why has no one truly solved male pattern baldness (particularly as the commercial incentives must be huge)
In: Other
There is no future in cures, just treatments. Planned obsolescence. Sell subscriptions, not products. You will rent your home, not buy. You will own nothing and like it.
They have – hair transplants are a huge industry. If you’re looking at non-invasive methods, things like minoxidil etc do work, in certain cases, while the follicles are still active. But there’s not been a general, one pill and done, cure, since it’s part of a normal biological process.
same reason they havent solved cancer or the common cold yet. its been barely 100 years since real medical progress has been made and only 50 since real exponential growth. there is still so much we dont know about the human body and alot to learn in trying to fix it.
They’ve gotten as far as identifying that follicles are still there and could be switched on. But genetic switch triggers are incredibly hard. Most of the methods used in mice for any kids of trigger are incredibly expensive, would need human trials just for safety of technique, or both.
Dihydrotestosterone and DNA play a major role in the loss of hair, it isn’t really something that can be “fixed” as there is nothing biologically wrong the body is doing what it was programmed to do. https://youtu.be/zxR5K8zqdEw
[deleted]
MPB is s combination of genetics and hormones, particularly the hormone DHT, which is a byproduct of testosterone, when you were younger, DHT was vital in your growth but as you grow older it does little for your body and it works as an androgen and attacks your hair follicles. We can deal with DHT with finasteride, but that comes with a heap of issues and side effects as you are essentially suppressing a male sex hormone.
Genetics we can little against, we aren’t that advanced in genetic engineering.
For now, taking hair follicles from your pubes and putting them on your head is the go to.
This is what I recall hearing from Patrick Stewart (Captain Picard);
Stewart, after being offered the role of Captain Picard asked Gene Roddenberry if it made sense that in the 25th (or whatever) century, there would still be male pattern baldness. I mean they could replicate food and cure most diseases using high tech, would there really be bald men? And Roddenberry thought about it and said “Yes, in the 25th century they could cure it, but also in the 25th century, as a society, they don’t care if you’re bald or not”
Totally paraphrased of course. In other words, the enlightened man would “live with it”.
EDIT: I got it totally wrong; [https://youtu.be/pXOK-ZVJMaU?si=X-KsFq-mM38tgPwy](https://youtu.be/pXOK-ZVJMaU?si=X-KsFq-mM38tgPwy)
1. It’s historically been considered a cosmetic issue by the medical and scientific communities and therefore not a priority like fatal or disabling diseases.
2. The commercial value is not as lucrative as you would think.
3. We have some ideas on how to functionally cure it (hair follicle cloning), but they are beyond our current scientific capabilities.
Because the premise is wrong, there isn’t actually that much commercial incentives and there is also economic competition with other treatments.
Assuming someone finds a cure for male pattern baldness with no significant side effects, it has an issue that men are usually not willingly to tint their hair that frequently, and by age 30 most men have some gray hair and by age 40 most men have significant gray hair. Coincidentally, many cases of male pattern baldness algo get worse close to this age.
The cure or definitive treatment for male pattern baldness need to compete with existing treatment with topical finasteride, wigs and hair implants, while also having the monetary and time cost of tinting hair. Most men think it is cheaper and more effective to just shave the head.
Latest Answers