Rate of Technological Advancements

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • awesome0
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2014
    • 15

    Rate of Technological Advancements

    I know many of us here are hoping for a cure tomorrow, or yesterday or 10 years ago.

    Technological advances are usually incremental, until something revolutionary happens.

    In the grand scheme of human history we've come a long way in 60 years, when hair transplants first started in the US. First strip methods, then FUE, now robotic-assisted FUE... I expected with better and better cameras and advances in robotics, FUE will be get better, safer and cheaper.

    Of course the advances on most things are incremental, but every once in a while a huge innovation occurs. The problem is, its hard to predict from the outset which innovations are incremental and which are path defining.

    I have a Ph.D. and am actively engaged in many research projects. I love them all and I think they are all worthwhile. But sometimes they don't pan out. Sometimes they do.

    So as hard as it is, we need patience. Relatively to other procedures, hair tranplants need a lot of time. For a new surgical procedure, you can often gauge success in days (are they dead or not). We need at the minimum 6 months to know anything about growth, and possibly a year or two, and eventually we need 5 years to assess long term effects.

    Lots of stuff won't pan out. Sometimes it will seem likely progress has stalled (because it has) but stuff will keep moving forward. In the meantime, hit the gym, get in shape, and be healthy so we can be healthy and active enough to enjoy advances as the come out.
  • clarence
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2012
    • 278

    #2
    Great, all this information almost made this thread worth clicking.

    Comment

    • brocktherock
      Senior Member
      • Dec 2013
      • 205

      #3
      Originally posted by clarence
      Great, all this information almost made this thread worth clicking.
      9000 crybaby threads from people with absolutely no clue or a ph.d giving insight to the nature of research along with a positive attitude.

      Comment

      • 35YrsAfter
        Doctor Representative
        • Aug 2012
        • 1421

        #4
        Originally posted by awesome0

        I have a Ph.D. and am actively engaged in many research projects.
        We had a researcher/patient in a few weeks ago who mentioned that he had access to the budgets for various types of medical research. He said he was surprised because a lot more money goes into hair loss/growth research than he expected.

        35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant, 1045 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

        Comment

        • hellouser
          Senior Member
          • May 2012
          • 4423

          #5
          Originally posted by 35YrsAfter
          We had a researcher/patient in a few weeks ago who mentioned that he had access to the budgets for various types of medical research. He said he was surprised because a lot more money goes into hair loss/growth research than he expected.
          Dude probably expected ZERO. I'd be shocked too.

          Comment

          • Arashi
            Senior Member
            • Aug 2012
            • 3888

            #6
            Great thread, worth clicking !

            Comment

            • hellouser
              Senior Member
              • May 2012
              • 4423

              #7
              Originally posted by Arashi
              Great thread, worth clicking !
              Yup. Bookmarked. Will read again later.

              Comment

              • HairIsLife
                Member
                • Aug 2014
                • 96

                #8
                I think a large majority of our problem is that people are content with what we have. When you go out on the street and you ask someone, what can a bald guy do about his hair loss ? 95% of people would probably say "He could just get a hair transplant and use Rogaine, Duh !"

                Any person who isn't actually experiencing hair loss themselves don't know about our limitations. It boils my blood when I read comments where people say "If I go bald I'm just going to get a hair transplant." I'm sure that most of the general population thinks bald men are bald because they're just too lazy or cheap to do something about it.

                Hair transplants revolutionized the hair loss industry, there's no doubt about it, but I fear that people are too content with what we have to actually want more. I figure the users on this forum only make up less than a percent of hair loss sufferers worldwide. We're a very small minority, and for that reason, things will likely not change from the way they are right now for who knows how long.

                Comment

                • macbeth81
                  Senior Member
                  • Sep 2014
                  • 101

                  #9
                  Non-hair loss suffers don't care, and why would they. Others probably don't have noticeable hair loss until middle age or older. By then they are married, have children, careers, and other priorities beyond spending thousands on a cosmetic procedure. Many people in general also let themselves go whether it be aesthetics or even health. Those who care will always be a minority.

                  It doesn't help that hair loss research seems to be focused on creating new follicles. Why not address the problem directly and revive existing miniaturized hairs? I will probably being drawing Social Security before they have a solution at this pace.

                  Comment

                  • HairIsLife
                    Member
                    • Aug 2014
                    • 96

                    #10
                    Originally posted by macbeth81
                    It doesn't help that hair loss research seems to be focused on creating new follicles. Why not address the problem directly and revive existing miniaturized hairs?
                    That's what RepliCel is doing, though the problem still stands with the revived miniaturized hairs; they're still susceptible to our hormones, which doesn't really solve anything. We bring them back to life only for them to shrink once again. With brand new bioengineered follicles, we won't have to worry about the effects of DHT and miniaturization.

                    Comment

                    • Sogeking
                      Senior Member
                      • Feb 2011
                      • 497

                      #11
                      Technology is advancing, however we'll have to wait till' next decade for some more game changing technologies, but due to clinical trials and scaling everything from lab to market level medicine will always lag behind other technological developments except fusion. Fusion should come around 2050. Damn who knows if I'm gonna' be alive to see it.
                      Actually it doesn't even matter...

                      Comment

                      • awesome0
                        Junior Member
                        • Aug 2014
                        • 15

                        #12
                        Honestly I might be more excited about replicel giving me back my achilles, which lately I have to stretch out way more after soccer and other activities now that I'm 35. But I'd love to have my hair back too.

                        I suppose right now given we're on this forum we'll complain about why all research hasn't been devoted to hair loss. But I suppose once one of gets cancer, diabetes, or something else that just happens as we age, we'll be glad about the research dollars that have gone elsewhere. We can't live forever..

                        Comment

                        • Sogeking
                          Senior Member
                          • Feb 2011
                          • 497

                          #13
                          Originally posted by awesome0
                          Honestly I might be more excited about replicel giving me back my achilles, which lately I have to stretch out way more after soccer and other activities now that I'm 35. But I'd love to have my hair back too.

                          I suppose right now given we're on this forum we'll complain about why all research hasn't been devoted to hair loss. But I suppose once one of gets cancer, diabetes, or something else that just happens as we age, we'll be glad about the research dollars that have gone elsewhere. We can't live forever..
                          Well not forever but you mentioned technological advancement, so why not living for a very long time? Given enough of medical breakthroughs we could cure aging. I'm secretly hoping for that, however no end in sight yet for that.

                          Comment

                          • awesome0
                            Junior Member
                            • Aug 2014
                            • 15

                            #14
                            TO be honest

                            I'm not that excited about living for a really long time if it I can't be active, productive and enjoy life. Medicine has progressed faster in delaying death, but not so much in delaying aging. I would prefer to leave a full live to 75 and drop dead, then slowly deteriorate towards a painful death at 90.

                            Most of delaying aging is on us: diet, exercise, rest and challenging our minds.

                            Comment

                            • HairIsLife
                              Member
                              • Aug 2014
                              • 96

                              #15
                              Originally posted by awesome0
                              I'm not that excited about living for a really long time if it I can't be active, productive and enjoy life.
                              This. Life past your prime is useless. What's with everyone and always wanting to live forever ? Make good use of the time that you have so when you're 50 and ready to kick the bucket, you can look back and say that you enjoyed life to the fullest while you could. We don't need more people living longer, the world is already overpopulated.

                              Comment

                              Working...