Drug companies are deliberately shelving cure research

[DepressedByHairLoss]

But nonetheless, there were far more people whose acne was cured or permanently lessened by Accutane, thereby putting the lie to the notion that pharmaceutical companies won't market curatives.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that there were far more people whose acne was permanently cured. But even if this was true, this is only one example as opposed to an infinite amount of examples as to where the pharmaceutical industry rakes in obscene amounts of money by making people pay for continuous treatments rather than a one-shot cure. Continuous treatments will make these companies far more money than one-shot cures and make no mistake about it, these companies are far more concerned with making money for themselves than the good of the people. The obscene amounts of money that they rake in serve as a testament to this. And with regards to acne, another poster on here recently brought up that if you go to acne sufferer message boards on the internet, you'll see things about "acne vaccines" which were brought up and then mysteriously disappeared just as soon as they were brought up. Why would that be? Because these vaccines would be a one shot deal, and would not generate nearly as much money as continual treatments. And although I'm not an expert on acne medications, if other medications are currently being developed to effectively treat acne, then that suggests to me that accutane is not a one-time cure for acne at all.
And the notion that hair transplant doctors can have powerful lobby to further their needs and interests is very plausible. These HT doctors also make loads of money; as a matter of fact they make more money per procedure than any other type of cosmetic surgeon out there. Spencer even brought up this fact on his radio show a few times. So with the money that they generate, it is very possible if not probable that they could have a powerful lobby to further their interests and agenda. And even if a new treatment could work complementary with a hair transplant, these HT doctors would still lose a ton of money and business. And if something similar to Replicel came about, it would probably render hair transplantation obsolete.
And here's an example. About 3 years ago, a doctor named Marwa Fawzi extracted stem cells from children suffering from alopecia areata, cultured them in order to multiply them, and then re-injected these stem cells into the bald parts of the children's heads. One of the children nearly regrew a full head of hair!! True, these children suffered from alopecia areata and not male pattern baldness, but the premise is such that this treatment would likely work in people with male pattern baldness. Stem cells were extracted and injected into the balding areas of the children's heads. These stem cells then functioned as fully functioning hair follicles and regrew great amounts of hair for these children. And this method must've been reasonably safe; after all, they tried it on young children. Yet all I heard was one mention in 2009 about this and then all of a sudden it vanished from the public's radar. For a such a potentially-effective and proven treatment to suddenly vanish from the public radar is awfully suspicious to me.