Possible Treatments

[brocktherock]

Cotsaralis doesn't strike me as an attention whore at all. When they interview him about his research, he is proud of the progress but never gave timelines without being asked. When he did give timelines he just said "if everything works out perfectly, it COULD be in blah blah". Follica isn't a publicly traded company and they don't get money for making false claims. The last time they went public for funding was years ago and since then they've done clinical trials (which must cost a fortune). If you read the bios of all the chairman and researchers on the website, youll notice they are prestigious Harvard professors or people that have been in the field for years. They obviously aren't sleeze bags looking for a buck. Cotsaralis has been on this road of skin perturbation for years now and is still moving forward. I find hope in the fact that he's been secretive because it means that he more than likely has something solid. If I could I would invest into follica. If they were exposed as liars it would no doubt discredit all of their careers.

[hellouser]

Actually Cotsarelis apparently admitted to suffer from a vertex loss:

http://whyy.org/cms/radiotimes/2012/10/08/hair-and-who-we-are/

at minute -29:47

On a side notes:
-The other interviewee, Albert Mannes, is so in denial. I already wrote that, but everytime I listen to this interview I wish I was there to yell in his ears that he is being part of the problem, and not of the solution. Such a sad man.

Both him and Marty Moss-Coane sound extremely ignorant. Every time someone had some input on hair loss, their response was 'hmm, thats interesting.' Really? That's all that goes through their thick skull?

It's really saddening that there's an untold truth, that balding men are basically social rejects... no one will say it, but a LOT of people (especially young women) view bald men this way.

And reading this very page, I can not help wondering whether the big pharma is actually hampering hair cloning research.

Well that's the thing too, I sometimes think about if there's some secret society or conspiracy that big pharma doesn't want a hair loss cure. But WHICH pharmaceutical doesn't want a hair loss cure? NONE of them have a treatment that's making them millions of dollars. Finasteride is on the decline and the patent is almost over... minoxidil's patent is over as well... which leaves us with nothing else on the market. The only pharmaceutical I can see getting its pantys caught up in a bunch and sending mongrel lobbyist scumbags is Cosmo... and thats years down the line since they were too ****ing stupid to realize that the hair loss industry has a LOT more for them to be rewarded with since the current options for treatments are SHIT. Had they been competent to put CB on a priority over acne they would have had a product on the market that would completely DOMINATE for a very long time.

My god, so many failures in this industry make all of these researchers look very very incompetent.

[gainspotter]

And all the while we're still losing our hair.........

[moore]

But WHICH pharmaceutical doesn't want a hair loss cure? NONE of them have a treatment that's making them millions of dollars. Finasteride is on the decline and the patent is almost over... minoxidil's patent is over as well... which leaves us with nothing else on the market. The only pharmaceutical I can see getting its pantys caught up in a bunch and sending mongrel lobbyist scumbags is Cosmo... and thats years down the line since they were too ****ing stupid to realize that the hair loss industry has a LOT more for them to be rewarded with since the current options for treatments are SHIT. Had they been competent to put CB on a priority over acne they would have had a product on the market that would completely DOMINATE for a very long time.

Maybe a pharmaceutical which does not want to sell a one-and-done procedure. Getting you hooked on a lifetime pill looks more profitable if you see the whole issue from the other side of the fence.

I hate it too, but that's business, so I'm just sticking to reality here.

If finasteride was giving you back your full head of hair, and even more hair than what you started with, even with worst sides, could you imagine how many more consumers it would have?

And even more, you have to consider how much money Merck (or whoever) spent to discover it:
they were not even looking for a cure for baldness. They found it by accident, so I can only GUESS you just saved a lot of money. All you have to do is to brand it and sell it.

On the other hand, put yourself in the research for a moment. You are getting funds to develop a procedure you have no idea whether it will work.
Aside from the potential consumers (us) who claim to be willing to spend figures comparables to a modern hair transplant, your investors are probably either ignoring you, or getting nervous for their return on investment.

And yes, in the meantime we are getting our follicles smaller and smaller.

[walrus]

Maybe a pharmaceutical which does not want to sell a one-and-done procedure. Getting you hooked on a lifetime pill looks more profitable if you see the whole issue from the other side of the fence.

In most cases, this is not an issue of what pharmaceuticals 'want to sell', it is a biological one. Until human genetic manipulation is feasible, drugs will be targeting the expressed products of genes. The fact that there is one hit cure drug is not part of a wider conspiracy, it reflects the reality of how our bodies work.

[moore]

In most cases, this is not an issue of what pharmaceuticals 'want to sell', it is a biological one. Until human genetic manipulation is a feasible, drugs will be targeting the expressed products of genes. The fact that there is one hit cure drug is not part of a wider conspiracy, it reflects the reality of how our bodies work.

Very correct. But hair loss due to miniaturization seems to be progressive, so unless the follicular receptors are completely reprogrammed (genetic engineering?) to ignore some gene expressed phenotypes, you will alway have to counteract DHT-mediated genes for as long as you keep on producing DHT (live).

[hellouser]

Maybe a pharmaceutical which does not want to sell a one-and-done procedure. Getting you hooked on a lifetime pill looks more profitable if you see the whole issue from the other side of the fence.

Well, let's look at it in the long term;

Generic finasteride costs about $90 per 90 pills. This is at current pricing... once the patent is over, the price is going to drop like a rock. So lets do some math.. if each pill is $1 (90 pills for 90 dollars) then a 30 year supply of this garbage means a total cost of $10,950. But we can be pretty sure that we're not going to be stuck with this shit for another 30 years as our only option.

A hair transplant costs $10k for roughly 1,800 grafts (give or take) and thats only ONE mediocre norwood level gain. A full out cure that can culture cells and grow follicle will still require implanting of those follicles so a transplant doctor is STILL needed, which is going to cost much MUCH more than finasteride ever will. So is it really such a worthy investment if we know that a superior treatment can bring more money?

Finasteride should have run its course a long time ago... but I'd be furious as hell if a superior treatment were stalled or halted due to some current bullshit treatment that shouldnt be an option... our ONLY option SHOULD be a full blown solution from NW7 to NW1. Anything less should be ignored.

On the other hand, put yourself in the research for a moment. You are getting funds to develop a procedure you have no idea whether it will work.
Aside from the potential consumers (us) who claim to be willing to spend figures comparables to a modern hair transplant, your investors are probably either ignoring you, or getting nervous for their return on investment.

The funds are government grants coming out of OUR pocket, the tax payer. But we know, or at least are lead to believe from Cotsarelis that they ARE able to create new follicles with Follica's method. Tsuji and Jahoda are half way there and with China's recent discovery they should be 100% of the way there. There's nothing that should deter them from going all the way with a commercial product.

The investors though, should be ourselves, the balding men and women, executed through a crowdfunding campaign. This way WE have control where the money goes, how much is spent, etc. None of this corporate pig greed like what they did with Aderans.

[walrus]

The investors though, should be ourselves, the balding men and women, executed through a crowdfunding campaign. This way WE have control where the money goes, how much is spent, etc. None of this corporate pig greed like what they did with Aderans.

http://time.com/39271/oculus-facebook-kickstarter-backlash/

How much control does crowdfunding really give?

[hellouser]

http://time.com/39271/oculus-faceboo...rter-backlash/

How much control does crowdfunding really give?

Complete control if we don't sell our souls to corporate assholes. Like I said, if we raise the money ourselves, WE will dictate how the money is spent... nobody is buying us out.

[walrus]

Complete control if we don't sell our souls to corporate assholes. Like I said, if we raise the money ourselves, WE will dictate how the money is spent... nobody is buying us out.

Where would the actual research and development be done?

Through setting up a new lab and hiring new staff? Or simply giving the money to an existing lab that already has the expertise (and are already working on solving the problem)?

[hellouser]

Where would the actual research and development be done?

Through setting up a new lab and hiring new staff? Or simply giving the money to an existing lab that already has the expertise (and are already working on solving the problem)?

Bolded the answer. We already know a few teams are well into studies and are on the verge of the final stage of a treatment. Personally, I think it'd be best to jump on a crowdfunding initiative once we have a clear cut answer from any of the teams saying this:

'We're able to create any number of follicles from stem cells that grow hair and can be implanted onto the human scalp to cure hair loss.'

Once we hear those words, we need to get that treatment out the door as fast as possible. None of this 2-5 years, or 5-10 or 10-15 years bullshit. I think we've all grown tired of hearing that same crap spewed out by every journalist, researcher and naysayer.

[mnhair]

The current "treatments" are not what's holding back progress on a cure. Rogaine is not making all that much money. The same goes for propecia/fin; I get generic fin for free. If there's any money at all, it's in hair transplants. It seems like there's a lot of people working on hair loss. No one is successful yet, but whoever gets there first is going to make serious bank.

[35YrsAfter]

The current "treatments" are not what's holding back progress on a cure. Rogaine is not making all that much money. The same goes for propecia/fin; I get generic fin for free. If there's any money at all, it's in hair transplants. It seems like there's a lot of people working on hair loss. No one is successful yet, but whoever gets there first is going to make serious bank.

National Center for Biotechnology Information Website


I'm surprised that RU58841 products haven't been developed for commercial sale.

The following study was from 1998 - 16 years ago!

Abstract
"The effect of androgen receptor transcriptional activation by RU58841, a nonsteroidal anti-androgen, was studied in the human prostate cancer PC3 cell line by cotransfection with wild-type androgen receptor (wt AR) and an androgen-responsive reporter (MMTV-ARE-CAT) construct. Anti-and rogens, hydroxyflutamide, and Casodex, and the antiestrogen, genistein, were studied in parallel for comparison with RU58841. The wt AR was activated only by the androgen dihydrotestosterone (DHT). Neither the anti-androgens nor antiestrogen can enhance AR transcriptional activity at 10(-11)-10(-7)M in PC3 cells. Hydroxyflutamide, RU58841, and Casodex, but not genistein, displayed competitively suppressive effects on DHT activation of wt AR. The potency of RU58841 was comparable to that of hydroxyflutamide. From this result, topical application of RU58841, which is considered to be a potential therapy for skin diseases, may induce systemic side effects. However, RU58841, on topical application, revealed a potent increase in density, thickening, and length of hair in the macaque model of androgenetic alopecia, whereas no systemic effects were detected. Together our results suggest that RU58841 may have potent antagonism to the wt AR and could be considered as a topically applied active anti-androgen for the treatment of androgen-dependent skin disorders, such as acne, androgenetic alopecia, and hirsutism."

My own personal theory is, DHT plays a role in blocking platelet growth factors from benefiting genetically "doomed" follicles. When susceptible hair follicles receive an insufficient amount of these growth factors, they essentially "starve" and wither as other living things do in nature when they don't receive proper nutrition.

There really is a pretty good bit of evidence to back this up:

1.) Rogaine dilates blood vessels and increases blood flow, minimally improving hair growth.

2.) Cigarette smoking constricts blood vessels. According to identical twin studies reported by Sharon Keene MD, the smoking twin generally has poorer quality hair.

3.) Platelet Rich Plasma increases the hair shaft diameter of miniaturized hair caused by MPB. In other words the injection and micro needling of concentrated platelets supports healthier hair growth.

4.) PGD2 is a potent inhibitor of platelet aggregation and studies indicate that there are high concentrations of PGD2 around miniaturized hair follicles.

5.) Anticoagulants (blood thinners) which can help stave off blood clots and prevent complications in people with certain conditions, including heart disease, can also cause hair loss. Anticoagulants that can lead to hair loss include warfarin sodium (Panwarfarin, Sofarin, Coumadin) and heparin injections.



35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office
forhair.com
Cole Hair Transplant
1070 Powers Place
Alpharetta, Georgia 30009
Phone 678-566-1011
email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice
Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

[35YrsAfter]

My own personal theory is, DHT plays a role in blocking platelet growth factors from benefiting genetically "doomed" follicles. When susceptible hair follicles receive an insufficient amount of these growth factors, they essentially "starve" and wither as other living things do in nature when they don't receive proper nutrition.

Keeping this theory in perspective, Dr. Bernstein has a great page devoted to hair loss myths:

"Myth: Hair loss is caused by decreased blood flow to the scalp

Fact: When your hair is growing, it does require a significant amount of blood flow. Once you lose your hair, not as much blood is needed and the blood flow to the scalp decreases. Therefore, a decreased blood flow to the scalp is not the cause of hair loss, but a result of it."

Hair transplants can be very frustrating, particularly for young patients with large areas of thinning hair... You replace 4,000 hairs and a few years later lose 1,000 native hairs. I would say about 90% of Dr. Cole's patients visit the forums and only around 3% post. I encourage everyone getting results from topicals/derma rolling topicals, etc. to document their progress with photos and share them.

Chuck

[burtandernie]

Me too. Why such a potent AA that would basically stop MPB dead in its tracks years ago was killed off remains a mystery. Maybe it was found to have some sides is the only thing that makes any sense or they didnt think it would sell enough. MPB has certainly had a pretty frustrating history when you consider the length of time we have known how crucial androgens are to the whole thing. In a decade if MPB is cured by some transplant type procedure it will always be many times more cost effective to simple keep your hair through AAs or hopefully PGD2 related advances so its not a waste of resources pursuing these. A lot of guys given all the hassle/money of an invasive procedure will simply say to heck with it and accept MPB. Thats probably what I would do if it was bad enough

I'm surprised that RU58841 products haven't been developed for commercial sale.