VIGAMED (oral phentolamine mesylate 40 mg) is a new ED drug. It is not as popular as Viagra, but it may be an excellent alternative for men who cannot take or have had little success with PDE-5 inhibitors.
I've been taking VIGAMED for several months and I'm very happy with the results: it really works.
VIGAMED is not a PDE-5 inhibitor, it is an alpha blocker. It blocks alpha receptors in the penis and increases blood flow to the genitals. You should take it on demand, 15 to 30 minutes before sex. It is effective and safer than Viagra: side effects are minimal and transient.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to buy VIGAMED in the US, but you can order it online:
www.vasomaxclinic.comwww.propecia-proscar.comwww.worldwide-pharmacies.comAnd no, I'm not trying to sell anything here. Don't take my word for it. There are several studies that show the efficacy of oral phentolamine mesylate. Here's one of them, taken from the reliable International Journal of Impotence Research:
«Long-term safety and efficacy of oral phentolamine mesylate (Vasomax) in men with mild to moderate erectile dysfunction
The objectives of this study were to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of phentolamine mesylate, an orally active, rapid-acting alpha-adrenergic receptor antagonist, for the treatment of men suffering from erectile dysfunction (ED). It was an open-label study involving more than 2000 patients. Men received phentolamine mesylate 40 mg or 80 mg (10 tablets/month) as needed for up to 13 months and self-assessed erectile performance using two validated questionnaires. Treatment with phentolamine mesylate was associated with increases in Erectile Function Domain score of the IIEF, successful vaginal penetrations, and in overall satisfaction. Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and consistent with the known pharmacodynamic properties of phentolamine. In conclusion, phentolamine mesylate is safe and effective in the long-term treatment of men with mild to moderate ED.
International Journal of Impotence Research (2002) 14, 266-270. doi:10.1038/sj.ijir.3900885»