-
I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but lets try to view this from a financial stand point. Yes, the person to come up with a true cure for baldness would be rich as hell. However, drug companies make more money from 'treating' baldness than curing it. The same goes for cancer. It sounds bad but that's reality. Drug companies make billions from treating cancer rather than curing it. Cancer research and baldness research companies always struggle for funds because of the above.
Very pessimistic view, yes, but something to think about
-
![Quote](https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by BaldingJugZ
However, drug companies make more money from 'treating' baldness than curing it. The same goes for cancer.
Such statements presuppose that a "cure" for either would be a one-time treatment rather than an ongoing one, a circumstance which is rather unlikely.
-
I don't get why you assume that the company that cures hairloss is one that could've instead invented a treatment like propecia..surely it doesn't work like that
-
I don't think anyone would hold back a baldness cure because no one is making a ton of money now off of hairloss drugs. A very small % of men actually seek any drug treatment for their hairloss; therefore, if a real cure came about, it would surely make more money.
Some may argue that the transplant industry would not like to see a cure - but again, I doubt that either because many men are not candidates for transplant surgery anyway. I think many men who would seek a cure would be those who cannot get surgery.
This whole situation comes down to funding. How long can a company do research before it runs out of money? However, if the clinical trials of Histogen, Aderans, Acell etc. prove fruitful, there is a greater chance they will receive more capital to continue their research. Their results do look as though they have some promise; we will see. All one can do now is have some hope.
-
As an investor, this is where it gets complicated. Which research do you fund; which will deliver a return? I've always been quite risk averse when it comes to investing, so my natural instinct tells me to invest in every product in the clinical stage. However, were all the products to be successful some, such as hair cloning, would never take off. Histogen, with its injections, would wipe the floor with a hair transplant.
It's odd to think too that in about a decade, there will probably be a choice of treatment. A lot of people say there will be no advance in the next ten years because of bitter experience of waiting; however, I'm not so sure that their pessimism is well founded.
As baldness is becoming more ostracised from the media than ever before (I very much doubt Patrick Stewart would have as successful a career starting now for example) an effective treatment becomes more important. It is also reaching the point that the hirsute are sick of having to take bald people as they come and want a treatment just as much as we do, because baldness is scruffy and unsightly, shaved or not.
-
I should probably clarify how baldness is becoming less acceptable in society today. Some examples include:
1) High profile celebrities are getting hair transplants and being open about them. In return, they are being applauded both for their honesty and their new look. Hair transplants are no longer the surgery of the insecure; they are becoming the surgery of people who care enough about their appearance to do something about a big flaw, baldness.
2) Bald people on TV are actually on the decrease, except if they play undesirable characters. Various celebrities are cited as bald pin ups but they haven't actually changed for the eight years that I've been losing my hair. In 2003, it was Willis, Stratham and Vin Diesel... now it's, well, Willis, Stratham and Vin Diesel. Also, find me a single bald star in their 20s now. Those who have balded since, such as Jude Law, are generally more likely to evoke sympathy than being considered as a future star for the 'bald wall.' I very much doubt that anyone will be added to that list again.
3) The UK very obviously has a toupee wearing Prime Minister. It is starkly obvious, as Cameron was losing his hair about 2 years ago but ever since newspaper reports of the same has had a full head of hair. Clearly he is paranoid about his electoral chances were he to go bald. In the past, bald men have always lost elections but they've never realised themselves how starkly unacceptable baldness was. Cameron's actions are clearly an acceptance that the leader of the UK must never be seen to be bald again.
-
I don't agree that baldness is becoming less acceptable. I think, to a certain extent, it has never been particularly acceptable. Now is no different. In fact, one could argue that baldness has become a little more acceptable in certain circles because, as is evidenced by societal norms, the shaved head is a fashion trend - whereas in past times it was not. How many men with hair transplants have openly admitted to them? I believe they are scorned more than lauded.
Perhaps bald men are not the perfect idol on televison - but that does not prove much. Television is a fake representation of the world; it is not reality. Certain things are accepted on TV - but not others. For example, it is accepted for a man to be a stupid, fat and unshaven slob on TV. A man is also encouraged to be a complete reprobate. There are plenty of spurious things in the media, especially image and behavior.
I agree that bald men will never fair very well in the political realm; however, politics is not based on merit anyway, so who cares? I would rather live in a society in which people are chosen for roles based on merit than on a false perception. If people are that stupid (and they are) then we, as a society, are doomed anyway. When the U.S. suffers an economic meltdown due to unrestrained welfare and military spending - because of the morons the people elected, baldness won't matter so much, will it? When the U.S. economy collapses, perhaps people will learn a lesson about voting for a candidate because of his 'hair' or 'image'.
There is one problem with the 'baldness is the end of the world' camp: it is myopic. There is no doubt that hairloss has an effect on potential romantic, interpersonal relationships. Perhaps it has an untoward effect on some professionals as well. The problem is that there are many 'flaws' which may be construed as flaws. Will it get to the point where men will be 'expected' to get hair if a cure comes? No, because people are not expected to get face lifts, liposuction and nose-jobs. People have flaws, and that will never change. Some people have big noses, unsymmetrical eyes, imperfect faces, big ears, acne, excessive fat - but society does not mandate a remedy. Most people are not going into Hollywood or politics. Moreover, a full head of hair is not a 'guarantor' of perfect appearance. Many men with full heads of hair still look 'unsightly'.
On a final note, society has always shifted with regard to what is accepted and what is not. Obese women were in - in the 17th Century - now they're not. Beards (the scraggly, unhygienic and primitive look) were once in - now they're not. The world is constantly changing, and no one can always be sure to adapt properly. Fat men are accepted in our society (at least in the U.S.); however, I am not going to stuff my face with donuts and get lazy just so I can 'fit in'. I will continue to run, bike and strength train because I have my own idea of what looks best - in addition to the scientific evidence about diet and exercise. The world may turn as it wishes.
-
Baldness less accepted? Are you kidding me. Someone tol me cut my hair short because i looked better that way (your head has a nice form).
Do you know how many of my unbald friends are single? Well almost everyone where some of my bald friends are not. It dosnt matter what your hair is like if everything else is ok, but you wont have a chance if the rest of your body looks like crap
Being fat is a No GO
Being unhygienic is a No Go
Not doing Sports is a No Go
Being small (in terms of body height) is a No Go
You know hairloss is a cosmetical thing and can be fixed realtively easy, but how do you wanna grow someone who is small? Thats impossible
-
![Quote](https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by RichardDawkins
Baldness less accepted? Are you kidding me. Someone tol me cut my hair short because i looked better that way (your head has a nice form).
Do you know how many of my unbald friends are single? Well almost everyone where some of my bald friends are not. It dosnt matter what your hair is like if everything else is ok, but you wont have a chance if the rest of your body looks like crap
Being fat is a No GO
Being unhygienic is a No Go
Not doing Sports is a No Go
Being small (in terms of body height) is a No Go
You know hairloss is a cosmetical thing and can be fixed realtively easy, but how do you wanna grow someone who is small? Thats impossible
Hint: Leg-lengthening surgery
-
![Quote](https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Deluxe
Hint: Leg-lengthening surgery
Or shoe in-steps.
Similar Threads
-
By Wanthair in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 19
Last Post: 10-27-2010, 09:31 AM
-
By Wanthair in forum Hair Loss Treatments
Replies: 6
Last Post: 09-04-2010, 01:48 PM
-
By d0072 in forum Hair Loss Treatments
Replies: 7
Last Post: 10-23-2009, 06:33 PM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks