-
Senior Member
Drug companies will stop a cure hitting the market
I am by no means a 'conspiracy theorist' but I would be lying if I said that I am completely comfortable that the drug companies intend to find an outright cure that could reverse baldness for anyone.
Firstly it was roughly 2009 when Intercytex was at the verge of perfecting their hair cloning research when Pfizer bought them out, swiftly putting the patent on the shelf.
does anyone know that real progress (not only in the science) but of treatments actually hitting the market or is there only ever promises of this will "be ready in 5 years" ets that time and time again seems to be all these people say.
sorry to be pessimistic but I just don't really buy that with expensive daily use products like rogaine, propecia, alpecin shampoo, nirozal, laser combs etc ....why would they just cure it
-
Originally Posted by jman91
Firstly it was roughly 2009 when Intercytex was at the verge of perfecting their hair cloning research when Pfizer bought them out, swiftly putting the patent on the shelf.
Err, no. Intercytex's Phase II trials failed to pan out, and that trial (ICX-TRC) was sold to Aderans. Intercytex's Axordia stem cell therapy subsidiary was what was sold to Pfizer.
sorry to be pessimistic but I just don't really buy that with expensive daily use products like rogaine, propecia, alpecin shampoo, nirozal, laser combs etc ....why would they just cure it
Minoxidil is off-patent, finasteride's patent expires next year, laser combs are a niche product that don't have to be continually rebought, etc. The potential for one company to profit from a baldness cure is far superior to their sharing a slice of the current hair loss pie.
-
sad truth - no one has come out with cure for hairloss because no one has found one, yet.
-
Senior Member
gmonasco you are just saying i'm wrong by pointing out facts which you think are incorrect, but you haven't actually put forward anything to suggest there is real evidence that better treatments will actually come to market
-
Originally Posted by jman91
gmonasco you are just saying i'm wrong by pointing out facts which you think are incorrect
Yes, when the arguments you muster in support of a point are proved to be incorrect, that results in a condition known as "You're wrong."
but you haven't actually put forward anything to suggest there is real evidence that better treatments will actually come to market
You're the one making the claim; it's up to you to provide the evidence to support it.
-
Senior Member
Originally Posted by gmonasco
Yes, when the arguments you muster in support of a point are proved to be incorrect, that results in a condition known as "You're wrong."
No, there is a difference between picking apart details of an argument and responding to the point I'm making. You've just avoided coming up with an actual answer to the bigger question .The example I gave of Intercytex being forced by Pfizer to ditch their research may not be totally true as even though I have read it several times I accept my source is only other hairloss forums.
Originally Posted by gmonasco
You're the one making the claim; it's up to you to provide the evidence to support it.
To prove me wrong you have to actually give me some evidence of your own! and before you start waffling on about me not having any real evidence I will clarify that I CANNOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF A PROMISE BEING DELIVERED IN TERMS OF NEW TREATMENTS. Again, the real point am getting at is all of these future treatments that people keep on referencing from this company and that company seem to only exist in the future and seem to all have the 'just 5 years away' tagline with them. DO YOU SEE???
(and by the way how do you know why they stopped their research? they would not exactly come out and say "sorry the big bosses of pharmaceuticals have deemed our research potentially harmful to their financial ambitions.")
-
Senior Member
ok.... so let's say Replicel comes up with a cure - 50% hair growth 100% of the time.
What could ANYONE do to stop them from bringing such treatment into the market? It's impossible
-
Originally Posted by jman91
To prove me wrong you have to actually give me some evidence of your own!
No, that isn't how it works. You are the one making the claim; it is up to you to provide evidence supporting your claim. The only piece of evidence you've proffered (i.e., that "Intercytex was at the verge of perfecting their hair cloning research when Pfizer bought them out") is erroneous. Therefore you have provided zero evidence supporting your position
I CANNOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF A PROMISE BEING DELIVERED IN TERMS OF NEW TREATMENTS.
And that's supposed to demonstrate what? Nobody can deliver what doesn't yet exist.
Again, the real point am getting at is all of these future treatments that people keep on referencing from this company and that company seem to only exist in the future and seem to all have the 'just 5 years away' tagline with them. DO YOU SEE???
Yes, I see the banal point that nobody can deliver what doesn't yet exist.
and by the way how do you know why they stopped their research?
Because it's a matter of public record.
-
Senior Member
Oh my
That makes as much sense as saying that cancer hasn't been cured because it would hurt the pharmaceutical/medical dept. pockets. As if the medical community at large doesn't have family members that could possibly or have died from cancer.
I wouldn't classify you as a conspiracy theorist. Just a wee bit pessimistic.
Now on the other hand, if you begin to talk about 911....
-
Senior Member
Originally Posted by gmonasco
No, that isn't how it works. You are the one making the claim; it is up to you to provide evidence supporting your claim. The only piece of evidence you've proffered (i.e., that "Intercytex was at the verge of perfecting their hair cloning research when Pfizer bought them out") is erroneous. Therefore you have provided zero evidence supporting your position
ok for gods sake forget I even mentioned the intercytex example! really, i didnt need to bring it up and wish i had just kept it simple and said something like " can anyone tell me a time when they have delivered something after 'promising' research" at least then you couldn't detract from my question.
Originally Posted by gmonasco
And that's supposed to demonstrate what? Nobody can deliver what doesn't yet exist.
Ok, so you're saying that you believe that nothing yet exists better and I am saying...hmm hold on, no one can tell me I single time when they've delivered anything so if we think about it what i am saying is fact and what you are saying is, well, just a belief (which i personally think is naive).
Originally Posted by gmonasco
Yes, I see the banal point that nobody can deliver what doesn't yet exist.
naive to assume that
Originally Posted by gmonasco
Because it's a matter of public record.
yes it's a public record but they make public what they want the general public to know, of course they will only state a valid reason for not continuing with trials.
Similar Threads
-
By Mojo Risin in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 9
Last Post: 08-11-2013, 10:12 PM
-
By jman91 in forum Coping with Hair Loss in Everyday Life
Replies: 27
Last Post: 04-17-2012, 06:40 PM
-
By gmonasco in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 26
Last Post: 04-14-2012, 03:24 AM
-
By delcolorado in forum Men's Hair Loss: Start Your Own Topic
Replies: 3
Last Post: 04-04-2010, 05:35 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