Is it agreed that there will be a cure

[Pate]

not the point... if you believe that Histogen can easily improve your hair by ~20%, then why wouldn't it do 40% in multiple treatments? Why not 60? 100? 500? Eventually that would be equal to a full head of hair. What's the problem?

The law of diminishing returns.

2 years of treatment every 6 to 12 weeks is what we need to try. If everything works properly the amount of restored follicles should eventually trend towards 100%. But each successive treatment may be less effective than the last because there will be fewer inductive follicles left.

But as usual... All speculation.

[Tracy C]

Is it agreed that there will be a cure.

No it is not agreed upon at all. Almost everyone on the internet speculates out the nose but the reality is that none of them knows anything.

There is also no agreement on what constitutes a "cure" for hair loss.

Personally, I feel we will have much more effective treatments available to use within a few years. Female hereditary hair loss may be "cured" around that time as well - but male hereditary hair loss might take longer. Only time will tell.

[Dan26]

A full blown 'cure' is not on the horizon. BUT a combination of some things that should be coming out in the next 4-6 years will definitely keep your hair and grow a lot back. So if you are still have a decent a mount of hair left by then, even if you are pretty bald, you should be OK, considering HT's as an add-on as well. CB will tackle androgens, Histogen and something to address PDg2 levels will promote growth, modulate immune response, stop inflammation etc.

[gmonasco]

if you believe that Histogen can easily improve your hair by ~20%, then why wouldn't it do 40% in multiple treatments? Why not 60? 100? 500? Eventually that would be equal to a full head of hair. What's the problem?

The problem is that you continue to erroneously assume a linear relationship between dosage and results. That isn't how medicine works.

[2020]

The problem is that you continue to erroneously assume a linear relationship between dosage and results. That isn't how medicine works.

obviously that was an example. Of course it doesn't work like that. I know that... but from their phase 2 study they proved that in fact multiple treatments do bring better results. If 2 sessions grow more hair than 1 session, then would it be fair to assume that 10 sessions grow much more hair than 2 sessions? If yes, then this is a cure. At least for diffusely thining females like Tracy C says. They still have to confirm if HSC can reverse fibrosis/calcification that's present in balding scalps. If they can reverse that, then they could grow hair on a slick bald NW7 === cure. Those are the variables that they should be watching instead of putting all their resources into making pdf files and fancy presentations...

[jman91]

I

People with asthma have no cure, and their condition resides with a PGd2/pge2 problem, just like our hair. But at least they have inhalers....
.

what do you mean by this??

[konfusion]

I think there will be a cure when they find a way to cure mortality. At some point that will also happen but seems hundreds of years away.

[MrBlonde]

I'm afraid to admit that I would have to say no. Its like trying to cure ageing. We can fight to keep what we have and promote some growth of that which was lost but to halt it completely and have it unaffected by DHT? I'd say no.

[rdawg]

I'm afraid to admit that I would have to say no. Its like trying to cure ageing. We can fight to keep what we have and promote some growth of that which was lost but to halt it completely and have it unaffected by DHT? I'd say no.

I disagree, I think it's one of the most cureable 'diseases' currently without a 'cure'.(Cure being something that grows and maintains the hair back to it's mature hairline form for a very long time, say 10 years+).

By that I mean, all they really need to find is a strong enough stimulant, and possibly a better inhibitor that doesn't effect hormones as much. They already have products that have SOME affect, but it's moreso getting a much stronger effect now. Histogen is clearly on the right track, so how can science improve on what Histogen can do? Things/products will only get better, there will only be more solutions as time goes by, not less, which is why i'm fairly optimistic.

This is nowhere near as advanced as say cancer, alzeimers, parkinsons etc. all of which are far more serious of course, but they also seem much more complex.

[WarLord]

I was just wondering if there was an agreed consensus that there is a cure for baldness on the horizon. I hear a lot of talk about promising result from tests and I hear 4 or 5 years being banded about a lot. So is it agreed in the industry that in double that, in 10 years time, we will probably have a cure or are we just hoping on the most recent experiments?
By cure I mean, growing hair back.

The cure is already here: Finasteride, dutasteride, minoxidil, ketoconazole. In fact, I think that men, who don't have success with dutasteride+minoxidil must be sons of extra-terrestials.

[WarLord]

I'm afraid to admit that I would have to say no. Its like trying to cure ageing. We can fight to keep what we have and promote some growth of that which was lost but to halt it completely and have it unaffected by DHT? I'd say no.

If you say "no", then you must also admit that even women can't completely stop baldness, because it is an inevitable consequence of aging. A logical conclusion. What do you think?

[WarLord]

A full blown 'cure' is not on the horizon. BUT a combination of some things that should be coming out in the next 4-6 years will definitely keep your hair and grow a lot back. So if you are still have a decent a mount of hair left by then, even if you are pretty bald, you should be OK, considering HT's as an add-on as well. CB will tackle androgens, Histogen and something to address PDg2 levels will promote growth, modulate immune response, stop inflammation etc.

I wonder, if you just fell from the Moon or where have you spent the last 15-25 years? Don't we already have very effective medications, anti-androgens like dutasteride that can virtually annihilate DHT in your body? While you whine on this website, the medications keep working in the majority of people, who use them (especially in mutual combination). It is only hypochondriac, hysterical, misinformed and defeatist guys on internet forums, who live in a different reality and continue with their blah-blah about the dreamed-of future cure.

[Dan26]

I wonder, if you just fell from the Moon or where have you spent the last 15-25 years? Don't we already have very effective medications, anti-androgens like dutasteride that can virtually annihilate DHT in your body? While you whine on this website, the medications keep working in the majority of people, who use them (especially in mutual combination). It is only hypochondriac, hysterical, misinformed and defeatist guys on internet forums, who live in a different reality and continue with their blah-blah about the dreamed-of future cure.

Hair loss is not only androgen driven, there are many other factors. I assume you are just being a troll, but fin/dut does not work for everyone. If you think we know the long term effects of being on fin/dut at a young age you are clueless. These are NOT great medications. A small amount of DHT reduction is actually healthy, for the prostate and for longevity. But if you feel 'happy' about reducing DHT in your body by 70-95%, then you really don't understand the hormone and it's importance. If it was the only option I had, I would take fin at a low dose. But it isn't.

"Don't we already have very effective medications, anti-androgens like dutasteride that can virtually annihilate DHT in your body? working in the majority of people" - Warlord

*Troll of the year bro!*

[clarence]

I'm afraid to admit that I would have to say no. Its like trying to cure ageing. We can fight to keep what we have and promote some growth of that which was lost but to halt it completely and have it unaffected by DHT? I'd say no.

I'll prove to you how simple hair loss is compared to ageing and some of these diseases mentioned; I will castrate you, and that'll be the end of it for you, my friend. Kiss your balls goodbye, literally - and keep the hair. I bet a lot of people would choose to stop ageing, if all it took was cutting away a non-vital organ from the body. And later less invasive solutions would be developed.

[Dan26]

I'll prove to you how simple hair loss is compared to ageing and some of these diseases mentioned; I will castrate you, and that'll be the end of it for you, my friend. Kiss your balls goodbye, literally - and keep the hair. I bet a lot of people would choose to stop ageing, if all it took was cutting away a non-vital organ from the body. And later less invasive solutions would be developed.

Castrating would NOT cure hair loss.