US government owned patent on hair follicle neogensis

[polios]

That really goes to show that the vast majority of hair loss sufferers view today's treatments as being limited and very mediocre, and illustrates how desperately we need new and better treatments.

Really hope that these new patents will make a change to this in the next 5 years. A lot of exiting research is going on at the moment. I hope that there will be at least something as effective as Finasteride that has less side effect. I would like to take Finasteride, but these possible side effects are scary.

[dutchguyhanging]

What I hear all the time is people talk about others that they know who are balding and assume that they are OK with it because they get up and function every day, yet they themselves have not and could not allowed themselves to go bald. I remember reading about one survey which found that although the vast majority of balding men are indeed bothered by hair loss, only a scant sliver of them actually use today's treatments. That really goes to show that the vast majority of hair loss sufferers view today's treatments as being limited and very mediocre, and illustrates how desperately we need new and better treatments.

exactly.. i am actually one of them. I dont use any treatments and I am Nw5. after all why should i? taking drugs every day for the rest of my life doesnt really make sense for my health. but it doesnt mean i dont care about my baldness. I can give up to 70K if there is a cure out there. and I know many of my friends would do the same....
thats why I dont believe people saying no one really cares about hairloss. there is huge money in this market

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Well, I based the 50% on what I hear people tell about their friends and family when we talk about hair loss. Most tell about some friend or family member does not care and is just getting balder. When I talk to others who suffer from hair loss, I always see that they are interested in treatments, but that there are a lot of them that still do not pursue any treatment because they do not trust any remedies out there. So, it is very subjective. Perhaps everyone would make use of a hair loss if it was available under 40 bucks a month.

What I hear all the time is people talk about others that they know who are balding and assume that they are OK with it because they get up and function every day, yet they themselves have not and could not allowed themselves to go bald. I remember reading about one survey which found that although the vast majority of balding men are indeed bothered by hair loss, only a scant sliver of them actually use today's treatments. That really goes to show that the vast majority of hair loss sufferers view today's treatments as being limited and very mediocre, and illustrates how desperately we need new and better treatments.

[polios]

I hope so, too. But it will be very unlikely. They will probably orientate on hair transplantations when it comes to pricing. I bet there are enough people who are willing to pay high prices.

Honestly, I paid already some 4-5k already on some different treatments over the past few years. Hopefully the cure will be nothing you will have to pay for your lifetime. I will end up not having anything for college tuition for my children because I spend all the money on my hair.

[dutchguyhanging]

I hope so, too. But it will be very unlikely. They will probably orientate on hair transplantations when it comes to pricing. I bet there are enough people who are willing to pay high prices.

i could give 50grand in a blink of an eye, can go up to 60-70 if u promise to make me NW0 and i dont have to use any meditations for the rest of my life

[Hairmore]

I hope that if a better treatment comes it will be one that most sufferers will be able to afford.

I hope so, too. But it will be very unlikely. They will probably orientate on hair transplantations when it comes to pricing. I bet there are enough people who are willing to pay high prices.

[Hairmore]

I hope that if a better treatment comes it will be one that most sufferers will be able to afford.

I hope so, too. But it will be very unlikely. They will probably orientate on hair transplantations when it comes to pricing. I bet there are enough people who are willing to pay high prices.

[polios]

Granted, since this would be deemed a cosmetic 'cure' for a non-debilitating disease, the patent holders and/ or pharma companies would be justified in charging outrageous amounts for it.

Pharma companies sometimes also take out health care providers when they developed a better treatment. I remember when there was a new pill for treating Hepatitis C the company holding the patent wanted some few hundred dollars from insurances for a month of treatment - simply because public health insurances in some countries of Europe were obliged to pay for significantly better treatments. I do not know how the cure will look like but with a cure that would be affordable for the middle-class around the world it would be possible to make a few hundred times more profit than some expensive solution. I hope that if a better treatment comes it will be one that most sufferers will be able to afford.

[Hairmore]

Well, I based the 50% on what I hear people tell about their friends and family when we talk about hair loss. Most tell about some friend or family member does not care and is just getting balder. When I talk to others who suffer from hair loss, I always see that they are interested in treatments, but that there are a lot of them that still do not pursue any treatment because they do not trust any remedies out there. So, it is very subjective. Perhaps everyone would make use of a hair loss if it was available under 40 bucks a month.

[Trouse5858]

Well, the question is if there are really cures. Just think about male pattern hair loss for a second - it is genetic. Curing means to get to the very root of the problem and changing the genes themselves. I believe some time in the future the genes of newborns will be enhanced but there is little chance to chance to change existing genes.

Diseases that have no genetic causes like some bacterial infections are rather curable and pharma-companies and governments around the world invest big bugs to find cures for diseases that are really curable. Hair loss is genetic and in addition to that not high-priority. Even if there was a cure: At least 50% of hair loss sufferers would not care about it much because they can live with hair loss quite good and a treatment would probably cost a lot.

Fifty percent seems like an extremely high number of people that would lack any motivation to fix their hairloss problem. I think whatever data you may be using to make such a statement is heavily skewed by the lack of men and women currently seeking some type of treatment. To me, that is a far bigger indictment on the current lack of viable options than it is on the psychological complacency or economic restraint of a consumer. I've said it before and I'll reiterate again on this thread; anything remotely approaching a 'cure' would likely be worth, at minimum, a few dozen billion dollars with the chance for massive growth once the treatment becomes available worldwide and affordable to the middle class. Granted, since this would be deemed a cosmetic 'cure' for a non-debilitating disease, the patent holders and/ or pharma companies would be justified in charging outrageous amounts for it.

[Herbaliser]

Well, the question is if there are really cures. Just think about male pattern hair loss for a second - it is genetic. Curing means to get to the very root of the problem and changing the genes themselves. I believe some time in the future the genes of newborns will be enhanced but there is little chance to chance to change existing genes.

Diseases that have no genetic causes like some bacterial infections are rather curable and pharma-companies and governments around the world invest big bugs to find cures for diseases that are really curable. Hair loss is genetic and in addition to that not high-priority. Even if there was a cure: At least 50% of hair loss sufferers would not care about it much because they can live with hair loss quite good and a treatment would probably cost a lot.

There is still treatments for it even if carry on our genetics.
We lost track of the biggest cure issues that matters, and hair loss should not be a high priority, but at the same time companies understands the high value of it.

[hellouser]

Diseases that have no genetic causes like some bacterial infections are rather curable and pharma-companies and governments around the world invest big bugs to find cures for diseases that are really curable. Hair loss is genetic and in addition to that not high-priority. Even if there was a cure: At least 50% of hair loss sufferers would not care about it much because they can live with hair loss quite good and a treatment would probably cost a lot.

That's not true because of today's poor treatments. If people had treatments that worked WELL, they would definitely care.

[Hairmore]

But I believe that my point in my previous point does in fact hold true for other areas of the medical and pharmaceutical industry. Since that industry is profit-driven, they can make so much more money creating continual treatments rather than cures. I mean, I think of how many once-a-day pills that big pharma has produced (they saturate TV with their ads) and how few (if any) cures they have produced, and their motives become very clear to me.

Well, the question is if there are really cures. Just think about male pattern hair loss for a second - it is genetic. Curing means to get to the very root of the problem and changing the genes themselves. I believe some time in the future the genes of newborns will be enhanced but there is little chance to chance to change existing genes.

Diseases that have no genetic causes like some bacterial infections are rather curable and pharma-companies and governments around the world invest big bugs to find cures for diseases that are really curable. Hair loss is genetic and in addition to that not high-priority. Even if there was a cure: At least 50% of hair loss sufferers would not care about it much because they can live with hair loss quite good and a treatment would probably cost a lot.

[hellouser]

this is exactly why u should not go to the hairloss summit. U may be the oldest user in this forum and may know current treatments but ur approach is totally juvenile. if someone finds the cure 1-he/she will be the richest person alive, we are talking billions of eur stuck in this market 2- fame will come along as you will be solving the equation which hasnt been solved over 2016years. money, fame, prestige... one of them will attract you. But you talk like 15 years old kid... unbelievable...

?????

That makes no sense. So Gardner leaves Jahoda's team (confirmed) and I say he should be happy enjoying his hair, and you think this suggests I said he didn't care to cure hair loss? That's insulting.

[TJT]

You have some points with regards to hair loss. But the main thing that I believe it is in the financial self-interest of the vast majority of the hair restoration industry to maintain the status quo. This is evidenced by their extreme lack of effort to pursue any new and more mainstream treatment.

But I believe that my point in my previous point does in fact hold true for other areas of the medical and pharmaceutical industry. Since that industry is profit-driven, they can make so much more money creating continual treatments rather than cures. I mean, I think of how many once-a-day pills that big pharma has produced (they saturate TV with their ads) and how few (if any) cures they have produced, and their motives become very clear to me.

Conspiracy theory mumbo-jumbo. Whoever discovers the cell-based treatment for hair loss can licence it to hundreds of treatment centers around the world. Each treatment center then performs thousands of procedures, each priced at let's say $10k - $30k. There will be NO shortage of customers in the foreseeable future (as long as gene therapy isn't widely employed), since the hair loss gene is rampant in the population. The treatment centres make a huge amount of money, and the licence holder makes much more. The money-making potential is absolutely huge!