Benjamin Owen
Member
- Reaction score
- 1
Will it? I am just wandering and hoping.
Will Hairloss Be Cured In Our Lifetimes?
- Thread starter Benjamin Owen
- Start date
Benjamin Owen
Member
- Reaction score
- 1
My mind is wandering..
- Reaction score
- 86
It depends what you mean by cure. If you mean something that will magically grow full heads of hair on anybody, then probably not. But if you mean something more efficient than what we have now (big 3) at slowing further hairloss and slight regrowth then yes that is extremely likely, however it might be too late by then for the majority of us.
- Reaction score
- 16
I'm sure commercial hair cloning treatments will come out within the next few decades(at most), even though I don't consider them to be a true cure.
Anything short of gene editing is not a cure IMO.
Anything short of gene editing is not a cure IMO.
- Reaction score
- 22
I'm almost sure that another treatment that is accessible as Minoxidil or Finasteride will most certainly come out in the next 20 years, and that it will likely be better than those aforementioned two.
I consider a cure though, and this might be a tough metric, going from a Norwood 7 to a Norwood 0 or so in some sort of treatment. Doubt a treatment like that though will ever come out in our lifetimes, but I imagine we will be far better off when it comes to stopping full baldness.
I consider a cure though, and this might be a tough metric, going from a Norwood 7 to a Norwood 0 or so in some sort of treatment. Doubt a treatment like that though will ever come out in our lifetimes, but I imagine we will be far better off when it comes to stopping full baldness.
I think there will be a cure, well my definition of a cure. Which would be a treatment that gives you hair back and you don't have to remain on the treatment for life, like Tsuji's method or Replicel. It won't address the underlying genetic problem but who cares if you've got cloned DHT immune hairs on your head.
I believe Tsuji's method can be here in 2020 so yes there will be a cure in our life time, as long as they can give you normal density.
I believe Tsuji's method can be here in 2020 so yes there will be a cure in our life time, as long as they can give you normal density.
Cure is a relative term. If you have alopecia areata and by the use of minoxidil or provillus you have some growth you may say you have a cure. If it is alopecia totalis, no hair on your head, then 100% cure is just not possible, If your hair loss is due to some medications, particularly chemotherapy you may get 100% regrowth after stopping the medication.
- Reaction score
- 3,149
Cured as in every single case? No.
Presuming I live for another 50 years then; cured as in anyone balding with money can alleviate it until they are old then yes.
Presuming I live for another 50 years then; cured as in anyone balding with money can alleviate it until they are old then yes.
Yes, I have little doubt. Also, cure is not a "relative" term; it literally means a "treatment that relieves the symptoms of a malady or disease".
I don't see how anyone can look at the treatments currently in clinical trials or about to enter it and honestly say that it's "decades" away; it's just being cynical.
I mean, we have 3D printed Adam Jensen arms coming out next year, AI scared the sh*t out of everyone by achieving something no one expected it to do for decades yet, self-driving cars with an excellent safety profile, the emergence of the internet of things, game-changing Alzheimer's drugs in clinical trials, CRISPR (gene editing), damn-powerful phones, the first robot surgery is successful, robots have replaced employees at restaurants, robot pharmacists, soft robots, nanomachines that can monitor your health in real-time, and the list goes on and on...
But no, there's just no way we'll see a cure for hairloss in our lifetimes; it's not like there is at least one lab that's working to commercialize a solution for just that via a scientifically-solid method, nor have we already achieved exceedingly more complex technology already -- please.
I don't see how anyone can look at the treatments currently in clinical trials or about to enter it and honestly say that it's "decades" away; it's just being cynical.
I mean, we have 3D printed Adam Jensen arms coming out next year, AI scared the sh*t out of everyone by achieving something no one expected it to do for decades yet, self-driving cars with an excellent safety profile, the emergence of the internet of things, game-changing Alzheimer's drugs in clinical trials, CRISPR (gene editing), damn-powerful phones, the first robot surgery is successful, robots have replaced employees at restaurants, robot pharmacists, soft robots, nanomachines that can monitor your health in real-time, and the list goes on and on...
But no, there's just no way we'll see a cure for hairloss in our lifetimes; it's not like there is at least one lab that's working to commercialize a solution for just that via a scientifically-solid method, nor have we already achieved exceedingly more complex technology already -- please.
- Reaction score
- 594
If Tsucji/Kyocera or Replicel come through then yeah. If they don't, then there's nothing else on the horizon that looks promising...
Doubtful. Probably not just more of what we have now IMO. male pattern baldness is not curable unless you grow new hair from scratch which is decades away IMO if not longer. My advice is take propecia and whatever else and try to keep what you can because it aint coming back
I couldn't agree more
The science at this point has come far enough in the hair loss industry that a cure will be available in the near future. That's what is attracting massive billion dollar companies to invest, they must believe it as well that's why they put the money up. Let's not forget these companies investing know more about these technologies then we do.
Look at kyocera, they are gonna spend millions of dollars and thousands of man hours over several years developing technology for Tsuji's method. I'm sure they know everything there is to know about Tsuji's method and are confident he will be successful or they would not make such a commitment.
- Reaction score
- 16
The only reason we have our current male pattern baldness treatments is through selfish motivation for profit, and there's lots of it to be made in the male pattern baldness industry. The truth is that nobody gives a f*ck about males. If there were a female version of male pattern baldness, shaming or humiliating a woman for it would certainly land you in jail. Meanwhile millions men are humiliated everyday for being bald and it's seen as funny to mock a man for his baldness.
Tsuji is a cope, as it doesn't deal with the underlying genetic cause of male pattern baldness. Should you decide to have any children(assuming you don't already have any), your sons will likely suffer from male pattern baldness. and they'll also be dependent on money-grubbing corporations who will probably charge thousands for the "cure". male pattern baldness is a vicious cycle that can only be cured through genetic engineering.
Some people on here are way too optimistic about male pattern baldness "cures".
Tsuji is a cope, as it doesn't deal with the underlying genetic cause of male pattern baldness. Should you decide to have any children(assuming you don't already have any), your sons will likely suffer from male pattern baldness. and they'll also be dependent on money-grubbing corporations who will probably charge thousands for the "cure". male pattern baldness is a vicious cycle that can only be cured through genetic engineering.
Some people on here are way too optimistic about male pattern baldness "cures".
- Reaction score
- 5,209
I think before we find an absolute cure for baldness, we will create a permanent hair system. that's right. Artificial hair that won't break, or fade or anything. The only thing necessary would be touch ups every few years. Like... terminator hair. 
Exactly.
I think it speaks volumes when you have these naysayers and you ask them "Why?" and they can't give you an answer that isn't either "Because the cure didn't come out in the 80s or the 90s" (despite there being nothing but baseless speculation in those days) or they simply throw around aimless doubt. Case in point:
As has been stated from the get go, they plan to take cells from hair at the back of the head as that is generally resistant to the hormones.
Obviously, except they'll be born into a world where effective treatment already exists.
Having something eliminated genetically obviously means it will no longer ail a population; it doesn't mean that something that solves the problem for pre-existing population isn't a "cure".
While the advice present at the end is sound, the rest of it is simply opinion, but we are offered no reason for how one came to arrive at this opinion. What knowledge do you have of the technology to say that it is so far away when the company aims to release it in less than a decade?
The technology anyone is using to view this conversation right now is much more complicated than any of the methods of the upcoming treatments.
Im just basing it solely off the past history of male pattern baldness. It hasnt been cured in centuries, and I have a hard time believing its going to change in the next decade or two. Its all complete guessing no one can make any real educated guesses out beyond a few years anyway
In the past many companies have claimed this or that with whatever technology they had the time. Making promises and claims doesnt always turn out in the end.
You can't base your opinion off of past failures using different methods and different researchers, it makes no sense.
Science has come a long way over the past few decades it's a whole new game. Some new methods are not simply "claims" Tsuji has published his methods in peer reviewed journals and that means the method is sound if it has been published.
Also many researchers in the hair loss world often say funding is their largest obstacle and now some companies have massive billion dollar partners. That means things will move faster than ever before, it's gonna happen.
The other two were Intercytex and Aderans, the former tried to literally clone hair follicles; however, the phase III trials weren't as promising as they had hoped and a major reason they closed down was due to severe lack of funding.
As far as I can tell, neither of these methods were like Tsuji's and RIKEN is (without question) the most well-funded hair restoration project to date.
Intercytex took stem cells (though what kind I cannot seem to find) from the back of the neck so that donor hair would not be necessary. Aderans method took a "small strip of follicular stem cells" (no mention of what kind) and injected them; the process wasn't viable for multiplication, but it did stop the loss and revitalized existing follicles. Basically, they were an early Shiseido/RepliCel. Tsuji's method involves taking Mesenchymal and Epithelial cells, stacked in 3D to derive a new follicle.
An interesting note is that this has been demonstrated to work in animals since the 70s. However, past methods have worked in humans (as seen with Intercytex), but they didn't work as well as hoped and lack of funding to continue research is what really put them out of business.
The important thing to remember here is that the past methods did work despite having different approaches. It seems that to what extent it works would depend on the type of stem cells used and whether or not it is viable to multiply those cells. I believe @Swoop had said recently that in his chat with RIKEN he got the impression that they had solved the issue of multiplying epithelial cells? If he could just...@Swoop in and let us know before the interview is published, that'd be just damn super.
Either way, this all stands as evidence that we are close -- you have to fail to succeed in science.
http://parsamohebi.com/hair-loss/hair-cloning/
Benjamin Owen
Member
- Reaction score
- 1
Is Tsuji, Replicel or Bretzu's cream OK for under 18s?