the no cure conspiracy

[daplo collins]

I kind of believe if a cure was discovered it would be swept under the rug so propecia and hair transplant companies could continue to make billions Its a good chance a cure already exists.

 

[Vesemir]

Maybe they could make much more money of an easy cure.

 

[Roberto_72]

The OP is obviously kidding.
In Spain and Italy, finasteride is a generic drug that sells at 0.25 cents a pill. I think it is the same all over Europe. No one is making ANY money out of it this side of the Atlantic.

 

[resu]

It's nice to believe in these type of conspiracies because the truth is much scarier, there is no cure.

 

[Eren]

If someone had a cure, then he would just quit his job at that company before making the cure available. If that individual could be rich because of that then he wouldn't give any f*cks about the hair transplant or finasteride companies.

But here it is, there is no cure. We still don't even exactly know how DHT does what it does. How does it make the hair shafts thinner and thinner? The mechanism is far from fully understood.

 

[Tottenham]

Jet fuel doesn't melt steal beams

 

[tele]

I kind of believe if a cure was discovered it would be swept under the rug so propecia and hair transplant companies could continue to make billions Its a good chance a cure already exists.

i hate that this is probably true

 

[Kalash]

Not true at all, the people doing R&D aren't assholes and the word would get out.

 

[Roberto_72]

May I suggest a different interpretation of the lack of a cure (without side effects and efficacious for everyone that is)...
In my opinion, in the 21st century, we have grown the impression that we have learned a lot about how physics work and that pretty much all the universe's secrets are unfolding. This knowledge of physics also allows for the creation of gadgets that can "think" almost as well as we can.
We then tend to compare this knowledge of the physical world to the physics of the human body and are staggered by how little we know about it.
Some say "how is it possible to have gone to the moon but not have been able to grow new hair, even in a lab"? It is not because there is a conspiracy of because scientists are for some reason being dumb.
I think biology is as complicated as physics; comparing the results, more...

 

[GoldenMane]

The OP is obviously kidding.
In Spain and Italy, finasteride is a generic drug that sells at 0.25 cents a pill. I think it is the same all over Europe. No one is making ANY money out of it this side of the Atlantic.

This, once drugs patents expire and they go generic, there is no longer any vested interest on the part of the big drug companies. Finasteride and minoxidil went generic long ago, the drug companies would love a new drug that they can charge top dollar for.

One thing drug companies do have a vested interest in, is preventing simple one time treatments. They want customers coming back again and again to renew their prescriptions. A one of treatment like histogen is a bit problematic for them. If a drug was found, that could alter WNT pathways to restore or produce new follicles, the drug companies wouldn't like that very much.
Long term maintenance is where the money is, not in cures.

 

[Roberto_72]

This, once drugs patents expire and they go generic, there is no longer any vested interest on the part of the big drug companies. Finasteride and minoxidil went generic long ago, the drug companies would love a new drug that they can charge top dollar for.

One thing drug companies do have a vested interest in, is preventing simple one time treatments. They want customers coming back again and again to renew their prescriptions. A one of treatment like histogen is a bit problematic for them. If a drug was found, that could alter WNT pathways to restore or produce new follicles, the drug companies wouldn't like that very much.
Long term maintenance is where the money is, not in cures.

This is also true. But we should also take into consideration that in this particular case there is no widespread alternative drug to cure hairloss (how many people who are balding actually use finasteride?), so the company that really solved the issue would benefit of 10 or 11 years of revenues coming from pretty much every bald person on the planet... (I know this sounds a bit ridiculous: the company that really solved the issue!!!)

The present hairloss drug outlook doesn't please anyone: bald people and the people that could make them "see the hair" alike

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I kind of believe if a cure was discovered it would be swept under the rug so propecia and hair transplant companies could continue to make billions Its a good chance a cure already exists.

This isn't specific to hair loss.

 

[F2005]

The OP is obviously kidding.
In Spain and Italy, finasteride is a generic drug that sells at 0.25 cents a pill. I think it is the same all over Europe. No one is making ANY money out of it this side of the Atlantic.

But hair transplants are what are making these hair transplant surgeons multi millionaires.

- - - Updated - - -

This, once drugs patents expire and they go generic, there is no longer any vested interest on the part of the big drug companies. Finasteride and minoxidil went generic long ago, the drug companies would love a new drug that they can charge top dollar for.

One thing drug companies do have a vested interest in, is preventing simple one time treatments. They want customers coming back again and again to renew their prescriptions. A one of treatment like histogen is a bit problematic for them. If a drug was found, that could alter WNT pathways to restore or produce new follicles, the drug companies wouldn't like that very much.
Long term maintenance is where the money is, not in cures.

Unfortunately I totally agree with this. I see that many of you guys are from other countries which prohibit pharmaceutical companies from directly marketing their drugs via television advertising, but it's legal here in the US. I don't know whether to laugh or cringe (well, cringe mostly) when I see the transparent, manipulative, and money-hungry commercials for their drugs. Here's one of their greatest hits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ThkhpUDBzM. And what is the commonality with virtually all of these drugs? They don't cure anything but they require a person to take these drugs indefinitely. It's like Chris Rock says: big pharma are like drug dealers, they get you on the comeback. It's honestly sickening and it wouldn't surprise me at all if cures for certain diseases are being withheld so that Big Pharma can make loads of money researching and treating them.

 

[Notcoolanymore]

I kind of believe if a cure was discovered it would be swept under the rug so propecia and hair transplant companies could continue to make billions Its a good chance a cure already exists.

You forgot to include the hair piece companies.

 

[Cincinnati Kid]

You forgot to include the hair piece companies.

That GIF is ridiculous hahahahaha.

 

[RatherGoBlindThanSeeItGo]

You forgot to include the hair piece companies.

I doubt the hair piece industry is really that influential. The conspiracy is strong in this one. I do believe there might be treatments out there that are just as effective as propecia/minoxidil but never got developed or even researched because they couldn't be patented like propecia and minoxidil were. Would the use of minoxidil and propecia be as prevalent as they are now if Upjohn/Merck couldn't get the patent to cash in with their product for a decade before generic formulations were allowed? I doubt they would even have invested in clinical trials to measure the efficacy of these treatments if there wasn't some possibility to make money off of it. Because that's just how medicine works.

I have always wondered, since oral spironolactone is so strong, why hasn't topical spironolactone (shown to give benefits with 0 systemic absorption) ever had a serious clinical trial with hair density, total hair, terminal hair counts? How do we know it's not as effective as finasteride? Well, who's going to fund a large-scale clinical trial if topical spironolactone formulations were already patented for use against acne (http://www.google.com/patents/US4543351) in 1984 and there's literally no money to be made because within a year of having your cream on the market there's a dozen other companies making cheaper versions of your product.

It's not just about spironolactone though, it's really any treatment you can think of that probably couldn't be patented for whatever reason. The prospect of making money is what drives companies to develop products like propecia/rogaine. Not necessarily because they want what's best for us. I don't think anyone would be secretly harboring a permanent cure (it would probably leak somehow) but I definitely believe there are effective alternatives to finasteride and minoxidil that we don't know of because nobody bothered to invest in clinical trials due to the lack of prospective profit.

Also, that poor guy. He looks a lot better without that silly hair piece.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I doubt the hair piece industry is really that influential. The conspiracy is strong in this one. I do believe there might be treatments out there that are just as effective as propecia/minoxidil but never got developed or even researched because they couldn't be patented like propecia and minoxidil were. Would the use of minoxidil and propecia be as prevalent as they are now if Upjohn/Merck couldn't get the patent to cash in with their product for a decade before generic formulations were allowed? I doubt they would even have invested in clinical trials to measure the efficacy of these treatments if there wasn't some possibility to make money off of it. Because that's just how medicine works.

I have always wondered, since oral spironolactone is so strong, why hasn't topical spironolactone (shown to give benefits with 0 systemic absorption) ever had a serious clinical trial with hair density, total hair, terminal hair counts? How do we know it's not as effective as finasteride? Well, who's going to fund a large-scale clinical trial if topical spironolactone formulations were already patented for use against acne (http://www.google.com/patents/US4543351) in 1984 and there's literally no money to be made because within a year of having your cream on the market there's a dozen other companies making cheaper versions of your product.

It's not just about spironolactone though, it's really any treatment you can think of that probably couldn't be patented for whatever reason. The prospect of making money is what drives companies to develop products like propecia/rogaine. Not necessarily because they want what's best for us. I don't think anyone would be secretly harboring a permanent cure (it would probably leak somehow) but I definitely believe there are effective alternatives to finasteride and minoxidil that we don't know of because nobody bothered to invest in clinical trials due to the lack of prospective profit.

Also, that poor guy. He looks a lot better without that silly hair piece.

I think I've seen posts on this site claiming to get sides from topical spironolactone.

 

[RatherGoBlindThanSeeItGo]

I think I've seen posts on this site claiming to get sides from topical spironolactone.

Sorry, I didn't mean to paint topical spironolactone as some miracle product free of side effects. I have seen some posts that reported this as well. There was a guy on a steroid forum who claimed he had decreased serum testosteron after using topical spironolactone. But the little research (basically just the one study about acne where men's backs were covered with topical spironolactone) that exists supports the 'no systemic effects' claim. The point is, topical spironolactone or something else that's out there might have an effect similar to finasteride with less chance of side effects, but we wouldn't know that for sure because no company would fund a proper clinical trial for something they can't make money off.

So although I don't want to make any claims about topical spironolactone, I do admit that it looks promising and I wish there was a clinical trial to really know how effective it is compared to finasteride/minoxidil.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Sorry, I didn't mean to paint topical spironolactone as some miracle product free of side effects. I have seen some posts that reported this as well. There was a guy on a steroid forum who claimed he had decreased serum testosteron after using topical spironolactone. But the little research (basically just the one study about acne where men's backs were covered with topical spironolactone) that exists supports the 'no systemic effects' claim. The point is, topical spironolactone or something else that's out there might have an effect similar to finasteride with less chance of side effects, but we wouldn't know that for sure because no company would fund a proper clinical trial for something they can't make money off.

So although I don't want to make any claims about topical spironolactone, I do admit that it looks promising and I wish there was a clinical trial to really know how effective it is compared to finasteride/minoxidil.

OK, in that case my agreement is complete on this respect.

The system provides no incentive to rigorously investigate the effectiveness and safety profiles of non-patented treatments.