WHATS THE NEXT BIG THING?

[mbehr22]

Im assuming that propecia qualifies as one of the 1st really big breakthoughs in hairloss treatment, but what other promising treatments are CLOSE to coming to fruition?

How far off is hair cloning?

What exactly is "hair mult" ?

What other new techniques look promising?

I cant wait to see what kinds of crazy cure we can come up with in the next 10 years.

The 20th century has been dubbed the "Physics" century, and that the 21st will be the BioTech/Molecular age ...

We even finished the human genome project ahead of schedule ....

 

[News2]

Hmm, yes, but it never ceases to amaze me that they haven't found the cure yet. I mean: They put a man on the moon almost 40 years ago, they have cloned a sheep, they have developed countless drugs to treat countless illnesses etc. etc., but they cannot regrow a bit of hair. What I find most astonishing is that the financial incentive did not translate into more research. I mean: Whoever finds the cure has got a licence to print money, and yet there doesn't seem to be much of an appetite to look for a cure.

 

[barnabas]

Hmm, yes, but it never ceases to amaze me that they haven't found the cure yet. I mean: They put a man on the moon almost 40 years ago, they have cloned a sheep, they have developed countless drugs to treat countless illnesses etc. etc., but they cannot regrow a bit of hair. What I find most astonishing is that the financial incentive did not translate into more research. I mean: Whoever finds the cure has got a licence to print money, and yet there doesn't seem to be much of an appetite to look for a cure.

The first part of your argument is ridiculous, as those were all in the national interests and/or saved lives. The second part is naive, as propecia has actually not made Merck much money at all, and Rogaine rapidly went generic and didn't make the inventors of that much either. Looking at the track record, companies aren't going to bother developing baldness cures with all of their might as the previous treatments didn't make much of anything.

 

[person_123]

Previous treatments weren't cures.

They only worked while you continued to use the product, and in some individuals they did nothing.

Both products only regrew little hair, and helped maintain current hair.

If you look at hair transplant industry, however, people are willing to pay a small fortune to have a scarring procedure done, which might not last long anyway.

If we find a true "cure" to hairloss, it will make lots of money.

 

[News2]

The first part of your argument is ridiculous, as those were all in the national interests and/or saved lives.

The point I was trying to make is that there have been significant achievements in many areas of science, but a cure for baldness has not yet been found, even though men have suffered from hairloss for centuries. (And frankly: What would you prefer: A man on the moon or a cure for baldness?)

Looking at the track record, companies aren't going to bother developing baldness cures with all of their might as the previous treatments didn't make much of anything.

You did not read that properly. I am not talking about some kind of wishy-washy treatment that doesn't amount to much. I am talking about a CURE. There are millions of people who do not bother with the treatments that are currently available, because - frankly - the results are not that impressive. But if there was a cure, then a lot of them would use it. And by the way: Men spend billions of dollars a year on hair loss treatments every year as it is.

 

[powersam]

why was putting a man on the moon in the national interest, or in the interest of saving lives? it gained nothing but a little bit of bragging rights for the US, which would hint at a certain immaturity really.

 

[News2]

Exactly. And talking abot being "naive": Do you really think it is easier to find someone who is willing to invest in a project that is "in the national interest" than in a project that - if it is successful - will generate lots of money?

 

[spinner2]

Exactly. And talking abot being "naive": Do you really think it is easier to find someone who is willing to invest in a project that is "in the national interest" than in a project that - if it is successful - will generate lots of money?

If a project is in the government's interests, then the government doesn't need to find a source of funding, they just tax us more and fund it themselves.

 

[elguapo]

We recently got some of the best news this site has received - Phase II clinical trials for a treatment that has real potential to work - and we are arguing?

It's no wonder we have problems with North Korea and Iran and Iraq and you name it.

My suggestion: everybody settle down, take a break for a few months, and then check this and the other hair loss site for updates from either Intercytex or one of the lucky bastards participating in the trials.

I don't know how anybody can argue. I'm fuckin' elated with this news, and I cannot WAIT until next summer, for an update on Trychocite.

 

[News2]

If a project is in the government's interests, then the government doesn't need to find a source of funding, they just tax us more and fund it themselves.

That doesn't stop private investors from investing in a potentially lucrative project. All I'm saying is that I'm surprised that until recently there was so little interest in trying to find a cure.

I don't know how anybody can argue. I'm fuckin' elated with this news, and I cannot WAIT until next summer, for an update on Trychocite.

Yes, it sounds very exciting. However: In November 2004 they told us that HM was "3 to 4 years away" (i.e. 2007 or 2008). It's nearly 2007 now, and what are they telling us? "It's 3 to 4 years away." I wonder what they are gonna tell us in 2010. "It's 3 to 4 years away"? Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that it will never happen, but until it's actually on the market I say "I'll believe it when I see it". All this speculation is driving me mad. Personally, I think that 2010 sounds plausible, but there is no way of knowing whether phase II and III trials and the ensuing regulatory process will cause further delays.

 

[Apoc]

When was the last time that a small privately owned drug company received a grant from the state for their projects?

 

[elguapo]

I guess I shouldn't get ahead of myself, but I can't help it. I keep thinking that 5 out of 7 of the guys in the Phase I trial regrew hair. And even though those hairs may not have been as thick as their other hair, and there were 2 others who did not regrow hair, I keep thinking that the first trial was just meant for safety, and that they probably didn't use a high dosage in the first trial. Now, hopefully, they will find the right dosage or cocktail or whatever, and nice, terminal hairs will grow on all 20 of the Phase II trial participants.

I know what you're saying about how the date keeps slipping. But I can't help but be optimistic right now.

We'll see. Hopefully some time next year, we'll hear something.

 

[Fallout Boy]

No denying there has definitly been progress made so...theres hope for 5 years

 

[hairfin]

When was the last time that a small privately owned drug company received a grant from the state for their projects?

exactly, plus its a grant from a cash strapped health department, so they must think somethings working!!