Will there be a cure for baldness by 2030 according to you?

[froggy7]

I have had my fill of scientist/researchers lying to me.

ok so there will be no cure for baldness, so what?

 

[MrClean1]

ok so there will be no cure for baldness, so what?

Not in a timeframe that will help anyone on this forum.

 

[froggy7]

Not in a timeframe that will help anyone on this forum.

maybe stemson will find a cure in 15 years from now

 

[froggy7]

maybe stemson will find a cure in 15 years from now

what so funny?

 

[Diffused_confidence]

maybe stemson will find a cure in 15 years from now

By then I'll be 46 and probably treated by 50. So that point my hair doesn't help me much.

 

[Pls_NW-1]

what so funny?

"Find" is an extensive term lol.

They found their technique a lot of years ago already, they just need to develop it.

Nvm

 

[froggy7]

"Find" is an extensive term lol.

They found their technique a lot of years ago already, they just need to develop it.

Nvm

Their technique is only good in theory, until it has been tested on any human being, it's just worth sh*t

 

[Diffused_confidence]

what so funny?

You must be new here.

 

[farnsworth]

I tried to create a separate thread on my experience and research. Hopefully it becomes approved. But I believe theoretically and anecdotally it's been cured.

 

[DuncanOP]

By then I'll be 46 and probably treated by 50. So that point my hair doesn't help me much.

I don't think so. When you are older, you shall want your hair back to yourself feel younger.

I don't care about my age. But I want my hair with me forever no matter what haha.

@topic: We are waiting for big things from hair care for too much time, 30+ years (if we consider finasteride release and so on).
I don't think we will need to wait much more time to new products comes to market. But the perfect cure can be stilll a little far

 

[Dar]

By then I'll be 46 and probably treated by 50. So that point my hair doesn't help me much.

Why would it be so bad to have hair at 50?

 

[Dar]

progress is visible and you cant deny it

What progress???

 

[INT]

we must honestly admit that we are in the best moment in history to eliminate baldness, there have never been so many companies and such science as now

I remember seeing this post before...


In 2007....

 

[Pacho]

I remember seeing this post before...


In 2007....

game over

 

[MrClean1]

So you're on this forum just to tell the rest of us we have nothing to hope for?

No...I am on the forum for better treatments and ideas. I just don't see a cure anytime soon. Name all the cures that medical science has given us that are are not related to surgery or antibiotics.

 

[scientist_0005]

i don't think there will be a cure by 2030. i also do not think there will be a treatment option superior and/or saver to finasteride and minoxidil up until 2035. deff not in 2030. you have to think, if it is supposed to be on the shelves in 8 years, it needs to at least be on the map rn, and there is literally only 4 competitive ideas rn and i think each and everyone of them has major issues. this industry is most definitely the most regressive and fucked biotech branch there is but thats just life.

 

[FollicleGuardian]

Note: It looks like I can't post sources or post a separate thread. I'm not going to wait for a moderator to provide that permission.

This is a quick discussion, I am a very busy person. I will post some of my research but not all of it in the interest of time. I have almost cured my Androgenetic Alopecia to baseline, I will not recommend the materials to do so because of legal precariousness, but they've each been discussed throughout the forums at least in a speculative capacity. It is this ensemble of these materials which cures Androgenetic Alopecia.

Anything you do is at your own risk and this is in no way a recommendation.

The explanation anticipates all and every symptomatic facet of Androgenetic Alopecia hairloss.

There are two major causes of the symptoms of Androgenetic Alopecia, the first is namely 5AR sensitivity about the follicles, and the hormones which are aromatized into DHT. DHT kills follicles by triggering Mitochondrial Pyruvate conversion (MPC) [6]. Lack of lactate production has recently been shown to determine the quiescence of the stem cells (note: the mere addition of lactate will not help Androgenetic Alopecia).

This quiescence of the stem cells leads to the eventual demise of the follicle by preventing replenishment of the follicle by a mechanism discussed below.

The second is evinced by the question which remains, why does a 5AR-inhibitor or otherwise DHT removal not trigger complete rejuvenation of the follicle given that the stem cell exists quiescently? The answer is that a single stem cell follicle itself is unable to signal strongly enough to receive the prolactin/17b-estradiol and other chemicals to participate in the hair cycle, which on trigger switches on MPC inhibition. What is needed is a collection (read density) of follicles (even if fully miniaturized!) to be fully synchronized, this can only happen if each stem cell remains in cycle with each other, where they solicit participation of the next hair cycle [1,2,3,4].

This is why single hair follicle transplants fail and why a minimum density of follicles is required. Additionally, this is why grafts only succeed in adjacency to healthy hair, while regrowth will always occur starting from the adjacent hairs.

Finally, this is why hairloss often begins at the temple which has half the density of follicles than everywhere else on the head [7]. As stem cells become dysfunctional, it becomes more difficult for adjacent cells to participate in the next hair cycle. That is, hairloss is an exponential process, accelerating on each new cycle.

The goal of Androgenetic Alopecia prevention and rejuvenation of quiescent cells is to then allow hairs to synchronously begin and maintain a hair cycle. This is where the efficacy of lactate hydrogenase medicine (e.g. minoxidil, but it should be clear though that this is not enough if the follicle is DHT treated or otherwise not in cycle) and 5AR inhibition occurs.

MPC inhibition causes a build up of Pyruvate in the cell. What do you think about using Pyruvate topically?

 

[pegasus2]

Women don't lose hair at the temples. They lose it in the center. So much for proximity theory

 

[farnsworth]

Women don't lose hair at the temples. They lose it in the center. So much for proximity theory

The proximity theory has been seen in all animal and human models. It is not a theory but the empirical observation on transplants and regrowth patterns which requires significant coordination of hair cycles, this is the efficacy of prolactin. There is a recent study where they attempt a single human hair stem cell transplant in a murine model without success. But the minimum addition of 3 produces growth.

I have a theory to women hairloss which explains that but I’m not interested enough in the research to verify it. What is true is that 5AR inhibition is far less effective with Androgenetic Alopecia in women than men. Additionally, unlike men, the dht levels of women experiencing Androgenetic Alopecia is not significantly different than those without.

 

[farnsworth]

MPC inhibition causes a build up of Pyruvate in the cell. What do you think about using Pyruvate topically?

Will not work. MPC or lack thereof is an intracellular process. The goal is to prevent the conversion into glucose and instead allow lactate production.