realistically, when can they make a safe alternative for finasteride?

[Pate]

It makes more sense that topical anti-androgens are probably not the answer that so many think they are. Therefore they are not worth investing in.

That might be part of it. However, they don't need to cure hair loss to be a financial success, they just need to be more effective than finasteride and mostly side-effect free.

I think it's more the threat of hair multiplication. We've been hearing for more than 10 years now that the HM breakthrough to cure hair loss is imminent. With that on the horizon there wasn't much incentive to try and develop a better drug to stop hair loss.

Of course, HM has really struggled, and if somebody had pushed ahead to develop CB-03-01 in 2000, it would be well and truly out by now. And the developers would probably be very rich, but hindsight is 20-20.

[Alf]

That might be part of it. However, they don't need to cure hair loss to be a financial success, they just need to be more effective than finasteride and mostly side-effect free.

I think it's more the threat of hair multiplication. We've been hearing for more than 10 years now that the HM breakthrough to cure hair loss is imminent. With that on the horizon there wasn't much incentive to try and develop a better drug to stop hair loss.

Of course, HM has really struggled, and if somebody had pushed ahead to develop CB-03-01 in 2000, it would be well and truly out by now. And the developers would probably be very rich, but hindsight is 20-20.

But HM would probably be more expencive and some improved finasteride would probably still be used by people who still have not lost too much hair?

[Follicle Death Row]

CB 03-01 will have a place in the market if they can get it out by 2017. It would be the 1st treatment to use almost as a preventative measure and failing that the likes of Aderans and Histogen could be the 2nd bullet. I'm just assuming Aderans will be around 10k so I guess there's the incentive there to spend 20 bucks a month to let CB take care of the prob for a long time. Apparently it's more effective than oral finasteride and side effect free systemically anyway. Sounds like a good product if you ask me.

It's likely that the young college student who's beginning to thin is going to turn to CB first due to the financial aspect. I guess that would be the 20-30 demographic who perhaps don't quite yet have the sheckles for the fancy cellular treatments.

I think there's a place for CB and I hope it comes to market. Sounds like a safe and elegant interim solution for the young guys.

[Kirby_]

If (if!) PGD2 blocking topical treatments hit the market relatively soon, CB-03-01 will be obsolete before it's even released.

[TravisB]

If (if!) PGD2 blocking topical treatments hit the market relatively soon, CB-03-01 will be obsolete before it's even released.

If (if!) blocking PGD2 is really all what's needed to stop MPB

[rdawg]

It's tough to say that what fin does is what is strictly necessary to stop hairloss. By that I mean, it's possible a future product will target a more specific hormone/part of the body(i.e PGD2) so that it will have a lesser effect on your hormones. Although I dont fully understand what finasteride exactly does to stop hairloss so don't quote me on that.

What I think is more likely is something that STIMULATES the hair enough to overpower what is trying to kill it miniaturize it maybe?

or possibly a lighter fin dose coupled with a powerful stimulate could be the solution.

I'd say we're lucky that we have something that at least halts the hairloss ALOT with fin but we do not have a product that can properly stimulate the hair. Minoxidil is ok but for the most part ineffective after a while, we need something better in that area.

[Follicle Death Row]

If (if!) PGD2 blocking topical treatments hit the market relatively soon, CB-03-01 will be obsolete before it's even released.

Well yes though I'm quite skeptical of them being able to get out a PGD2 blocker before CB-03-01. Hope I'm wrong on that.

[Dazza]

Well yes though I'm quite skeptical of them being able to get out a PGD2 blocker before CB-03-01. Hope I'm wrong on that.

Just did a search on CB and found a few other forums doing group buys of this stuff. Seems pretty expensive. Is there ment to be a official source of this stuff?

[Tracy C]

I think it's more the threat of hair multiplication. We've been hearing for more than 10 years now that the HM breakthrough to cure hair loss is imminent. With that on the horizon there wasn't much incentive to try and develop a better drug to stop hair loss.

That is a very valid point. Hair multiplication will happen, it's happening now, it's just a matter of when will it become available to those who need it. It could happen five or ten years down the road, or it could happen next year. No one really knows. All people who are not directly involved in the research can do is speculate - and speculate they do.

[DepressedByHairLoss]

I will concede that people make valid points when they say that topical anti-androgens are not being produced because the advent of hair multiplication is imminent. However, as Pate says, a topical anti-androgen that is more effective than finasteride and without the side effects could still make a company a ton of money. I view it as being even simpler: doctors themselves could even produce a topical version of finasteride which could be more effective than oral finasteride and without the side effects, since it is locally applied to the scalp and not circulated throughout the entire body. I've heard of a dermatologist in NYC who makes his own version of minoxidil, as well as another mesotherapy doctor who injects dutasteride into the scalp. There's no reason why more of these doctors cannot create topical versions of finasteride, especially since I'm sure they're aware that oral finasteride causes plenty of people side effects. But unfortunately, there has been such minimal progress in the field of hair loss treatments that we've been stuck with the same old options for the past 15 years: minoxidil (whose results are very, very minimal at best), finasteride, and hair transplantation (which most people statistically don't even want.

What really gets me is that a lot of the possible treatments for hair loss could be autologous (or using components already approved by the FDA) and therefore do not need to go through rigorous clinical trials. The use of topical finasteride is one example. Another example is the use of autologous stem cells to regrow damaged stem cells or body parts. Plenty of doctors, such as Dr. Purita in FL, are using stem cells taken from a person's own body to heal injuries, regenerate damaged cartilage, and even in orthopaedics to in place of invasive procedures like knee replacements. I really don't see why such autologous procedures could not be used for hair loss. Dr. Greco is attempting to this type of thing and I really commend him for it. However, he's the only one that I know of trying to do such things. Unfortunately the majority of the hair loss population is not being served adequately at all by today's treatments.

Lastly, I will concede that finasteride can be pretty effective, but minoxidil is really a joke in terms of a hair regrowth stimulant. We really need a much more powerful hair regrowth stimulant.