptoms after discontinuing Accutane. After the final course of Accutane, the patient was alarmed that the symptoms persisted for more than a decade.

Whenever a scientist is presented with a case in which reintroduction of a drug induced problems that had abated once the drug was discontinued, and this concordance between symptoms and drug use continued over a number of cycles, it is virtually impossible to conclude that there is no connection between the drug and the problem. Therefore, Roche should not have dismissed or ignored the case I reported to them. While I know of several cases linking Accutane and long-term sexual dysfunction, I am certain there are many cases that have not yet come to my attention. Besides me, there are millions of other doctors in the world who may have fielded similar reports from their patients.

Furthermore, I think that many people just suffer in silence if they have a sexual problem since it can be very difficult to discuss your sex life with someone even if he is a physician. The patient discussed above waited eight years before he mustered the courage to discuss his problem, and he is probably not the only one who is reluctant to discuss sexual dysfunction. I would like to hear from you (see the Contact Me information on page 6) if you have experienced any sexual problems related to the use of Accutane. I will present a comprehensive report to Roche, and I will keep you updated on the search to find a solution to this problem. Additional information on this topic will be posted on my web site (www.sexualtips.net). The mechanism by which Accutane causes sexual dysfunction is not known, but I suspect that it has multiple modes of action. I think it interferes with the proper functioning of some sensory peripheral nerves, or their receptors, or the brain’s response to the nerve data, thus greatly distorting tactile fidelity (a subject I will discuss in detail later in this chapter). This disturbance of fidelity is not necessarily confined to the genitals; Accutane has been associated with a dysesthetic tingling on nongenital skin, the course and intensity of which seems to parallel the unpleasant sexual “hit your funny bone” tingling. These dysesthesias may persist for a few seconds after the inciting stimulus is removed. If you lightly touch your skin, for example, the sensation usually ends when the contact ceases. In contrast, Accutane-induced dysesthesias may take seconds to fade away.

I think that Accutane decreases responsiveness to testosterone, at least in those areas of the brain that control libido. What is the treatment?

• Discontinue Accutane now. I understand that it can be a difficult decision to choose between clear skin or a satisfying sex life. I cannot make this decision for you, but I can tell you what I would do: stop the Accutane. Physicians have many other ways to treat acne besides Accutane. I would rather use a less powerful therapy and spare my sex life. Every year, I hear from many patients who wish they’d done the same thing.
• Try relatively high-dose supplemental vitamin B6 (but avoid excessive doses that may induce a peripheral neuropathy; see the vitamin B6 section for more information).
• Try other supplements, herbs, and drugs, as discussed elsewhere in this book.
• Stringently avoid other things that may decrease the testosterone level or effect (such as phytoestrogens and antiandrogens).
• Consider using supplemental testosterone. It is useless to use your blood testosterone level to gauge whether or not this is necessary. Judging from tests conducted on people with Accutane-induced sexual dysfunction, Accutane does not seem to appreciably lower the blood testosterone level. What it apparently does is partially block some of the effects of testosterone. This decreased responsiveness is analogous to someone who is hard of hearing. To some extent, you can compensate for their disability by speaking louder. A partially deaf ear needs more sound, and someone who is less responsive to testosterone needs more testosterone. Of course, there are drawbacks to the use of supplemental testosterone. Because the testosterone susceptibility of most areas of the body is not affected, increasing the testosterone level enough to restore libido and sexual sensation may trigger unwanted changes elsewhere, such as alopecia and acne (ha isn't that IRONIC!! - Acne!)
• If you are a man, avoid things that increase your estrogen level.
• Avoid things that increase sex hormone binding globulin.

Be patient. The dysesthesias tend to diminish in time, although it may take years. Your perception of sexual pleasure will likely increase, too, although it may not return to your pre-Accutane zenith. The elimination half-life (that is, the time it takes for half of an administered drug to be excreted) suggests that Accutane does not persist in the body for a long time. The drug may not stick around for long, but its effects do. It is as if Accutane flips some switches in the body. This is true for its intended effect (the long-term suppression of acne), and its sexual side effects. Once flipped, those effects are permanent, or at least very long lasting.

Hence, you should think twice before using Accutane. There is no way to know in advance if your use of Accutane will trigger dysesthesias and reduced sensation. You may take it for a while without any problems, and then wake up with enough sensory abnormalities to make you wonder if your spinal cord was mashed in a vice while you slept. Being cheated out of life’s greatest pleasure is a terrible fate. Are you willing to take that risk?

[moreGano]

been reading this book for awhile now, thanks for posting

[Sheefa]

Bump. I am keeping this at the top for all the men out there.

[Evie Conrad]

been reading this book for awhile now, thanks for posting

I can't comment on whether someone is posting under different user names but I think the other accusations, made against "NCC" etc are unfair.

There is an element of "flaming" in very many of the comments, which people make about Accutane on the Internet. Raising the subject can make some people very angry. On the whole, what they say is factually correct and their anger is righteous.

I reject the suggestion that "NCC" is a "troll". He/ she knows far more about Accutane than most pharmacologists. Perhaps you aren't as interested in the subject and so, to you, he/ she seems obsessive. I, on the other hand, admire his/her dedication.

I can understand why he/ she keeps making the same points. The Accutane saga has very important implications for everyone because it highlights extremely serious shortcomings in the supervision, training and education of doctors; and the so-called regulation of the pharmaceutical industry. Politicians and bureaucrats allow drug companies to do whatever they like because they have so much money.

A significant proportion of prescription drugs are neither safe nor effective. Iatrogenic disease is now the second-largest cause of death in the United States (for which man is directly responsible) after incidents involving firearms (many of which are accidents).

Yet, no one wants to know. Most media organisations are either scared of Big Pharma or in cahoots with it. People generally believe what they want to believe and most patients want to think that there is a pill for every ill. The answer is only a prescription away. That's neat; convenient. No one has to worry. This is medicine as a security blanket rather than an effective way of treating the causes of disease or- Heaven forbid- maintaining good health.

Actually, any patient, who still has this approach to treatment [i.e. who trusts doctors and drug companies completely and takes no real interest himself/ herself] is putting his/her life at risk, without knowing it. Medicine is just a business, like any other. Would you have absolute faith in a motor mechanic, plumber, electrician or builder? Very few people would. Most of us check what's being done and, over time, we acquire the necessary knowledge. However, when it comes to medicine, the usual reaction is "Oh, this has to do with chemistry or something. I'll shut down my brain and leave it to the guy with the stethoscope, the nice suit and the impressive certificates on the wall". Well, duh, exactly how do the props make a doctor more reliable than any other tradesman?

Truth be told, the average doctor hasn't a scientific bone in his body. As even some doctors admit, the practice of medicine usually depends on a series of confidence tricks. In the 21st Century, that is no longer acceptable to those, who believe in pure science and think that standards in healthcare matter. If people want hocus-pocus and ritual, then they should go to churches, synagogues or mosques. There should be no place within medicine for quackery and virtual faith healing (but faith healing using drugs, which have the potential to cause very serious unwanted effects).

That is exactly what most doctors practice- often unwittingly. The "evidence" of corporate science, which has been bought by commercial interests, isn't worth a dime, so why do people still accept it? When all the arguments of the pro-Pharma brigade have been defeated, they usually fall back on "It's the best there is." It isn't. Where there's a will, there's a way: the information that patients really need almost always exists. They just need to take the time to find it but that requires courage, energy and a degree of scepticism. Many people lack those qualities.

Naturally, drug companies and doctors (who gain power, wealth and status as the cardinals and priests, respectively, of their pseudo-religion) are delighted to go along with patients' foolish desire to consume large quantities of toxic chemicals. No one should forget the words of Paracelsus (a rare example of a Swiss German with high, humanistic ideals but he was around in the 14th Century) which were often tought to first-year medical students, in the old days.

"Everything is a poison and only the dose determines whether something is poisonous or not."

What Paracelsus would have thought of prescribing a cell-destroying chemo drug at 8 or 16 times the dose, which might have been used by an oncologist [had the drug been licensed for its original intended purpose], for the treatment of teenage acne, one can only guess. With few exceptions, chemo drugs are used as a last-ditch effort to extend the life of someone with terminal cancer. They are not prescribed for something, which is fairly normal; from which 70% of adolescents suffer with no long-term effects; which, according to textbooks, usually lasts about two years. Dermatologists must, therefore, bear more of the blame than Roche: they had a duty of care to their patients. The drug company didn't (although, in my view, it had a moral duty to be honest to the licensing authorities and to the doctors, to whom it sent its propaganda). The drug was licensed solely for the treatment of the most severe form of acne (from which only 3% of acne patients suffer, by dermatologists' own admission) but over 90% of prescriptions were for mild or moderate acne. Would any dermatologist like to explain that? The obvious reason is that they are a bunch of robots, who will do whatever powerful interests tell them to do and couldn't care less about their patients.

Many people in Europe think of Thalidomide as the most dangerous drug, ever licensed. That is only because its victims were babies and the Western World idolises young children (thus sowing the seeds for feral teenagers but that's another story). The media lapped it up. Hacks were similarly overjoyed, when it was discovered, in 2009, that Thalidomide had been developed by the SS and tested on death-camp inmates.. I haven't looked into this story in detail but would be prepared to wager a substantial amount that the SS were aided by a chemical/drug company like IG Farben (manufacturer of Zyklon B, which was used in Nazi gas chambers, and the company, from which Pfizer, now the biggest drug company in the World, is descended).

Accutane was much more dangerous than Thalidomide and has affected far more people. Dr Werner Bollag [head of Roche's cancer-research division in the 1960s and 1970s], the man who practically created Roaccutane, realised his "Frankenstein drug", Accutane, was worse than Thalidomide and stopped development work on it. Work only started again (and the drug was only licensed for acne treatment) because the marketing department of Roche's American subsidiary was determined to get it on to the market, at all costs. The costs, of course, were human; while the profits were exclusively Roche's. The company's scientists still had their reservations but were obviously unable to express them publicly at the time. Several Roche employees (or former employees) spoke out, in later years.

Here's another important difference: Thalidomide was banned. Accutane and its generic forms are still in use, around the World. More victims are being created, every month. Doctors are still giving potential recipients misleading information, so that they and their parents are not in a position to make an informed choice. That is a crucial moral and legal point, which many teenagers may have missed: it is only informed consent that keeps doctors out of jail.

The manufacturer and the regulatory bodies (FDA, MHRA etc] are no more open than they were in the 1980s. Only the Internet and the battles fought by a few crusaders, such as Liam Grant and Michael D Hook, make information more readily available. The victims of 2010 are almost as much in the dark as the victims of the 1990s. Anyone, who warns acne sufferers (and Accutane victims) of Accutane's true nature and risks, is doing society a tremendous service.

I dare say that, when the pharmaceutical industry is properly regulated, and scientific and medical freedom are granted [i.e. when patients have the rights to be given full and accurate information and to decide what sort of treatment they will have], there will be no need for anyone to warn us of the dangers of Accutane on www.acne.org. The guardians of this web site will be able to relax.

When people take the metaphorical cotton wool out of their ears, the victims, their relatives and those, who simply know the difference between right and wrong, will stop shouting.

[Wynne]

Ummmm. Yeah. There's proof that alll of those persons are one and the same.

[abcabc]

Read that book too. It's good to see that at least one doctor will come out and talk about it, but it hasn't helped me. I've had major ED problems caused by Accutane for about 8 years now and don't see it ever being fully fixed.

[jacobden]

Here comes the bumping of the 2 year old threads again, and the ranting of the "doctors" that write books for profit, the people that have ED out of the 20+ million of accutane users are probably under the .00001%, and people that get it 10+ years after completing accutane did Not get it from accutane. Many have gotten ed in their 20's and 30's and never took accutane, and doctors dont find a reason, just the ones that have have something to blame now. But the very few that have gotten it while on accutane probably have some sort of hormonal problems from it.

edit: I removed a 0 for you

Edited by jacobden, 23 October 2010 - 03:32 PM.

[abcabc]

Well, I am one of those .000001% who have suffered from Accutane induced ED. I love how you use ridiculously low statistics in your posts like you know what you are talking about. I don't know 100% for sure that Accutane caused my ED, but I am going to use my common sense on this one. Before I took Accutane in 1999 my junk worked great. A year after my course, my junk didn't work at all. Now I guess maybe it wasn't the Accutane because there is now way I could ever prove it 100% true, but after seeing other people post the same problem on sites like these, I can pretty much assume what caused my problem. You don't just lose the ability to get an erection in your sexual prime without a good reason when previously everything was great. So, I know you love Accutane, but believe it or not stuff like this has happened. If you don't like reading stuff like this, then don't. Nobody is holding a gun to your head, and people who have posted their sufferings on here don't want to hear what you have to say.

[Evie Conrad]

Here comes the bumping of the 2 year old threads again, and the ranting of the "doctors" that write books for profit, the people that have ED out of the 20+ million of accutane users are probably under the .00001%, and people that get it 10+ years after completing accutane did Not get it from accutane. Many have gotten ed in their 20's and 30's and never took accutane, and doctors dont find a reason, just the ones that have have something to blame now. But the very few that have gotten it while on accutane probably have some sort of hormonal problems from it.

edit: I removed a 0 for you

1. I had not joined this forum, two years ago.

2. I am very pleased to say I am not a physician.

3. The use of the term "ranting" is completely subjective and largely meaningless.

4. The number of people, who have used Accutane is not, to the best of my knowledge, "20 + million". I think it would be three or four million short of that. Of course, you may have taken your information straight from Roche. If you did, I apologise. You must know what you are talking about. Apologists for multi-billionaire, child-poisoning Nazi collaborators from Switzerland would have access to all sorts of information, which has been withheld from doctors and patients.

5. "0.00001%" is a strange way to express the fraction. This is just a figure of speech, like "95% of people I know think that...". If you were to consult Meyler's Side Effects (which your friends at Roche will have in their library) or the official statistics and drug reports of the regulatory bodies, you would see that the numbers of Accutane patients affected by impotence are significant. More than any other side effect, impotence will be under-reported. Neither patients nor doctors want to discuss it. Men never want to admit that they have problems in this area. "Hey, everyone, I can't get it up!" is not something you'll hear a guy say.

6. As I have said before, testosterone levels have very, very little to do with erectile dysfunction. This is the sort of clutching at straws, which many urologists attempted, when patients first reported Accutane-related ED. They didn't bother looking up reference books either.

"Oh, come, come, now, Johnny..." [Johnny was thinking "If only I could, you b****rd."] "... you probably fell off your little bicycle, while doing your paper round. That's a well-known cause of life-long impotence. Or perhaps you ran into a bunch of rednecks, were mistaken for a serial sex offender and castrated while under anaesthesia, which removed all memories of the event. Or, better still, you were transported to a passing space craft, crewed by orally fixated nymphomaniac spermaholic aliens with 42JJ-18-38 figures, who robbed you of your virginity, before draining you of all your manliness, for ever. In fact, I might write about that in a little journal I edit. [wipes drool from chin] Face it, Johnny: you're just a big girl and it's all your fault. I mean, you probably wanted to be impotent, didn't you? How dare you try to blame the Blessed Pharmaceutical Industry [urologist makes sign of the crossed cheque], which funds all my research and might have me dumped in a disused mine shaft (without hope of rescue by Lassie) if I were to take your complaint seriously."

7. The exception to the testosterone rule is an almost complete absence of the hormone. That is an extremely rare condition and affects sex drive, rather than the parts of the nervous system, which govern erectile function. I previously cited the example of eunuchs, whose testes [where testosterone is produced in males] had been removed but who could still have sex. They had very, very little testosterone but were still in working order (apart from the ability to impregnate). Transsexuals provide another example. Many undergo treatment with oestrogen and have surgery, to soften their facial features, increase body fat in the appropriate places and give them breasts. However, these stages occur before the final step, in which their penises are basically turned inside out and converted into vaginas. For a time before that last operation, many look like females outwardly [in terms of body shape etc] but still have functioning penises and can have sex like any man (or any man, who hasn't taken Accutane at high doses). These two examples [eunuchs with almost no testosterone and transsexuals who are taking oestrogen] show that hormones have little effect on erectile function.

8. Any urologist worth his salt will be able to tell you that erectile dysfunction is incredibly rare in anyone under the age of 30. Roughly one ED patient in 5000 is under that age and the most common causes of ED in the under-30 bracket are physical trauma. Sporting or traffic accidents are likely explanations. Another cause is [Cue/... scary music] a drug reaction. [Falls off seat, faints etc] Well, whaddya know? Chemo drugs are among the culprits. The chances of young men/ boys becoming permanently (or even temporarily) impotent at the age of 14 or 15 are miniscule. I am tempted to say that they are in the region of 0.0000001% but that wouldn't be terribly objective.

9. If you don't know what Accutane's method of action is, you won't understand why it is perfectly possible for the drug to cause problems, long after patients have stopped taking it. Retinoid chemotherapy drugs turn down the body's cell production/ regeneration mechanism. That's how they kill tumours (the cells of which function, in several respects, like normal cells).

Patients report symptoms and doctors match the symptoms to the available treatment. If there are no symptoms, there is APPARENTLY no problem. This illustrates ione of the differences between science and medicine. The former deals in realities, while the latter is concerned mainly with appearances.

Take, as an example, the Accutane recipients, whose bowel linings started to disintegrate. Many of them didn't experience serious symptoms, until years after they had finished taking Roaccutane. All the while, the damage, done years before to the cellular replacement mechanism, was creating a sort of maintenance time bomb.

The process was s a bit like the deterioration of those dodgy, old ships in the US Navy strategic reserve fleet. They sat at anchor for forty-five years, in some cases, while the steel in their hulls were slowly rusting away. By the time they were towed to scrap yards in the 21st Century, a few were ready to sink (and they'd spewed lead paint, fuel etc into the rivers on which they lay). Yet, they had still been afloat, so, to the untrained observer in the distance, they might have seemed OK, only a few days before. They hadn't been taken into dry dock, repaired or repainted for a long time, so there was nothing to stop metal corrosion. Contrast that with preserved ships on the River Thames in London (eg HMS Belfast), which are generally much older than the US Navy hulks were but are in good shape because they are maintained.

There's one more thing I want to mention. Please try to remember the difference between Irritable Bowel Syndrome, IBS, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease, IBD. The first (another label for a set of symptoms, which doctors don't understand or don't investigate appropriately) is much less serious than the second.

[Wynne]

Common reasons for erectile dysfunction for those under 30: diabetes, hypertension, kidney damage.

And do away with the condescension, if you please. Thanks muchly.

[jacobden]

So to sum up what you said, ED for people 30 and under is very rare, and even much rarer with people that took accutane. nice.

[Fred Q]

There are no scientific studies that prove or disprove this or any of the supposed long term side effects of accutane. It's all speculation, and there is no egitimate study that says 100% accutane does this, or caused that. NO ONE CAN SAY FOR SURE ACCUTANE IS OR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PERMANENT SIDE EFFECTS.

Evie Conrad- Here are some corrections to some stuff you said.

3)Two years ago when Roche discontinued accutane, there was a statistic released from some pharmaceutical agency that stated around 16 million people have been treated with the Accutane brand of isotretinoin alone. This number did not take into account the generic brands. Since then there has been no official statistic of how many people have been treated.

9). Accutane induces an autoimmune response in some individuals which causes the body's immune system to attack its own digestive system, among other things. While retinoic acid is SPECULATED to cause the shortening of telomeres which would give your suggested theory some substance, it has yet to be proved in a lab. So therefore, accutane causes IBD which is induced by an autoimmune response.

By the way, accutane is not really used in the treatment of cancer because it proved to be relatively ineffective. Therefore, its hard to correlate its cancer treating effects with its effects for causing long term side effects.

[oli girl]

Common reasons for erectile dysfunction for those under 30: diabetes, hypertension, kidney damage.

And do away with the condescension, if you please. Thanks muchly.

Ironic as Diabetes, hypertension and kidney damage are all listed side effects from Accutane. Well Diabetes can cause hypertension and kindney damage, so what's the point. Accutane can Cause ED and it has been reported to the FDA since 1982. I have seen thoose...

I am too busy right now, however I will respond to fredq post soon. However, this debate could go on and on, to you suffers try not to argue and save your energy to help others who are suffering and healing yourself.

Edited by oli girl, 26 October 2010 - 08:10 AM.

[Wynne]

Common reasons for erectile dysfunction for those under 30: diabetes, hypertension, kidney damage.

And do away with the condescension, if you please. Thanks muchly.

Ironic as Diabetes, hypertension and kidney damage are all listed side effects from Accutane. Well Diabetes can cause hypertension and kindney damage, so what's the point. Accutane can Cause ED and it has been reported to the FDA since 1982. I have seen thoose...

I am too busy right now, however I will respond to fredq post soon. However, this debate could go on and on, to you suffers try not to argue and save your energy to help others who are suffering and healing yourself.

People who have never taken accutane have been diagnosed with diabetes, hyptertension and kidney damage. Actually, the majority of those diagnosed never took accutane.

I read a study that 1 in 3 Americans will have type 2 diabetes by year (forgot the year ). 1 in 3 didn't take accutane. They do however have horrible diets.

[Fred Q]

Accutane does not necessarily cause diabetes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20804507

[oli girl]

Okay Wynne let me be specific Type 1 diabetes not type 2 (which is know for diet) Type 1 is autoimmune. Even Roche states that there have been reports of Glucose alterations and new cases of diabetes pg 23 (you know the link).

lol Fred Q, As that study one only tested the subjects before and then 3 months in to treatment, 2 doesn't even comment on dosage and 3 they only did how many 48 patients. Didn't you say a pharm did satistics that around 20 mil have taken accutane. (which I like to see that report as I don't find anything from a pharm company, though I have read Roche's court statement on a number)
Which we all know even Roche states long term side effects unknown and that Accutane continues to work up to 2 months after the course is over.

I'd post the links and journals/bio chem but it take up numerous pages and well you can go look up the relationship between Retnoic Acid (Accutane) and insulin, diabetes etc... If you can't find then maybe I'll post the links.

As for Accutane not being used for Cancer treatment and not benifical, that is not true. It is still used in conjuction w/ Other Chemo drugs. In fact they are using Accutane in w/ a new immunotherapy biologic agents in pedatric neuroblastoma patients and have seen sucess. Not to mention Vesinoid is not that diffrent from Accutane.

Any how this thread kinda came off the subject as it was about ED, which Accutane has been reported to cause. Wether it be Accutane caused a disease that can cause ED or it just dried up the uretha etc.....

[Wynne]

Again.

....People who have never taken accutane have been diagnosed with diabetes, hyptertension and kidney damage. Actually, the majority of those diagnosed never took accutane.
...

[Boss01]

What would be the point in having clear skin if i could not get a boner?
The only reason i want clear skin is to better my chances of getting laid.
If i could'nt have sex it would be pointless.

[jacobden]

What would be the point in having clear skin if i could not get a boner?
The only reason i want clear skin is to better my chances of getting laid.
If i could'nt have sex it would be pointless.

Don't see the point in that post.



Also 16mil people took roches accutane years ago, and thats not counting people taking the generics, and hundreds are still taking it over the world every month

Edited by jacobden, 29 October 2010 - 01:39 PM.

[Fred Q]

It is still a study (not the best) that counteracts the other reports that I just found regarding diabetes which one by the way tested the same amount of people and at the same time intervals.

I didn't say that it wasn't used for cancer anymore, but its not common because its not extremely effective against the common types of cancer.

Vesanoid is tretinoin and accutane is isotretinoin. Both are retinoic acid. Both have the same chemical formula. However their stereochemistry is different which can account for vast differences in their mechanism of action. If you don't know what that means, which im presuming you dont, then i'll be happy to clear that up for you...LOL