Has Science Asked The Right Questions About male pattern baldness?

[coolio]

so we can genetically engineere unsensitive follicles or we can simply block X and not DHT.

We don't need new replacement follicles that are genetically engineered insensitive.

We just need to use donor cells from the less sensitive "donor area" of the head, and then don't subject the new replacement follicles to a decade of very high androgen levels like what happened in our teenage years. Those years got the ball rolling on the androgen damage.

Genetic changes for the sake of fighting hair loss are not coming any time soon and we don't need them to get a real treatment option.


This is like saying we need a genetic fix to grow 5 centimeters taller. Sure, genetics would be the best fix. But if you could make it happen by getting a handful of cells removed & multiplied & reinjected manually at a clinic, wouldn't that be good enough in the practical sense?

Even if the cellular method might fade gradually, and need some 'top up' sessions every 10 or 20 years, it would still be enough to satisfy millions of people.

 

[Min0]

We don't need new replacement follicles that are genetically engineered insensitive.

We just need to use donor cells from the less sensitive "donor area" of the head, and then don't subject the new replacement follicles to a decade of very high androgen levels like what happened in our teenage years. Those years got the ball rolling on the androgen damage.

Genetic changes for the sake of fighting hair loss are not coming any time soon and we don't need them to get a real treatment option.


This is like saying we need a genetic fix to grow 5 centimeters taller. Sure, genetics would be the best fix. But if you could make it happen by getting a handful of cells removed & multiplied & reinjected manually at a clinic, wouldn't that be good enough in the practical sense?

Even if the cellular method might fade gradually, and need some 'top up' sessions every 10 or 20 years, it would still be enough to satisfy millions of people.

follicle cloning is happening right now (replicel, Tsuji ... etc)
but it's not that simple. we don't know if the cloned follicle can resist 20 years of androgens as if it was new. or if it would be functional at all if cloned too many times.

 

[Trichosan]

One can't really make analogies in a broad way when it comes to biological systems because they are inherently different in genetic cause, cellular signalling and many other things science does not yet know. However, we are now seeing experiments in creating synthetic genes. But even before that level of total control maybe through recombinant manipulation possibly with CRISPR, cloned follicles without susceptibility as in those who simply do not go bald may be generated. Science is full of unexpected surprises though. Guess, plead, hope, pray, it still sheds no valuable light on the problem where we are today.