[HN Gopher] Viagra improves brain blood flow and could help to p...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Viagra improves brain blood flow and could help to prevent dementia
        
       Author : geox
       Score  : 353 points
       Date   : 2024-06-08 22:55 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ox.ac.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ox.ac.uk)
        
       | silenced_trope wrote:
       | I take 4.5mg cialis (tadalafil) every day.
       | 
       | I think a lot of people do. Viagra is slightly different of
       | course.
       | 
       | Both "hims" and "blue chew" now offer a daily mint "multivitamin"
       | of tadalafil.
        
         | jjallen wrote:
         | You take it for this purpose or why?
        
           | QuantumGood wrote:
           | It is prescribed for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH; an
           | enlarged prostate) which include difficulty urinating--not
           | just for ED
        
             | koolala wrote:
             | ouch thank you for explaining your usecase
        
             | pasquinelli wrote:
             | now you have my attention.
        
             | abraae wrote:
             | Just hijacking to add a public health warning about BPH.
             | Like many men as they get older, I was getting up several
             | times a night to pee. Thought I would just put up with it
             | until it got worse.
             | 
             | I went on a yacht for the weekend, drank quite a few beers
             | and crashed to sleep.
             | 
             | I awoke to find out I couldn't pee at all. I can't describe
             | how painful things were by the time I staggered into the
             | emergency department that evening. Definitely the worst
             | experience of my life. A few weeks later a guy was winched
             | off a boat by helicopter with the same condition - one of
             | his mates had been tasked with catheterising him using the
             | rubber fuel hose from the boat's engine, but was
             | unsuccessful.
             | 
             | If you are having trouble urinating, seek medical attention
             | - don't ignore it.
        
               | justinc8687 wrote:
               | Is there some correlation to boats or just happenstance?
        
               | abraae wrote:
               | Just coincidence, situations where one might drink too
               | much and be isolated from medical care.
        
               | barrenko wrote:
               | Ignoring prostate issues for 6 months got me to the edge
               | of sanity - I was 26 then and was told there was no way I
               | have prostate issues.
        
               | 2-3-7-43-1807 wrote:
               | why on a yacht, though? i have a similar problem. shy
               | bladder plus tense pelvic base. maybe even somewhat
               | increased prostate (i don't know). so peeing is always
               | something i need a little privacy for. but everytime i'm
               | scuba diving plus out with a boat it's like my prostate
               | is locking up completely. extremely weird and
               | uncomfortable feeling. on those small boats there is
               | never a toilet but there are sneaky options that in
               | theory should work but don't. so i'm wondering if the
               | wavy motion might have something to do with this problem.
        
             | petereddy wrote:
             | I take it on doctor's orders to recover from prostate
             | cancer. Improving the circulation in that area should help
             | rebuilding tissue.
        
             | paiute wrote:
             | There are many off label uses. Pulmonary Hypertension for
             | one.
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | If you want to pretend to be old, Strattera gives you the
             | effects of this as a side effect.
        
               | hombre_fatal wrote:
               | Another weird effect was that my ejaculation and orgasm
               | were seconds apart. Don't remember which came first
               | (pun). Hated that drug.
        
             | QuantumGood wrote:
             | BPH smptoms I started having in my '60s turned out to go
             | away when I stopped taking antihistamines for seasonal
             | allergies.
        
           | tomcam wrote:
           | Looks like 5mg viagra is 10%-20% of the minimum recommended
           | dose for viagra's original purpose
        
             | saulpw wrote:
             | 10mg works really well in my experience.
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | 5mg of tadalafil would be 50% of the typical "as needed"
             | dose for its original purpose
        
             | loeg wrote:
             | GP is talking about cialis (tadalafil), a completely
             | different drug. It is dosed differently from viagra
             | (sildenafil).
        
               | tomcam wrote:
               | Thanks! I thought they were the same
        
           | snakeyjake wrote:
           | I do the same because 20 years ago a roadside bomb blew up
           | next to the vehicle I was riding in and caused it to roll
           | over and down an embankment and the repeated impacts
           | compressed my lumbar discs which after about 10 years
           | manifested as degenerative disc disease at L5-S1 and a series
           | of disc bulges and scar tissue build-up up and down my lumbar
           | region that compressed the nerves leading to my genitals and
           | ultimately led to a spinal fusion of that area...
           | 
           | ...and a low dose makes it so my penis functions normally.
           | 
           | It's fantastic, really.
        
       | the_arun wrote:
       | It needs prescription, correct?
        
         | cactusplant7374 wrote:
         | It's possible to order it from Indian pharmacies or one can
         | pick it up while on vacation in the third world.
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | Which is why _every_ package I get from India (to Canada)
           | goes through heavy inspection, to the point that most /all
           | Indian pharmacies just won't ship here anymore.
        
         | koolala wrote:
         | ummmmmm... no offense if you have dementia and i have no easy
         | way to ask about it, sorry this question is personal and you
         | could easily just be asking for a friend
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | In the UK you can get it over the counter since a couple years
         | back afaik.
        
         | bananamerica wrote:
         | Over the counter in Brazil.
        
           | dbdoug wrote:
           | And a month's supply of generic tadafila 5mg in Brasil costs
           | less than USD$7.00
        
         | ethagnawl wrote:
         | In the US, it does but the bar is laughably low. For example,
         | you can get a prescription on blewchew.com which gets
         | "reviewed" by their "consulting physicians" and have it in hand
         | in a day or two.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | In the US, yeah, but arguably it shouldn't be. Probably the
         | only good reason for controlling it is risk of priapism from
         | people using it stupidly, which is an extremely bad "go to the
         | ER now" condition.
        
       | bell-cot wrote:
       | Expect a new tsunami of Viagra spam in 3...2...1...
        
         | jagged-chisel wrote:
         | I bet you were at least sixty seconds late
        
       | boguscoder wrote:
       | Hmm I thought viagra improves blood flow in opposite place but 2
       | for price of 1 is great too
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | I think it just causes vasodilation anywhere in the body?
        
           | Spod_Gaju wrote:
           | Yes, pretty much everywhere but the eye.
           | 
           | https://www.proteinatlas.org/ENSG00000138735-PDE5A/tissue
        
           | AbstractH24 wrote:
           | This makes me wonder -- why do things like stimulants,
           | caffeine, and cold medicine help people think clearly?
           | 
           | Aren't they vasoconstrictors?
        
         | andrewstuart wrote:
         | Its all the same.
        
         | Izikiel43 wrote:
         | Different head
        
       | GlickWick wrote:
       | Wasn't this class of medication originally for cardiovascular
       | issues, and the whole ED mitigation was a happy marketable
       | accident?
        
         | mikercampbell wrote:
         | I vaguely recall an anecdote about athletes using it for
         | performance improvement, and getting a slightly different stat
         | buff
        
           | brandall10 wrote:
           | It's commonly used in bodybuilding competitions.
        
             | lukan wrote:
             | Now I cannot get that picture out of my head. A crowd full
             | of bodybuilders in tight shorts and all on Viagra doing
             | workouts.
             | 
             | Each to his own I guess..
        
               | idiotsecant wrote:
               | I'm pretty sure you don't just get random erections
               | unless you're engaged in activity that you find sexually
               | stimulating.
               | 
               | ...so yes, probably.
        
               | rs_rs_rs_rs_rs wrote:
               | > I'm pretty sure you don't just get random erections
               | unless you're engaged in activity that you find sexually
               | stimulating
               | 
               | I think that's the case for Cialis but Viagra should make
               | you "pop" regardless of what activity you're doing.
        
               | Frost1x wrote:
               | That's not how it works at all. As someone with recent
               | onset of ED taking viagra regularly, it's been fantastic
               | but it just makes me function like I should.
               | 
               | It takes about an hour to take effect (usually less for
               | me) and lasts a little over 4 hours with some lingering
               | effects for several hours later, with diminishing effects
               | towards the 4 and above hours.
               | 
               | If I'm sexually stimulated during that time physically
               | and or mentally, everything works like it should
               | (erection). If during that time even when I would
               | normally see peak effects around the 50 min to 90 min
               | mark I'm driving or doing taxes or whatever non-sexually
               | stimulating activity one might do, no erection at all.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | You don't get turned on by Schedule K-1 Form 1065?
               | Nothing gets me hornier than correctly accounting for
               | capital equipment depreciation.
        
               | rs_rs_rs_rs_rs wrote:
               | Bodybuilders at competition time have very low body fat
               | and are very dehidrated, it's never an "issue".
        
               | Iulioh wrote:
               | And really big hormonal issues caused by the low body
               | fat.
               | 
               | Bodybuilders (in the months before competing, while
               | cutting) can't get it up even if they wanted to.
        
               | BossingAround wrote:
               | I don't know how people imagine viagra working - it's not
               | like you take a pill, you continue browsing the internet,
               | reading news, and suddenly, a boner lifts your desk.
        
               | robxorb wrote:
               | That's pretty much how I imagined it working.
               | 
               | Was news to me to read in a sibling that it also requires
               | mental stimulation. I thought it was purely a physical
               | inducement by the drug, as many drugs for other purposes
               | induce a physical response without requiring mental
               | effort.
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | Me too. Even xkcd helped spread missinformation about the
               | topic ..
               | 
               | https://xkcd.com/779/
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | > _it 's not like you take a pill, you continue browsing
               | the internet, reading news, and suddenly, a boner lifts
               | your desk._
               | 
               | Aside from the lifting the desk part, that's exactly how
               | I imagine it working - and how it should work. You mean
               | it also requires special sexual arousal? Well, even that
               | it shouldn't be that difficult.
        
               | fostware wrote:
               | I imagine some just need a stiff breeze
        
               | bitwize wrote:
               | Sounds like an Elton John video.
               | 
               | Most male bodybuilders wear loose shorts (or e.g., track
               | pants) for workouts, the tight trunks being worn on the
               | contest stage.
        
           | Traubenfuchs wrote:
           | Long term PDE 5 treatment lowers estrogen and increases
           | testosterone. As a consequence of that, and its
           | cardiovasvular effects, it makes it easier for the body to
           | turn fat into energy by fat-browning, to grow muscles and to
           | lose fat.
        
           | hammyhavoc wrote:
           | Tadalafil works well for getting more out of your workouts
           | too (I take that). Gives you an overall feeling of well-being
           | too (better than any cup of joe), I no-bullshit begin my day
           | with it.
        
         | jbandela1 wrote:
         | That is true that it was originally for cardiovascular issues.
         | 
         | However, it seems that there was at least theoretical
         | consideration that it could be used to treat ED
         | 
         | A nice overview is here:
         | 
         | https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd2030
        
         | Phoenix5869 wrote:
         | Yep. Originally developed for high blood pressure and angina,
         | but in clinical trials was found to be more effective in
         | treating ED than heart issues.
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | many drugs are found by accident
        
         | paiute wrote:
         | It is being used off label all over the place for heart
         | conditions. That's why i take it. The on label use is actually
         | pretty annoying for the first few months.
        
           | newswasboring wrote:
           | Not trying to be crass here, but does that mean you are just
           | walking around with boners all day?
        
             | SeanAnderson wrote:
             | Not OP, but their statement read as if that effect wears
             | off after the body develops tolerance to the medication.
             | So, yes they did for a while (it was annoying) but no they
             | don't now (for a few months)
        
               | jawngee wrote:
               | Or they grew accustomed to the erections and no longer
               | found them annoying, which is how I read it.
        
               | itronitron wrote:
               | or other people found them annoying
        
               | xyproto wrote:
               | There must be a market for pants that have room for this.
        
               | xkcd-sucks wrote:
               | I've heard the erection points downwards if you slice the
               | ligament holding it up on the top side that could make it
               | fit down the leg better
        
               | alfiedotwtf wrote:
               | Wtf
        
               | MrDrMcCoy wrote:
               | Hey, look at all this nope
        
               | royaltjames wrote:
               | What a terrible day to have eyes
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | Yea, seems rather extreme when the doctor could also just
               | prescribe phloppycoxin.
               | 
               | Somehow reminds me of another joke...
               | 
               | What do they call a testicle transplant in the US?
               | 
               | "Shooting someone else's children"
        
               | BolexNOLA wrote:
               | Sadly I remember wearing pleated pants
        
               | coldtea wrote:
               | Or they found a girlfriend and can finally take full
               | advantage of them!
        
               | Traubenfuchs wrote:
               | There is NO tolerance development, on the contrary,
               | increasing vascular health by long term PDE5 treatment
               | and increasing psychological confidence over time make
               | the treatment more effective with time.
               | 
               | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S205011
               | 611...
        
               | The_Colonel wrote:
               | You're taking about slightly different things - you about
               | ED, the other person about "boner all day". They are not
               | the same thing.
               | 
               | Slightly off topic, but this is why I don't really trust
               | these "no tolerance" claims. That claim is usually very
               | specific, while people's understanding of "tolerance" is
               | often quite a bit wider.
               | 
               | I take 3 medications which each make "no tolerance"
               | claims based on scientific studies. But my subjective
               | experience is that all of them do build tolerance in some
               | way - the subjective effect does wear off with time and
               | taking a break does reduce the tolerance. One possible
               | cause is mistaking the intended effect (ED) with side-
               | effects (boner all day).
        
               | zolbrek wrote:
               | The first time I took sildenafil I had a bad headache and
               | nausea, the next couple of times I didn't suffer from
               | nausea and the headache wasn't as severe. I don't suffer
               | from any side effects now other than my nose getting a
               | bit stuffy every now and then, so in that sense I
               | developed a tolerance to the medication's side effects.
               | The boner effects still work just as reliably as day one,
               | no tolerance development for me there.
        
               | rickydroll wrote:
               | you are lucky, in addition to the migraines and stuffy
               | nose, sildenafil altered my vision making everything
               | looked blue tinted. I tried a couple other drugs in that
               | class but the migraines never went away.
        
             | Traubenfuchs wrote:
             | No. You get hard easier and it takes longer to go down, but
             | without (mental) stimulation, there is no erection. (for
             | the vast majority of people taking sane dosages)
        
             | WhackyIdeas wrote:
             | One trick I remember when I was going through puberty at
             | school, I would make good use of tucking under my belt ha!
        
         | standardUser wrote:
         | We don't know how many medications actually function. We put
         | them inside of increasingly complex animals and study the
         | results to see what they do (and hope they don't die). Botox
         | was intended to treat muscle spasms. Powerful anti-depressants
         | are regularly prescribed for pain from nerve damage in people
         | with no mental health issues. And MDMA isn't prescribed for
         | anything because the powers that be prematurely decided to ban
         | it based on completely fabricated claims, which I assume is
         | part of a massive hundred-year conspiracy to make sure
         | people... keep dying from alcohol? Not totally sure about that
         | last one, but it's hard to deny the facts.
        
         | lebuffon wrote:
         | I know a former executive of the company that was developing
         | this drug for cardiovascular problems. He told me that they
         | sold it because it had this "side-effect" that they couldn't
         | get rid of. ;-)
         | 
         | Marketing is the key to business success. (Talking to you, tech
         | people)
        
           | grogenaut wrote:
           | Is that marketing (advertising) or product market fit?
        
         | 1oooqooq wrote:
         | this is the case with almost all drugs. for example almost
         | every antidepressants was the result of a weight loss or
         | something like that.
         | 
         | drug research is worse than training an LLM. you feed it to
         | random people and then compare effects with initial conditions
         | and of something looks good you try with more control.
        
         | caycep wrote:
         | yes, well, pulmonary hypertension
        
       | bouncycastle wrote:
       | All you need is regular exercise to improve blood flow
        
         | mpenick wrote:
         | Simple solutions to hard problems seem to be falling out of
         | favor.
        
           | Spod_Gaju wrote:
           | Actually, exercise lowers cGMP (and low cGMP is what Viagra
           | reverses) so your "simple solution" is actually totally
           | wrong.
        
           | larsrc wrote:
           | Have done regular exercise to improve my Long COVID state for
           | 6 months now. It has helped, but it has its limits too. If I
           | overdo it, I get worse, but I can't always tell until later.
           | And other health issues are limiting what forms of exercise I
           | can do.
           | 
           | Hard problems rarely have one simple solution, or they
           | wouldn't be hard, would they?
        
         | rsynnott wrote:
         | > The OxHARP trial was a meticulously designed double-blind,
         | placebo-controlled study involving 75 participants who had
         | experienced a minor stroke and showed signs of mild to moderate
         | small vessel disease.
         | 
         | I mean, I think if going for a walk were a magic bullet for
         | stroke rehabilitation, someone would have noticed by now.
        
           | SamPatt wrote:
           | I'm not knowledgeable about stroke rehabilitation
           | specifically, but the benefits of walking are extremely
           | robust. Especially if you're talking about the difference
           | between a totally sedentary lifestyle and one which includes
           | a substantial amount of walking.
        
       | koolala wrote:
       | deleted?
        
         | koolala wrote:
         | wait i read the whole headline now sorry
        
           | koolala wrote:
           | wait "prevent?" whats going on? ill read the comments, oh
           | wait
        
       | a_wild_dandan wrote:
       | "...involving 75 participants who had experienced a minor stroke
       | and showed signs of mild to moderate small vessel disease."
        
         | mikercampbell wrote:
         | I had my hopes up, but there is the kicker
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | Presumably it would need to be pretty continuous though? So uhm
       | like micro dosing ?
        
       | ablyveiled wrote:
       | Viagra increases the effect of nitric oxide, which is bad stuff
       | when it gets into cytochrome complex iv in the mitochondria
       | (IIRC). I would personally suspect based on that, that its
       | effects on brain health would be negative in spite of blood flow.
        
         | francisofascii wrote:
         | Nitric oxide bad for you? Pretty sure it is good for you
         | ,otherwise super foods like beets and leafy greens would be bad
         | for you.
        
           | Spod_Gaju wrote:
           | Too little NO is bad for you, too much NO is bad for you.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Leafy greens can be bad if you're sensitive to oxalates.
           | Depends how you cook them though.
        
         | fnordpiglet wrote:
         | Nitric oxide is a crucial part of the biology of life,
         | especially animals. Viagra does not specifically impact the
         | amount of nitric oxide in the body or the nitric oxide cycle
         | mediated by arginine. It instead enhances the effect of NO in
         | the smooth muscle. I would not worry about nitric oxide in
         | general as it's crucial for the basic functioning of your body.
        
         | Dylan16807 wrote:
         | 1. "Bad stuff" meaning what?
         | 
         | 2. There's no such thing as increasing "the effect" of such a
         | nonspecific chemical as nitrogen oxide. There's tons of
         | effects, and it increases some of them. Also, can the active
         | ingredient get _into_ mitochondria?
        
       | sva_ wrote:
       | > The OxHARP trial was a meticulously designed double-blind,
       | placebo-controlled study involving 75 participants who had
       | experienced a minor stroke and showed signs of mild to moderate
       | small vessel disease. Each participant received sildenafil, a
       | placebo, and cilostazol (a similar drug) over three-week periods
       | in a randomised order.
       | 
       | I feel like dudes will know if they got Viagra or not? It doesn't
       | seem like cilostazol has the same kind of effects on them, or
       | does it? So is it really a placebo?
        
         | saulpw wrote:
         | Viagra doesn't "make" you hard, you still need sexual stimulus.
         | I've taken it and then the sexual opportunity fell through, so
         | I went back to coding or whatever, and I didn't notice anything
         | different.
        
           | bn-l wrote:
           | Dang, that is a sad tale.
        
           | wumbo wrote:
           | Severe warning. I have no sexual problems and took a viagra
           | once.
           | 
           | It definitely was automatic and persistent.
           | 
           | It was terrible. It wouldn't even go away when I was done
           | with it.
        
             | paiute wrote:
             | Pseudoephedrine
        
               | ThrowawayTestr wrote:
               | You shouldn't mix uppers and downers.
        
               | paiute wrote:
               | It's one of the things they might give in a hospital for
               | it.
        
               | rblatz wrote:
               | The espresso martini would like to have a chat with you.
        
               | portaouflop wrote:
               | Small doses are fine
        
             | wumbo wrote:
             | Why the downvotes? People are giving wrong and dangerous
             | advice.
             | 
             | Yeah, you can say "well just don't take it if it's not
             | prescribed."
             | 
             | But don't bury the truth. If you don't have ED and you take
             | it, the GP is wrong.
        
           | loeg wrote:
           | > Viagra doesn't "make" you hard
           | 
           | It definitely does.
           | 
           | > you still need sexual stimulus.
           | 
           | Not really, or to a _much_ lesser extent.
        
           | mirekrusin wrote:
           | Maybe that's just java language, have you tried with other
           | ones?
        
           | chkaloon wrote:
           | But it does frequently cause nasal congestion, unrelated to
           | sexual simulation
        
             | XajniN wrote:
             | It's not unrelated actually, there is some tissue inside
             | the nose cavity that is similar to the erectile tissue of
             | the penis. That's why the nose gets "stuffy" from
             | sildenafil, and that's why you sometimes sneeze when
             | aroused.
        
               | rd07 wrote:
               | A curious question, is nasal congestion has any
               | correlation with high blood pressure?
        
               | XajniN wrote:
               | I wouldn't know. Sildenafil lowers the blood pressure, so
               | I would expect the negative correlation.
        
               | rjeli wrote:
               | See also levomethamphetamine, the mirror image of meth
               | found commonly in drugstores in Vick's inhalers, acting
               | as a vasoconstrictor
        
           | dbdoug wrote:
           | I can (at the ripe old age of 78) confirm this completely.
           | Without stimulation, nothing except facial flushing. With
           | stimulation, and only with stimulation, a functioning
           | erection.
        
             | adastra22 wrote:
             | > nothing except facial flushing
             | 
             | What does this mean?
        
               | rzzzt wrote:
               | Person takes pill, face gets a bit more rosy than usual.
               | I guess it has an effect on small blood vessels
               | everywhere.
        
               | adastra22 wrote:
               | Thank you.
        
             | jcims wrote:
             | >Without stimulation, nothing except facial flushing.
             | 
             | and for me, a stuffy nose and splitting headache.
        
           | gjs4786 wrote:
           | Wrong python. Hehehe
        
           | rs_rs_rs_rs_rs wrote:
           | >Viagra doesn't "make" you hard, you still need sexual
           | stimulus.
           | 
           | That's Cialis, Viagra should make you hard even when you're
           | in the confession booth talking to a priest.
        
             | myrandomcomment wrote:
             | Viagra = standing at attention pretty much no matter what
             | is going on. Cialis = you have to have the mind/stimulus.
        
             | noduerme wrote:
             | which one makes the priest hard?
        
               | fetzu wrote:
               | Viagra was approved in the 90's and Cialis in 2003, so
               | I'm guessing none of them..
        
             | zolbrek wrote:
             | I have experience with both, this is not the case.
        
         | spencerchubb wrote:
         | Maybe, but maybe not. If I told you I'm either giving you
         | actual viagra or a placebo, you might get more aroused even if
         | given placebo. Because psychologically you'll be thinking
         | "There's at least a chance I took viagra right now"
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | the placebo effect does not work like that. You dont get
           | physiological benefits just by thinking you have them.
        
             | Dylan16807 wrote:
             | Being more aroused is not a physiological benefit.
             | 
             | To have no placebo effect, the random patients in the brain
             | blood flow trial would need to all be unable to get
             | erections, or something.
        
             | hattmall wrote:
             | Isn't that the exact definition of the placebo effect?
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | you dont get antibodies against viruses just by thinking
               | you have them.
        
               | tux3 wrote:
               | Even if this is obviously true, that does nothing to
               | support the original statement. That's a whole different
               | claim that you had to fall back to.
               | 
               | Which is a motte-and-bailey type of argument.
        
               | alexey-salmin wrote:
               | And yet such thinking can in some cases increase your
               | chances of surviving the viral infection. That's the
               | placebo effect.
        
               | XajniN wrote:
               | A placebo has no physical or physiological effect at all,
               | it can only affect what the test subjects think or
               | pretend they feel.
        
         | treprinum wrote:
         | Viagra doesn't work for everyone; it's not like you take it an
         | get automatically erect, even with sexual stimulus. There are
         | many reasons for ED, some of them in the brain, some of them in
         | hormones. Viagra only helps with cardiovascular ones.
        
           | grugagag wrote:
           | I had a highly intelligent and good looking roommate with ED
           | and it was devastating that at such a young age he couldnt't
           | maintian an erection even with viagra, cialis. I urged him to
           | see a doctor and it turns out the 'baloon' down there that
           | gets filled with blood also has a valve to keep the blood in.
           | He had a misfunctioning valve and blood was leaking out and
           | erection was soft. Sad story, as it seems to have had
           | psychological effects on this person. Not sure it was much
           | they could do at the time other than a manual pump fix. He
           | did have a girlfriend though and they found other ways around
           | it, though I heard she was cheating on him in search for a
           | normal experience.
        
       | spencerchubb wrote:
       | Boss: You look... particularly excited to be working today
       | 
       | Me: I'm just trying this new technique to boost productivity
        
         | luxuryballs wrote:
         | you seem to be working hard today
        
           | xtracto wrote:
           | Oh man...
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | Username checks out
        
           | spencerchubb wrote:
           | My username is my legal first and last name lmao
        
       | mpenick wrote:
       | Saunas, hot baths, and excercise improve blood flow.
        
         | demondemidi wrote:
         | This is America: we demand a low-effort, overpriced solution,
         | preferably in pill form.
        
           | senordevnyc wrote:
           | Not everyone on HN is from the US, and the study in question
           | is from the UK...
        
             | demondemidi wrote:
             | Do you have jokes where you live?
        
               | jrflowers wrote:
               | Do you
        
               | hattmall wrote:
               | GOT EM!!
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | Saunas and hot baths are low-effort too, but they get pretty
           | expensive time-wise.
           | 
           | And these pills are pretty cheap.
        
           | houseplant wrote:
           | think about the main consumer base for viagra, and then think
           | about who makes the majority of economic/financial decisions
           | in this country.
        
           | Frost1x wrote:
           | It's more of a testament to a potential beneficial side
           | effect of an already widely used drug for something entirely
           | different.
           | 
           | I (in America) actually exercise 5-6 days a week with regular
           | sauna use afterwards averaging about 2-2.5 hours per total
           | session (20 minutes from sauna). I coincidentally even happen
           | to take long hot baths frequently (3-4 times a week for an
           | hour) as a form of stress relief, relaxation, and it further
           | helps with muscle recovery.
           | 
           | Absolutely none of that helps me to a notable degree with
           | what the specific pill in question does which I also use
           | regularly. In addition, viagra adds an additional say 4 hours
           | per day per pill to my normal weekly routine of increased
           | blood flow that may help reduce risk of dementia when I'm
           | older. That's a big win in my book if it's true as it's
           | something I already do and is additive.
        
             | demondemidi wrote:
             | Or maybe guys that are embarrassed about it need some other
             | cover story?
        
         | larsrc wrote:
         | Cognitive Long COVID sufferer here. All the of those help
         | indeed, but why not this, too? With a shot.
        
       | pram wrote:
       | I've read about people using tadalafil as a nootropic in the
       | past. Is there even a difference?
       | 
       | It's so easy to get a prescription these days might be worth a
       | shot.
        
         | simple10 wrote:
         | Tadalafil (Cialis) can be useful for dealing with depressive
         | symptoms. It's commonly used in nootropic circles.
         | 
         | With both viagra and tadalafil, they can negatively effect
         | sleep. So it's hit or miss for a lot of people depending on
         | depressive or anxiety symptoms.
         | 
         | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7306377/
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | It's thought to improve neuronal density in the hippocampus and
         | also (higher p) to increase bone density. A lot of bodybuilders
         | and athletes use it for increased blood flow benefits, partly
         | because it seems to have fewer side effects then sidenafil
         | (which can cause mild retinal damage leading to a blue tint in
         | the vision; probably why Pfizer used a blue tint in all their
         | advertising). I have no personal experience with it but the
         | theory seems sound.
         | 
         | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321982/
        
       | xgkickt wrote:
       | I'd like to see how this effect from Sildenafil compares to
       | increased NO levels from eating beets.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | If nothing else, you're making me imagine some new scenes
         | involving Dwight Schrute :)
        
         | debo_ wrote:
         | _looks at pants_ I see you 've been beeting off
         | 
         | ... Sorry
        
         | paiute wrote:
         | This is how i figured out NO would help my heart. Eating cereal
         | colored with beet powder. If i understand the magic happens
         | when it combines with saliva. So chewing beets might help.
        
         | 01100011 wrote:
         | Also arginine and/or citrulline.
        
       | Arthanos wrote:
       | 50mg 3x a day, according to the study:
       | https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.124.32432...
       | 
       | Seems high to me, but I've never taken the drug. I assume most
       | people take it just a few times a week for it's intended use? Is
       | anyone aware of research that shows positive benefits to health
       | at recreational doses?
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | That's a standard dose. 3X per day is because it has a short
         | half life.
         | 
         | > Is anyone aware of research that shows positive benefits to
         | health at recreational doses?
         | 
         | Recreational doses? What does that mean? Excessive vasodilation
         | isn't going to be fun. You actually need some vasoconstriction
         | to balance your blood pressure. Too much and you're just going
         | to get headaches and lightheaded. Excessive vasodilation would
         | be expected to worsen cognition.
        
           | ezekiel68 wrote:
           | > Recreational doses? What does that mean?
           | 
           | I mean, we don't need to act obtuse here in the name of
           | pedantry. Commenter was clearly referring to occasional use
           | for on-label indication.
        
           | AbstractH24 wrote:
           | So Extended Release Sindafil is about to hit the market hard?
           | 
           | Reminds of me how ER Guanfacine was brought to market as and
           | ADHD drugs.
           | 
           | Why invent new drugs when you can put new wrappers on old
           | ones?
        
       | pbj1968 wrote:
       | I used to buy it over the counter in Mexico for recreational
       | purposes, now I have some ancient prescription I don't need
       | that's renewed annually for free. A stiff breeze will work, it's
       | actually remarkable. It will totally make your skin flush and
       | make you feel light headed, not surprised by any of this.
        
       | Spod_Gaju wrote:
       | If this is true they altered zinc metabolism might play a role in
       | dementia since zinc is the cofactor for PDE5, or that people who
       | do not make enough cGMP are prone to dementia (which also means
       | they might be low in GTP and GTP regulates glucose-insulin
       | secretion so...)
       | 
       | So I think they can do better then "here is a pill give me more
       | money".
        
       | WalterBright wrote:
       | First NIH said it does:
       | 
       | https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/viagra-...
       | 
       | Then it doesn't:
       | 
       | https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-dream-stud...
       | 
       | Then it does:
       | 
       | https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2024-06-07-sildenafil-viagra-impro...
       | 
       | Who knows what to believe.
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | I've always been taught that "a wank a day keeps the doctor
         | away" so I believe it.
        
         | pcloadletter_ wrote:
         | Maybe these studies are particularly hard
        
           | CydeWeys wrote:
           | They certainly are hard, because dementia is something that
           | develops over years if not decades. Anytime it takes that
           | long to do a single iteration of your experiment, it's hard!
        
             | jfoster wrote:
             | Does it need to be, though? You can survey healthy but
             | senior populations about their habits, and then over the
             | following years track what happens.
             | 
             | If medical records were public, the answers could even be
             | in those for any medicines that are prescription based. You
             | could then make statements like "A% of patients who took
             | drug B within C years did/didn't develop disease D".
        
               | CydeWeys wrote:
               | That's not a randomized controlled trial though. You
               | might find a correlation, but you couldn't actually
               | establish causation, or eliminate hidden variables.
        
               | hombre_fatal wrote:
               | We have to get over this false meme where people think
               | RCTs prove causation and the rest prove correlation.
               | 
               | An RCT doesn't prove causation, it only might observe
               | another correlation that contributes to our causal
               | inferences based on the convergence of evidence.
               | 
               | We don't have RCTs for most things that you take for
               | granted.
        
             | lisper wrote:
             | And any time the object of your study is also a treatment
             | for ED it gets extra hard. ;-)
        
           | K0balt wrote:
           | That seems a reasonable assumption.
        
           | debo_ wrote:
           | Don't worry, I caught your innuendo.
        
           | henriquez wrote:
           | It's hard science. I take viagra every day and have only
           | become moderately demented, so obviously it's working.
        
         | ezekiel68 wrote:
         | > Who knows what to believe.
         | 
         | This may be a sincere statement, but I'm not sure it's a
         | helpful one. What data do we have? A 2:1 advantage in published
         | studies that it does help. Since there is no such thing in
         | science as absolute proof of anything, these are pretty good
         | odds. Certainly more work will be done in the future to try to
         | replicate the results and figure out the one negative outcome.
         | But until then, we cannot say that the evidence is in any way
         | "equal" on both sides.
        
           | zerocrates wrote:
           | The first one is just a combination of some computer modeling
           | guessing at possibly useful existing drugs and a look at the
           | existing patient data showing that people who were on these
           | seemed to have Alzheimer's less. It's very clear that it's
           | just an initial step that doesn't actually show there's a
           | benefit.
           | 
           | The second is more of that same basic kind of research, but
           | weighing in the opposite direction: it showed no association
           | with Alzheimer's for people with a specific other condition
           | who got these drugs vs. ones with the same condition that
           | didn't (also they did some cell culture testing outside the
           | body that didn't show any effect/improvement).
           | 
           | This new one is an actual double-blind study giving people
           | the drug. Equally important, it's not claiming an effect on
           | Alzheimer's, but vascular dementia, a different form of
           | dementia that's directly related to blood flow and therefore
           | to Viagra's known effects. Of course it's still just really a
           | marker for future research on if this is broadly useful.
        
           | engine_y wrote:
           | Might be a 2:1 but we also have to take into account the
           | level of evidence each study provides.
        
           | HPsquared wrote:
           | Studies aren't conducted at random, it's not really valid to
           | sample them as though they were. Major selection bias.
        
         | deepfriedchokes wrote:
         | This is like the supposed health benefits of drinking red wine.
         | I don't know if it's true or not but it's fun to find out.
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | > Who knows what to believe.
         | 
         | Honest question: do we need to believe one or the other ?
         | 
         | Or can we get away with "it depends" or "it works on some
         | subjects and not on others"
        
         | peutetre wrote:
         | All I know for certain is there's no dementia in my pants.
        
         | j45 wrote:
         | Could be different for different folks
        
           | hk1337 wrote:
           | Different strokes for different folks?
        
         | hk1337 wrote:
         | Maybe they forgot what they said before?
        
         | stoorafa wrote:
         | That second study didn't use as robust of methods as the first,
         | and they each used observational data that benefit from
         | advanced methods (propensity score analysis).
         | 
         | With an RCT, the evidence is substantially increased.
         | 
         | I'd conclude sildenafil reduces risk of age-associated
         | cognitive decline
        
       | doubloon wrote:
       | you know what else would?
       | 
       | walkable cities
       | 
       | more time off from work
       | 
       | more third spaces
       | 
       | less air pollution
       | 
       | less inequality
       | 
       | of course none of that "increases productivity or GDP" so the
       | ruling class won't consider it. of course when they start dying
       | like Japan with low birth rates, their 'solution' is to have a
       | government funded dating app instead of doing the obvious.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | Less air pollution does increase productivity (air pollution is
         | actually really bad for your mental performance, it's a
         | surprisingly strong effect) and it seems to me "the ruling
         | class" does consider it seeing as the Clean Air Act exists.
         | 
         | Btw, Japan has walkable cities of course but also has low
         | inequality (but not so high wealth). Approximately nothing is
         | known to increase birth rates except for being highly religious
         | though; it seems they mostly collapse when people have anything
         | else to do for fun besides have sex. So basically it's caused
         | by being on your phone too much.
        
           | arcimpulse wrote:
           | "Japan doesn't have walkable cities" is not a logical
           | conclusion one can draw from the grandparent.
        
         | ezekiel68 wrote:
         | Nah, man.
         | 
         | I'll take the Capitalism and the pills.
        
         | kredd wrote:
         | Given the opportunity, people will do anything else than have
         | more than 2 children, which is the requirement to increase the
         | population. There's just better stuff to do than spend multiple
         | years taking care of the baby. Any argument other than "for the
         | greater good" won't sound reasonable to educated population.
         | Talking to my friends, especially women who already have a
         | child, they keep mentioning the opportunity loss when you go
         | through pregnancy and birth (career, vacations, personal growth
         | and etc.). You can call it selfish, but it's the reality and
         | nobody wants to fall behind. Everything you mentioned is great,
         | and I support it, but I doubt it'll convince young people to
         | sacrifice at the very minimum 6 years of their life (pregnancy
         | + first year).
        
           | hattmall wrote:
           | Are people really saying they missed out on "personal growth"
           | when they had kids?
           | 
           | Taking care of kids is not that hard or much of a sacrifice
           | really. It would be super easy if things were even more
           | communal. There's just really not that much great stuff that
           | you are missing out on after like 35/40+. In truth most of
           | the stuff geared to people in that age range is designed for
           | people with kids. I think a lot of people would prefer to
           | have more than 2 kids. The major issue is that SO much stuff
           | is designed for the family of four. Yeah there's 3rd row
           | seating, but it's annoying. Furniture that comes in 2 packs,
           | theme parks, restaurant tables, vacation accommodations, etc.
           | Because of modern life and the things we are accustomed to
           | the logistical management burden of more than two children is
           | very significant.
        
             | kredd wrote:
             | Not 35+, think of mid/late 20s as it used to be about 20
             | years ago. Peak health, some disposable income, educated,
             | but also good age to bear a child. If you start having
             | children at 35-40, it'll be harder for you to have 3+
             | children, but now for health reasons.
             | 
             | Up here in Canada, according to statistics, only 20% of
             | couples want to have 3+ children. If I recall it correctly,
             | it's not that they have it, but plan to, which might not
             | even happen due to socioeconomic reasons.
             | 
             | I don't think majority of young people want to have 3
             | children though, as you mentioned. Even if I do an
             | extremely unscientific look around in my circles, the
             | number of couples who want that is 0. I obviously might be
             | in a bubble, but it's a fairly common sentiment especially
             | for my age group.
        
           | Engineering-MD wrote:
           | For me having kids has been massive personal growth. In some
           | ways having kids is synergistic with many of life's goals and
           | personal growth. Career, less so, but I can a more capable
           | human for being a parent.
        
             | kredd wrote:
             | You're most likely right, but people achieve the same
             | result with having one or two children as well. It's having
             | minimum of 3 children that is needed to have a population
             | growth, and that's sometimes a bad life choice for a young
             | woman nowadays. Again, back to opportunity loss.
             | 
             | It's way easier for me to babble, because if I was a father
             | I wouldn't have to go through pregnancy period.
             | Statistically it also shows men want more children than
             | women, and that's fair because it affects our physical
             | health way less.
        
         | hattmall wrote:
         | Are there lower rates of dementia in places that have those
         | things?
        
         | 123yawaworht456 wrote:
         | "walkable cities" is the solution to virtually everything these
         | days, apparently.
         | 
         | I keep seeing this /r/antiwork crap in the most unexpected
         | places around here.
        
       | hkt wrote:
       | Ah, finally, Rupert Murodch's secret!
        
       | elzbardico wrote:
       | Well. too sad I can't take it. It gives me terrible heartburn (an
       | acute stomach pain, not a heart related condition) that only
       | partially responds to anti-acids such as Alka Seltzer.
       | 
       | Also, extremelly stuffy nose, to the point where basically I need
       | to breath by the mouth. And the red eyes, eyes as red as if had
       | just smoke the biggest and strongest joint ever.
       | 
       | Yes, I tried to use it recreationally a few times. It is not
       | worth the pain for me.
       | 
       | And then the dosage in the study: 50mg 3X times a day? I am not
       | sure I could even survive the first day.
       | 
       | Did I mention the headaches too?
       | 
       | EDIT: Before someone asks... At least the on-label effect works
       | really well in a recreational setting for me. But it is kind of
       | funny to have persistent carbon-steel erections when you're
       | feeling miserable with stomach pain and can't breath well. Doing
       | oral sex with a stuffy nose is... interesting.
        
         | Scoundreller wrote:
         | Sildenafil is fairly short acting, so that's probably the
         | reason for 3x/day (but a better choice if you don't need a
         | whole day of effects because of its side effects like sinus
         | congestion).
         | 
         | Tadalafil (Cialis) would probably be a better choice, and is
         | used at daily (but reduced) dosing for prostrate issues.
        
         | talldatethrow wrote:
         | Were you taking authentic or internet genetics from
         | China/India?
         | 
         | Ive gone through a decent amount of generics over the years,
         | from several sources, and even though the label is the same,
         | they almost all act differently on me. Some give me a flushed
         | red face. Some cause a dull headache. Some don't cause anything
         | negative thank God. They all work though.
         | 
         | I think the Indian/Chinese ones are laced with garbage and what
         | I feel depends on what else was in there.
        
           | exodust wrote:
           | The one time I used it over a few weeks was a generic brand.
           | The on-label effect worked, but I had one disturbing side
           | effect: terrible nightmares.
           | 
           | Unscientific conclusion, but the nights I took it when with
           | my new gf at the time, nightmares followed. Binned the
           | remaining pills, nightmares vanished. Possibly the generic
           | additives factor, or maybe the drug itself. Who knows, never
           | tried it again after that.
        
         | flatline wrote:
         | Viagra is prn, you should not take it 3x/day. Cialis is a daily
         | dose.
        
           | elzbardico wrote:
           | I was talking about the regime used in the study. If you read
           | the article you'll find that
        
         | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote:
         | It sounds like you have at least a small allergy to something
         | in the drug. The stuffy nose is something I get when I take
         | trazodone.
        
           | at_a_remove wrote:
           | Nope. You know that erectile tissue? Well, it's not just in
           | the penis, it's also in the nose as well. Hence the stuffy
           | nose. It's not allergies, it's the same sort of tissue having
           | the same response.
           | 
           | That "pump" in your nose you may feel just prior to a good
           | sneeze? That's those tissues swelling with blood.
        
         | 01100011 wrote:
         | Yeah I occasionally take it or tadalafil for BPH/prostatitis
         | because they have less side effects than alpha blockers. I've
         | got GERD and a hiatal hernia and, man, it really fires it up.
         | Chewing gum sort of helps. I also only take half of a 25mg.
         | I'll sometimes get the stuffy nose and rarely a headache but
         | the stomach issues almost prevent me from using it. I've sort
         | of grown used to tolerating extreme stomach pain though, so I
         | still use it if I really need it.
        
           | elzbardico wrote:
           | Man. Based on personal experience at my family. I bet you're
           | carefully keeping tabs on your stomach with a doctor, but if
           | not, don't grow used to tolerate extreme stomach pain. I've
           | seen stomach cancer in my family, and I would like to
           | encourage you do whatever you can to minimize the risk for
           | you.
        
         | vidarh wrote:
         | Having tried it recreationally and also getting the stuffy
         | nose, NSAIDs counter that effectively for me. Of course if you
         | also get acute heartburn you want to be careful with combining
         | it with something that can be tough on the stomach...
         | 
         | Talk to your doctor about whether you can combine with a proton
         | pump inhibitor like Omeprazole. There's are downsides (in
         | particular, sustained use can mask other things, including
         | serious issues) but I've not had a single episode of heartburn
         | since I was out on it.
        
         | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
         | > Also, extremelly stuffy nose, to the point where basically I
         | need to breath by the mouth. And the red eyes, eyes as red as
         | if had just smoke the biggest and strongest joint ever.
         | 
         | Looks like an allergic reaction; it could be not so much in
         | sildenafil itself, but what they use as filler for the pills.
        
           | vidarh wrote:
           | Stuffy nose is a common side effect of sildenafil itself. UK
           | NHS lists common side effects as anything affecting more than
           | 1 in 100 patients.
        
       | adolph wrote:
       | canned ham health benefits still elude science
        
       | largbae wrote:
       | I always wonder if there is a circular logic flaw in survey
       | studies of recreation and dementia: could it be that the folks
       | who are chasing Viagra or running marathons don't get dementia,
       | because the ones with dementia don't pursue these activities?
        
         | acchow wrote:
         | This is known as a confounding bias. A quality study should try
         | to eliminate the obvious ones, but of course there may still he
         | an infinite number of hidden confounding variables.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | This isn't a survey; it's an RCT.
        
       | standardUser wrote:
       | The 3x daily dosage is surprising to me because the one notable
       | warning that comes with the prescription is to never take it more
       | than once in a day. In fact, I would go as far to say that if
       | you've been prescribed Viagra the only things you know about it
       | are: it will help you get boners, you should talk to a doctor if
       | you have a heart condition, and you should _never_ use it more
       | than once a day. The warning seemed extra ominous because it was
       | basically the only warning, so I adhered to it fairly strictly at
       | first.
       | 
       | About a year later I talked to some gay male friends and they all
       | said that was ridiculous, that they freely take it multiple times
       | per day, and I that should too. So now I do (as needed) and it's
       | worked very well. Plus, the subscription I get through Hims sends
       | me a giant bottle of 20mg pills (at an unreasonably high cost) so
       | I am able to easily dose myself instead of being given a one-
       | size-fits-all dosage, like we get with most medications. My low
       | dose is 3 pills and my high dose is 5 pills.
       | 
       | Now there are many options beyond Viagra including a ton of
       | intriguing combination drugs that use multiple erection drugs
       | and/or other drugs with tangential effects. But I like that I
       | know how Viagra works for me personally based on experience. I
       | think we all underestimate how much drugs very from person to
       | person. Plus, now that I think about the lack of warnings that
       | come with Viagra, it actually seems like an unusually benign
       | drug.
        
         | UberFly wrote:
         | A typical dose of Viagra is 25,50 or 100 mg, so your 3-5 doses
         | of 20 mg isn't even atypical. Also, there are plenty of
         | warnings that come with Viagra usage. You may have not taken
         | the time to read them.
        
       | nothrowaways wrote:
       | What a coincidence
        
       | fny wrote:
       | Viagra has also been shown to reduce period cramps.
       | 
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23925396/
        
         | ofrzeta wrote:
         | One trial with 62 patients and then "Since we did not meet our
         | sample size due to the loss of funding and could not confirm
         | our primary hypothesis, larger studies of longer duration,
         | likely multi-center, are needed to confirm the findings from
         | this study. "
        
       | kabes wrote:
       | It also increases blood flow to the scalp, which helps against
       | hair loss.
        
       | madmask wrote:
       | Try some citrulline
        
       | bionhoward wrote:
       | Just a word to the wise, viagra can cause tinnitus by putting too
       | much blood through tiny vessels in your ears. Be careful of high
       | doses while hydrated and exercising
        
         | noduerme wrote:
         | isn't, er, vigorous exercise part of what people expect when
         | they take viagra?
        
           | galdosdi wrote:
           | Depends. The kind of exercise you're thinking can be done
           | vigorously and for a long period -- or, for some people, it
           | could be a quick 5-10 minute thing that feels vigorous but
           | really doesn't involve that much muscular effort.
        
           | sushid wrote:
           | It's common to have a 1 hour running or a lifting session 3-4
           | times a week but kudos to you and/or my condolences to your
           | partner if your vigorous exercise lasts that long every time.
        
         | alfiedotwtf wrote:
         | Off-topic but related... I started Vyvanse about 3 months ago
         | and the only negative side effect so far is tinnitus. It's
         | bloody loud :(
        
           | hooverd wrote:
           | It can also be caused by SSRIs and NDRIs and benzos! Great
           | side effect if you're already feeling depressed. Although
           | benzos can also help, depending. I think 80% of cases are a
           | brain thing and not an ear thing, but because ENTs and
           | audiologists have exactly one hammer (hearing aids), we get
           | fuck all for research.
        
       | cpill wrote:
       | I wonder if it would help with the brain fog of long Covid...?
        
         | larsrc wrote:
         | Me too! This small study suggests so:
         | https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00598585
        
       | treprinum wrote:
       | It also seems to cause melanoma, so...
       | Pomergranate/beetroot/garlic seem safer. Arginine/citrulline
       | perhaps as well (all of them increase NO in the blood).
       | 
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4178948/
       | 
       | https://www.drugwatch.com/viagra/melanoma/
       | 
       | "In 2014, a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that
       | the use of sildenafil, more commonly known by its brand name
       | Viagra, within 3 months prior to the study's start increased the
       | likelihood of developing melanoma by as much as 84 percent.'
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | It is _associated_ with increased risk of melanoma, but not
         | known to _cause_ it. The third variable is expected to be
         | lifestyle  / socioeconomic.
         | https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2338254
         | 
         | > Men taking PDE5 inhibitors had a higher educational level and
         | annual income, factors that were also significantly associated
         | with melanoma risk.
        
           | treprinum wrote:
           | Still, it's a food for thought. I know correlation is not
           | causation but there might be some link that hits some folks
           | unexpectedly hard. I was taking sildenafil to improve brain
           | hypoperfusion from long covid and one day a fast growing mole
           | appeared on my arm that reached 2cm diameter in a few days -
           | the suspicion was on nodular melanoma or pyogenic granuloma
           | and it turned out to be the latter. I stopped taking
           | sildenafil immediately. I am in the socioeconomic group they
           | mentioned.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | between this and cialis helping with prostate cancer, i wonder if
       | the erection is just a side effect
        
         | AbstractH24 wrote:
         | One that is very profitable
        
       | pylua wrote:
       | Maybe now viagra opens up to older women, not just men ? It will
       | double their market ?
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | So it works as well for the big head as it does for the little
       | head. Interesting, but somehow I feel I should have figured this
       | was the case.
        
       | dkekenflxlf wrote:
       | @ALL:
       | 
       | Guys (esp!), for real-pros, Viagra is a toy - instead, they use
       | Taladafil/etc.
       | 
       | (Source: Boner all day _actually_ hurts ;-)
        
       | jgalt212 wrote:
       | There's a joke / counterpoint in here about men with erections
       | thinking less clearly than men without erections.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-09 23:02 UTC)