- Reaction score
- 4,504
The way I see it, in ascending order of likelihood and proximity:
1 - there will never be a drug that allows you to recover lost hair after the follicle has been inactive for some years (meaning it has produced no vellus whatsoever). If the follicle has been dead for some hair cycles, it's dead for good, all researchers seem to show (even Brotzu puts a five years limit to his apparently miraculous potion...)
2 - there might someday be a drug that allows you to recover lost hair (i.e.: re-activate follicles) if the follicle has been recently producing vellus. But this will probably come later than (3) and (4), so it is possible that if (3) and (4) are true, there is no need to spend research money on this topic.
3 - there will probably be some day a drug that works like propecia and avodart, but with fewer side effects, and able to stop hairloss in a bigger share of the balding of the population. This seems to me like the gold mine for researchers.
4 - there will surely be one day a method that allows for in-vitro replication of your own hair (Dutch scientists have created an artificial hamburger based on a single meat molecule. How far away can hair be?). That day, the problem of hair transplant (the donor - recipient ratio) is solved and baldness is practically solved via massive hair transplants (think of 20.000 grafts per expensive but definitive session).
I have a feeling that if (3) (i.e.: a good drug to prevent hairloss) comes before (4), then (4) becomes useless to spend research time and money on because bald men will be fewer and fewer.
1 - there will never be a drug that allows you to recover lost hair after the follicle has been inactive for some years (meaning it has produced no vellus whatsoever). If the follicle has been dead for some hair cycles, it's dead for good, all researchers seem to show (even Brotzu puts a five years limit to his apparently miraculous potion...)
2 - there might someday be a drug that allows you to recover lost hair (i.e.: re-activate follicles) if the follicle has been recently producing vellus. But this will probably come later than (3) and (4), so it is possible that if (3) and (4) are true, there is no need to spend research money on this topic.
3 - there will probably be some day a drug that works like propecia and avodart, but with fewer side effects, and able to stop hairloss in a bigger share of the balding of the population. This seems to me like the gold mine for researchers.
4 - there will surely be one day a method that allows for in-vitro replication of your own hair (Dutch scientists have created an artificial hamburger based on a single meat molecule. How far away can hair be?). That day, the problem of hair transplant (the donor - recipient ratio) is solved and baldness is practically solved via massive hair transplants (think of 20.000 grafts per expensive but definitive session).
I have a feeling that if (3) (i.e.: a good drug to prevent hairloss) comes before (4), then (4) becomes useless to spend research time and money on because bald men will be fewer and fewer.