In your opinion Hypo, what is the percentage of Gyne returning/regrowing (as a result of an underlaying cause) as compared with those cases that do not go into remission.
That is a fantastic question and one that is terribly difficult to answer. To my knowledge no legitimate data exists on the statistical percentage of gynecomastia re-development, never mind any data that offers a breakdown as to the causes of re-development that would allow us to say well if you have x, y or z here are the statistics and the likelihood of this happening.
I am prepared to look at anything that anyone may offer on this, but I have not seen any such data.
Given my answer I think you would have every right to say well if you do not know the statistical likelihood of recurrence then why are you making this an issue?
My answer to that would be, in the absence of verifiable legitimate statistical data we have to go off what information we do have even if that information is less than perfect.
I have applied this thought process when looking at various matters on the board, both re-development of gynecomastia and the problems with Propecia etc. In the latter case I have no statistical information on the link between Propecia and gynecomastia. But I have seen with my own eyes the vast number of men who have come through this board complaining of gynecomastia development post Propecia use (a greater number than that who have used steroids cycles) for over two years and I am aware of a world wide movement and support groups fighting against Propecia use.
So in that latter case despite a lack of statistics, enough information exists to say there is a very definite link between Propecia and gynecomastia and that Propecia can be a real problem.
Hopefully here I will show you equally compelling logic for the concern of gynecomastia re-development.
In the context of development and re-development of gynecomastia, I know;
A) That 10% of all gynecomastia cases are caused by hypogonadism
B) That there seems to be a high percentage of gynecomastia development and gynecomastia re-development in hypogonadal men from my experience over the years when viewing hypogonadal support groups across the world.
C) Upto 25% of cases of gynecomastia cases are caused by an underlying cause not puberty. If this follows the same pattern seen in hypogonadism then re-development is an issue here too.
So the logic;
I see a lot of gynecomastia recurrence in men with hypogonadism on support groups and have for years. 10% of all gynecomastia in are typically caused by gynecomastia, therefore the likelihood is that in every 100 men 10 have hypogonadism on this site.
Ergo it is reasonable to suggest that recurrence in those men will be the same as that seen elsewhere and a problem. Hence the need for endocrine referrals, ruling out problems and getting people diagnosed and treated where appropriate so they don’t suffer from hypognadism or have a high risk of gynecomastia recurrence.
Ultimately gynecomastia is hormonal in nature whatever the cause, it requires an underlying hormonal imbalance to occur whether that is a temporary one such as puberty or something more permanent like hypogonadism or hyperthyroidism. The lowest common denominator is an imbalance.
There is no reason to think that the form of an imbalance affects the rate of recurrence. If an underlying condition was able to cause gynecomastia in the first place via hormonal imbalance and glandular tissue is still there post operatively that has not been cut off from the effects of such hormones via vascular changes, then those hormones can still act upon that tissue, just as it did before.
Ergo- 25% of gynecomastia cases have an underlying cause. If that cause is not diagnosed and treated the same conditions that existed to cause the condition still exist to cause it a second time. If even 50% of such cases resulted in recurrence we would be looking at a total recurrence rate across gynecomastia patients as a whole of 12.5 %, something that would be a significant issue.
I do not know if you find my position compelling or not. Obviously good quality legitimate statistical data would be great and I would prefer to give you that. In the absence of that though, I have gone off all that I have found to be the case from my experience.
Separately from your question and something that has been part of my quest on this site.
People often have a very understandable problem on this website. They are concerned primarily about gynecomastia, that is why they are here after all and it is what has caused them great psychological pain. But gynecomastia is often a symptom of something wrong with the body that is more serious in terms of the harm that it can do to health. So I have not viewed the need for endocrine referrals purely in the context of gynecomastia, although that has been part of it. Given the fact that I know 10% of all gynecomastia sufferers, probably 10 in every 100 men on the site have hypogonadism, and given the fact that I know the damage that can cause in the long term if left untreated I have also been looking to try an protect peoples health by highlighting the need for endocrine referral. Also knowing the statistics for other serious underlying causes and the 25% figures previously mentioned, again I look at endocrine referral as a way of helping ensure that people do not have serious problems that are pointed to by the symptom of gynecomastia. Gynecomastia may seem like the only thing that matters, but in the final analysis, people can find out in years to come that there are worse things that can happen to them. If I can help prevent recurrence of gynecomastia by identifying those affected by problems and help ensure that those men do not suffer serious long term problems then I will be happy. In doing that and promoting endocrine referral it is safeguarding the health of all those on the board. From the men I have helped on the site get diagnosed and treated for conditions they previously didn’t know they had. Some of those men will now as a result of treatment avoid things like osteoporosis, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Cardio Vascular Disease and even death as an indirect result. That is a some prize i'm sure you'll agree.
in most cases the underlying cause is puberty irregularities. once that's gone, less worries.
i think gb's point was just that that's how it is for most gyne inquirers. i'd have just left it at "slim", but not if an underlying condition is there, and the tests suggest that's not a problem.
That is 90% correct as I see it. You could say from the sentiment that is almost spot on. My only issues are A) I believe that many of the underlying conditions, particularly hypogonadism are underdiagnosed and B) the statistical likelihood of an underlying cause is not insignificant being 25%.
Topic: is surgery a permanant cure? (Read 5019 times)
Similar Topics
