I use to cut mine into quarters. And took a couple Tylenol with it to eliminate the headache.
Meaning ‘not at all’? Or am I once again oblivious to some major thing? Um…need answer fast.
I get mine from [get roman . com]. Both GR and [for hims .com] want to rope you into automatic resupply (3 month supply at a time). I may have “misjudged” my usage a little and requested that I would need 2 20mg tablets 2 times a week when I really use around 2 a month. My goal is to build up a bit of a supply and then stop the auto payments.
I only use them later in the evening, after 9 pm my performance seems to drop, probably hormonal. I take 1 20 mg pill and my only side effect is a watery eye feeling, like you got bopped in the nose but not as strong.
If you snort them, you don’t have to wait 30 minutes. At least, those are the notes I’ve got.
“Someone I know” found, on their doctor’s advice (as a money-saving tactic first, but also to judge initial reactions), that halving a 10mg tablet is plenty, and cuts the cost in half.
Yes to the headaches, which is why “he” prefers to take them just before bedtime so “he” sleeps through the worst of the side effects.
When has Viagra (or even the generic Sildenafil) ever come in 10 or 20mg form? The smallest I’ve ever heard is 50mg.
The 20mg pill of Sildenafil (Ravatio) is approved for treating hypertension and is often prescribed “off label” for ED. The doc will just prescribe taking up to 4 pills as needed or something to that effect.
I get the 20mg generic sildenafil and take 2.5 of them to get the standard 50mg dose. Never had the blue vision or a headache.
Cialis is more effective for me, but since sildenafil has gone generic it’s dramatically cheaper. I understand Cialis is supposed to go generic this year, and it will be interesting to see if it drops as dramatically in price.
Revatio was designed for treatment of primary pulmonary hypertension, and some other rare circulatory diseases, so as to make life easier for pharmacists and other people who have to deal with insurance issues.
ED meds are not covered by Medicare or Medicaid when used for that purpose, and most private insurances have limited people to 6 doses per month.
How many ways is it controversial to someone, somewhere? Let me get started.
-
Viagra’s discoverers won the Nobel Prize, but not for the reason most of you may think. It’s because it led to increased research into the nitric oxide cycle, upon which these drugs (AKA PDE5 inhibitors) act. The NO cycle is believe to play a role in cancer, Alzheimer’s, and the overall aging process.
-
Scientists are, according to many, a bunch of sexist anti-woman bigots because they figured out how men could get more and better boners, but we haven’t come up with a foolproof, side-effect free birth control for men OR women. (And probably never will; sorry. Don’t think we aren’t working on it.) Most people would also be surprised at how many women use Viagra, etc. for their own sexual dysfunction. Really.
-
Yes, it’s true, Tricare spends several million dollars a year on Viagra and other ED meds and treatments. So? Erections and pregnancy are related (doh!) BUT THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. I also do not understand why so many women have an issue with elderly or disabled veterans being able to have sex.
I’m sure I can come up with others; these are just the first ones that come to mind.
I’m sorry but these are only controversies to you.
Somehow, there’s a reason we have a boner pill and a hair pill before we have a cure for cancer…
ETA: like, what’s the point of a corpse if we can’t give it rock hard erections?
When I worked at the grocery store, one of my technicians, who was probably a virgin at the time, asked me, “Why do you always put a ‘Do Not Drink Alcohol’ sticker on Viagra?” and I replied, “Renders it useless.” She answered, “Oh, yeah.”
More than once, I had guys ask me, “Can I drink with that?” and I told them that if they did, it wouldn’t work. These were men in their 20s whose impotence was quite likely due to alcohol and/or drug abuse.
You don’t know very many women, do you? LOTS of women think Viagra, etc. is an aspect of sexism. :dubious:
I don’t think they’re controversies, but other women (and MAAAAYBE some men) certainly do. I think Viagra, etc. is a wonderful thing, for the right people when used for the right reasons (and that’s as nebulous as pornography, as in I know it when I see it).
In recent weeks, I’ve seen oodles of pictures of women holding signs that say things like “Babies are God’s will? Really? Why isn’t impotence?” :smack: For many of those women, in a few decades, they will be happy that these drugs exist.
(Viagra was an accidental discovery, and so was the birth control pill. It was actually first used experimentally as a treatment for infertility.)
p.s. Not long after Viagra was launched, the president of the college of chiropractic in my city was found dead in his house; an autopsy discovered that he had a massive heart attack. When it was reported in the newspaper that Viagra was found in his house, one of my colleagues, a middle-aged man, said, “You mean they don’t have an adjustment for that?”
It’s not that Viagra is an aspect of sexist. It’s that requiring insurance to pay for Viagra, and forbidding it to pay for birth control, is an aspect sexist.
Beautiful illustration of ‘controversy’. 
nearwildheaven: Thanks for the insights. ‘They can’t cure X, but they can give a guy a bone.’ I have to admit that’s floated through my head a few times. But I take comfort in knowing the drug was an accidental discovery, and not some scientist from the He-Man Woman Haters Club waking up one day and deciding to work on man things. Also, at least for the ‘guys over 50’ camp, a useful erection is at least as much for her benefit as his. You tend to care less about how it’s working when your libido is dead, and it’s frustrating for everyone when the stars align and it’s game time but the quarterback is fast asleep on the bench. I mean, creative folks can find other stuff to do, but the ‘two minutes’ that didn’t happen echoes in the mind for days.
I know plenty of women. Ive never heard a single one ever say one bad thing about Viagra. I have heard them say things like how grateful they were for it’s existence. The only time i have ever heard of demographics of women speak poorly of Viagra, etc. is when older women complain about having to try to keep up with the newfound vigor and excitement of their husbands who have started taking Viagra.
Pregnancy is not a loss of function. Erectile dysfunction, obviously, is. But i dont really understand what your point is here. Are you saying that “oodles” of women have sex with men (thanks to those awful blue pills!!), become pregnant and then vilify the very drug that allowed the consensual sex to happen in the first place? Or are you talking about insurance coverage discrepancies between abortions and ED medications? Or about red states passing draconian anti abortion laws?
/double post