Why is there not a REAL solution to male pattern baldness yet?

[StartingTreatment]

Sure the "big 3" can slow down, stop, and even reverse hair loss (and transplants can be an option for the right people). But even today's current hair loss treatments are not a complete "cure" or solution to the problem. They may work well for a while (or possibly indefinitely for some people)...but they can always stop or slow down, or never work at all for others.

There's no doubt that there are more options now than ever...and I wouldn't have wanted to have to deal with male pattern baldness anytime before the mid to early '90s when there were far fewer treatments. You pretty much had to throw in the towel, wear a toupee, or comb it over.

However, I find it really difficult to believe that as we come up on 2012 that there STILL isn't a real, permanent solution for male pattern hair loss. I mean...we can send rovers to Mars. We can clone a sheep (and humans for that matter). We can beat cancer (not to mention other things in modern medicine and medical technology that are absolutely incredible...including cosmetic and plastic surgery). WHY can we not find a good, reliable, real way to put hair back on someone's head? It seems so simple compared to other things that have been accomplished.

And yes I've heard of hair cloning (or follicular cell implantation). But how come it's taking so long to develop...and why is it so hard to figure out if it will or will not work.

I can't even think of the amount of peoples' lives that would improve if there was just simply a REAL solution to putting peoples' hair back on their heads. I'm confident there are talented people out there that could figure it out. What gives?

 

[anxious1]

well with regards to male pattern baldness, there is no cure, because it is not a disease. Its a natural process, possibly accelerated by lifestyle (unproven )
but never the less natural, therefore we can only change it by altering genes and the endocrine system and stimulating new growth, all needs to be done with chemicals and unnatural processes.

basically its a natural condition and we can only fix it by interfering with that natural process, and most of the time u cant alter one thing, without a cascade of other things being affected.

E.g. Our genes are manipulated by our bodies with enzymes that cut, copy and paste(for lack of better words) pieces of dna together to fix mistakes.

- If we try and do this synthetically, we risk many dangerous diseases. We just dont know enough about genes to accurately manipulate them yet. (we dont know wat most of the genes do) however we do know how they are processed and expressed.

- If we play around with our hormones usually we block one thing and mess up everything else. The endocrine system is very complicated, and we still dont really know the extent of the cellular communication and cross talk.

With regards to autoimmune types of hairloss, the only real treatment is to block the actions of our immune system with drugs, which causes many problems as u can imagine.


In short, until we can successfully change our genetics safely without f*****g up everything else, there will be no cure. Im confident better drugs will come out at some stage though, but they will still most likely have other side effects. I have my doubts whether these newer drugs such as CB... watever its called will have no side effects. we probably just havent discovered them yet.


The best treatment is still hair transplants, but unfortunately its not socially acceptable. I like experimenting with supplments, and perhaps theres potential there, but then u have to worry about ur liver.

Personally ive given up for now on everything. There comes a time when u realise ur wasting precious years of ur life on this pointless pursuit.
time that could be spent with ur family and friends, and interests etc.

The older u get, the less u care, unless ur really self centered and boring . lol

 

[powersam]

StartingTreatment - Go and invent one then.

Hilarious how people can go on about 'I can't believe they haven't cured [insert anything without cure] ' yet they themselves have absolutely zero to contribute to said cure.

 

[The Natural]

powersam,

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

 

[powersam]

powersam,

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

With zero understanding of how such cures are created, and the troubles encountered along the way, people should shut up and wait.

If they did understand, they would shut up and wait.

 

[powersam]

I'm confident there are talented people out there that could figure it out. What gives?

The really talented people will be working on more important things.

 

[The Natural]

A "cure" would be disastrous for the hair loss commercial industry (pharmas, transplant specialists, etc). These companies, I gather, would rather leave things be, as they are now.

It is only when the cure becomes a bigger priority than the profits, will we ever see a real difference.

 

[freakout]

"Genes cannot selfactualize; they are chemically unable to turn themselves on or off. Gene expression is under the regulatory control of environmental signals that act through epigenetic mechanisms". Nijhout, 1990, Symer and Bender, 2001
Epigenetics

male pattern baldness is not a normal process. It's not a disease. It's symptom given the fact that it's associated with numerous DEADLY diseases and conditions.

Balding men will likely die sooner.

 

[anxious1]

male pattern baldness is not a normal process. It's not a disease. It's symptom given the fact that it's associated with numerous DEADLY diseases and conditions.

Balding men will likely die sooner.

Then how come gorillas and chimps also get male pattern baldness. Even when they live in jungles with totally natural foods and lifestyles.

And what 'numerous' diseases is it associated with. U urself says (and it is definately true, i agree with u on this!) that association does not prove causation.

i assume u mean heart disease and prostate enlargement ( benign prostatic hyperplasia)

do u have proof these r related to balding? cos i'd like to read that

I admit male pattern baldness is probably accelerated by lifestyle such as excesses like too much sex, alcohol who knows wat else, PROBABLY, but not proven, but this doesnt mean if u take these out of the equation u will have no male pattern baldness.

I dont see how u can say balding men will likely die sooner, i can see no proof of that watsoever.Heart disease and prostatic hyperplasia occurr in smokers, drinkers, non smokers, non drinker, healthy ppl, unhealthy ppl. etc.

If theres a secret common cause i'd like to know wat it is pls.

 

[freakout]

Then how come gorillas and chimps also get male pattern baldness. Even when they live in jungles with totally natural foods and lifestyles.

Are you a gorilla? Show ma a gorilla with smooth shinny baldness. Is it common among monkeys just like in humans? Or is it RARE?

And what 'numerous' diseases is it associated with. U urself says (and it is definately true, i agree with u on this!) that association does not prove causation.

Asoociation does not mean causation BUT IMPLIES COMMON CONTRIBUTING FACTORS

For a med student, you don't seem to be doing good on research. Go to NIH http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov and do some searching.

i assume u mean heart disease and prostate enlargement ( benign prostatic hyperplasia)
do u have proof these r related to balding? cos i'd like to read that

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12050096
http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/conten ... dq695.full

I admit male pattern baldness is probably accelerated by lifestyle such as excesses like too much sex, alcohol who knows wat else, PROBABLY, but not proven, but this doesnt mean if u take these out of the equation u will have no male pattern baldness.

I dont see how u can say balding men will likely die sooner, i can see no proof of that watsoever.Heart disease and prostatic hyperplasia occurr in smokers, drinkers, non smokers, non drinker, healthy ppl, unhealthy ppl. etc.

How much do you know on the subject of statistics?

If theres a secret common cause i'd like to know wat it is pls.

If there was a common cause they would have nailed it by now. Did it ever occur to you that there could be several causes and several factors?

 

[anxious1]

For a med student, you don't seem to be doing good on research. Go to NIH http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov and do some searching.

thats a bit personal isnt it? Im doing fine thank u very much, and we dont only use pubmed. We use a wide range of other databases + alot of resources that u need paid access to, which we get thru the university.

How much do you know on the subject of statistics?

well ive studied university level statistics, maths and epidemiology. how much do U know?

If there was a common cause they would have nailed it by now. Did it ever occur to you that there could be several causes and several factors?

Im sure there is, but causes of male pattern baldness. not causes of some mystery disease which male pattern baldness and prostate cancer are symptoms of.

Look im not pretending i know it all, i obviously don't, but im not the one making dumb statements like 'balding men will likely die sooner' (lol makes me laugh) And then questioning my abilities.

reading abstracts online, misinterpreting them (because u have no training in how to interpret them), and then quoting them as proof to substantiate ur quackpot theories while throwing in the word 'epigenetics' everywhere to try and sound scientific, is poor use of pubmed in my opinion.

 

[freakout]

we dont only use pubmed. We use a wide range of other databases + alot of resources that u need paid access to, which we get thru the university

Is that how you were able to conclude that male pattern baldness is a "normal" thing? It does sound like dumb to me. Why else do researchers continue doing theee studies if it's just a "normal" thing.

since you studiy statistics at the 'university' level, then you should at least understand why some researchers are proposing using male pattern baldness as an indicator for the potential onset of the associated diseases for early preventive treatments.

The reason: Balding men will likely die sooner due to those associated diseases and conditions.

 

[ripple-effect]

I've seen a few articles showing that balding men are at an increased risk of prostate cancer which makes sense..

Anyway, I can't blame the way ST thinks. I used to think like that when I was first seeing signs of my hair loss and didn't know what to do about. I thought like that out of frustration. I believe anxious addresses it well.

basically its a natural condition and we can only fix it by interfering with that natural process, and most of the time u cant alter one thing, without a cascade of other things being affected.

This is true, and this is why I stress topical & natural. That way you minimize having to screw up the internal processes going on in your body plus go straight to source of the problem. The DHT that attacks your follicles is created in the scalp.

E.g. Our genes are manipulated by our bodies with enzymes that cut, copy and paste(for lack of better words) pieces of dna together to fix mistakes.

- If we try and do this synthetically, we risk many dangerous diseases. We just dont know enough about genes to accurately manipulate them yet. (we dont know wat most of the genes do) however we do know how they are processed and expressed.

- If we play around with our hormones usually we block one thing and mess up everything else. The endocrine system is very complicated, and we still dont really know the extent of the cellular communication and cross talk.

I agree, this is why I'm not a big advocate of Propecia or any other synthetic drug for hair loss.

 

[Pyro]

anxious1, just ignore freakout. He just talks the talk, but in the end is just trying to sell his "I broke the mystery of male pattern baldness" book.

LOLOL

 

[Mojo Risin]

"It's all preliminary at the moment," says Cotsarelis, who has helped to set up a company, Follica, that will attempt to bring the idea to market. "If it all went perfectly then possibly in two to three years we would have a product, but that's very optimistic.

That was in 2007. Now, in 2011, the same guy says it's A DECADE AWAY. So yeah. Don't ask me why I put the ''troll face'' on Cotsarelis now ..

 

[The Natural]

..but in the end is just trying to sell his "I broke the mystery of male pattern baldness" book.

Wouldn't pay two wooden nickels for it.

:shakehead:

 

[StartingTreatment]

It's possible to "clone" or "make" a sheep, human, and other complicated living organisms with identical DNA from a "donor." Today. Right now.

So, why can't we just take a hair from the back of someones head (yep, just a simple hair...follicle included)...replicate it enough times for what someone needs, and then put those replicated hairs on top of someone's head? Anyone could go in and get Elvis hair if they really wanted it. And it would stay there forever. It would be a lot like today's hair transplants...except you wouldn't need to worry about running out of donor hair. And it seems like it would be even simpler than extracting hairs from a donor area.

That would be a real permanent solution to the problem. Instead of trying to manipulate hormones with drugs, etc. Check this out...it's 6 mins long, but really amazing...and these are complicated organs...I'm just talking a hair:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQnJAMsV1g8

 

[ukmale24]

I'm confident there are talented people out there that could figure it out. What gives?

The really talented people will be working on more important things.

Scientists revealed the formula for the perfect cup of tea today.

Maybe cancer patients could have one while they wait for a cure.

 

[StartingTreatment]

ha ha!...just like other important things like fake tits and nose jobs? Obviously there was room and a market for those. C'mon.

Have you ever seen the amount of money spent by people on hairloss "cures and treatments"...including those that aren't even clinically proven to work? It's goddam ridiculous.

 

[ukmale24]

A "cure" would be disastrous for the hair loss commercial industry (pharmas, transplant specialists, etc). These companies, I gather, would rather leave things be, as they are now.

It is only when the cure becomes a bigger priority than the profits, will we ever see a real difference.

But also, there's only a few companies that are making masses amounts of money from this. The others, who may be making a bit of money, would be better off finding a more reliable treatment or long-term cure than have to play second fiddle to Merck and the main Minoxidil sellers.