2004 Looks Promising For Hair Loss

[MacGuinness]

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.01/baldness.html

check out this month's Wired article on hair multiplication... we're gettin close... just hang in there

 

[ShedMaster]

Very interesting. This article gives me some hope that my greasy minoxidil head will not be permanent.

 

[bombscience]

God I hope this article is realisitic!!

Researchers in Canada, England, Japan, the Netherlands, and the US are on the verge of solving this puzzle, which could put an end to most forms of baldness for men and women. For the sake of his career and his hairline, Washenik desperately wants to win this contest.

but the down side:

But these fans are probably in for a long wait. Washenik says that it will be as much as five years before follicular neogenesis receives FDA approval and reaches the market. Martin Unger, a Canadian hair transplant surgeon who has tried to replicate hair cells, argues that it will take at least 10 years, though he acknowledges that Washenik and Aderans have changed the playing field by pumping millions of dollars into research.

 

[Redbone]

Sounds excellent but I hope Bosely does not win that race because I hear he is a real a**h**, performing allot of botched H/T's. Why should he make any more coin?

 

[ShedMaster]

God I hope this article is realisitic!!

Researchers in Canada, England, Japan, the Netherlands, and the US are on the verge of solving this puzzle, which could put an end to most forms of baldness for men and women. For the sake of his career and his hairline, Washenik desperately wants to win this contest.

I would consider 'on the verge' to mean 5 years from now.. but still I'm hopefull. Its not like hairloss is like AIDS, or cancer.

 

[zeushair]

Pretty wild, reminds me of The Fly when he has wierd hair growing on his back. Hopefully this gets somewhere.

 

[HairlossTalk]

check out this month's Wired article on hair multiplication

For the record, again, this technology will not be called "Hair Multiplication". That is the name of a proprietary procedure that hairsite users have deemed the "God" of all follicle cloning procedures because of their love and worship of Dr. Gho. This technology may or may not ever come to fruition, but it is not the gold standard term for the technology, as reputable researchers are now publishing their own research projects, unlike Gho. You may notice that they didn't bother even mentioning Dr. Gho in their article.

The technology, if developed by Bosley, will be given a name by them which none of us knows right now. Until then, the correct term for it is Follicular Cloning. Saying "Hair Multiplication" implies Gho, and Gho wasn't part of this article.

I have absolutely no problem with Gho, or his research, once he finally publishes it. Its moreso the propensity of hairsite users to cling to anything, no matter how unverified it is, and to scream from a mountaintop that it "works" or that it is the latest technology. Generally poor scientific thinking overall. I'll do what I can to nitpick and keep people on track

HairLossTalk.com

 

[hopewas]

i wouldn't get too excited if i were you guys. sounds nice to hear, but so did propecia when we first heard of it and it claimed to regrow hair

 

[Redbone]

Isnt Propecia supposed to re-grow hair in 80% of the patients? It is a huge step but not the miracle cure they promised. Hopewas it would make Micheal Jordan look like Micheal Jackson era 1977.

 

[Guest]

Isnt Propecia supposed to re-grow hair in 80% of the patients? It is a huge step but not the miracle cure they promised. Hopewas it would make Micheal Jordan look like Micheal Jackson era 1977.

In the clinical trials (all of them), propecia grew and retained hair. Added to minoxidil, the results were better.

i am no longer on propecia but don't have an issue with its efficacy. Light years ahead of anything before or since.

 

[20something]

Sounds excellent but I hope Bosely does not win that race because I hear he is a real a**h**, performing allot of botched H/T's. Why should he make any more coin?

I think Bosley is more a figurehead for the company now and he's not involved in the research anyway. If it means getting the technology out quicker, I don't care if Saddam Hussein does the research.

 

[jblig]

did he say $10,000 a head, sh*t I would pay that in a heart beat. But at least five years,,damnit, its going to be a long five years for me. Dont know if i can continue to hide it for that long, but I guess I will have to.

 

[Jack_the_Lad]

I definatley won't be able to hide it that long, I've already a bald.,. Oh well will just ahve to tell everyone that I'm off to boosley's saw mill for more hair.

I know this technique will produce unlimited amounts of hair, so lets hope he doesn't get to excited and start producing hair lines that start with your eyebrows(only joking), the snooner the better

 

[HairFreak]

i hope it will come out before everybody figures out that I'm balding big time. I want everybody to think that that full head of hear is a natural thing
Anyway, this has really encouraged me because now I see the real picture. I thought that number of reseearchers trying to find a cure for baldness is very limited. But, now I see that it isnt. Well, go figure. THe person who finds a cure will probably be one of the richest people in the world :lol:

 

[Guest]

i wouldn't get too excited if i were you guys. sounds nice to hear, but so did propecia when we first heard of it and it claimed to regrow hair

Posted by HairLossTalk.com elsewhere!

Once again guys, look to the clinical data for the answers to your questions first, not here!

The clinical data tells us that well over 70% of people who saw results after 1-2 years of use on Propecia, continued to have results (hair count maintenance or increase) after SEVEN years. Things plateaued at the 2-3 year mark and began to gradually drop off ... only minimally .... in the 4 to 5 years following that. Minimally meaning it went from 83% effectiveness to 75% of people seeing the same or better results.

Plateauing is also not typically manifested in loss of effectiveness. It would imply lack of continued improvement. You wouldn't lose anything.

Hair cycles in growth and resting phases anyways. This is very common. Many people go through "sheds" during treatment. Ride it out. It will come back.

According to the clinical data, Propecia, all by itself is sufficient to maintain and increase hair count in the VAST MAJORITY of men. Ride out the shed. If it lasts longer than a month or two, consider adding Rogaine. If not, you shouldn't need to add anything at this time. Things should continue to improve even if you stay on Propecia alone in the coming months. Make sure you're using Nizoral.

"Immunity" is an incorrect term created on some of these web forums by users who didn't fully understand how hair loss treatment works.

Please check out the 2 year Propecia FDA trial study here for some peace of mind: http://www.hairlosstalk.com/resourcelibrary

HairLossTalk.com

 

[Ams99]

Isnt Propecia supposed to re-grow hair in 80% of the patients? It is a huge step but not the miracle cure they promised. Hopewas it would make Micheal Jordan look like Micheal Jackson era 1977.

no, it's supposed to retain the hair you have in 80% of the people who take it (that figure seems to be a little high). i think only like 20% of people taking it see any regrowth while on the drug (unless you're also combing it with minoxidil, of course).

 

[Guest]

Isnt Propecia supposed to re-grow hair in 80% of the patients? It is a huge step but not the miracle cure they promised. Hopewas it would make Micheal Jordan look like Micheal Jackson era 1977.

no, it's supposed to retain the hair you have in 80% of the people who take it (that figure seems to be a little high). i think only like 20% of people taking it see any regrowth while on the drug (unless you're also combing it with minoxidil, of course).

Yes, the synergy of the two drugs takes them both to a more effective level.

Thanks

 

[Side Show Bob]

"A cure is just around the corner."

"New treatments are in the pipeline."

"Effective treatment within 5 years."

"Exciting new hairloss treatment awaiting FDA approval."

I've been hearing this for over 20 years. I'm convinced I'll be hearing it for another 20.

I know the younger members of this forum will disagree, but they're younger and, naturally, more desperate for a cure.

I hope for everyones' sake I'm wrong, but I know I'm not.

 

[Guest]

"A cure is just around the corner."

"New treatments are in the pipeline."

"Effective treatment within 5 years."

"Exciting new hairloss treatment awaiting FDA approval."

I've been hearing this for over 20 years. I'm convinced I'll be hearing it for another 20.

I know the younger members of this forum will disagree, but they're younger and, naturally, more desperate for a cure.

I hope for everyones' sake I'm wrong, but I know I'm not.

There are precious few "cures" for ANY disease that we humans can be afflicted by. So, when folks talk cures, they have the odds WAY against them.

If we are talking treatments, I think it is fair to say that we have made huge strides in the past thirty years, when the real science of male pattern baldness has actually been born.

Certainly, using the Big Three, fatty acids, spironolactone and the like is light years ahead of the days when we had polysobate 80 and that was about it.

Ditto the quality of hair transplants today vs. 1970.


It is all a matter of perspective on these things! I certainly would not want to go backwards on this trail.

 

[gt1229]

i am no longer on propecia but don't have an issue with its efficacy. Light years ahead of anything before or since.

Just curious: why are you no longer on propecia?