We've Just About Created A True Flying Car....

[nameless]

Curing hair loss can't be far behind. Check out the video in both links.



http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/nerdcore/this-is-a-legit-flying-car/vi-AAkn5nQ?ocid=mailsignout

http://newatlas.com/airmule-cormorant-autonomous-flight/46479/

 

[InfamousOne]

The problem with 'curing hair loss' is it's not considered a disability. Hair loss is considered a natural part of life for most people as they age, and therefore the industry views it as vanity more so than a condition. That's where the risk lies, because hairloss has no medical necessity it's 1000X harder and more expensive to cure. This is simply due to the fact that because hairloss doesn't negatively (at least medically) impact a persons life, the treatment for it must have 0 potential risks of side effects, because the company that cures hairloss and ends up creating another actual medical problem is going to get sued through the rear-end. Just look at what's happening to Merck with Propecia, all of those class lawsuits because healthy men, who were just losing their hair are now experiencing side effects that don't go away.

Now, if hair loss lead to death, and one of the possibly side effects was erectile dysfunction people are more inclined to accept the side effect. To cure hair loss, you almost need no side effects, and the amount of investment to go through clinical trials only to determine side effects is a huge deterrent to many venture capitalists and private equity firms.

If you're an investor and someone tells you that you can cure life-threatening cancer, but have to go through 400-500M dollars in clinical trials to get FDA approval and a possible side effect is high blood pressure, you can live with that. If someone tells you that you can cure hair loss and a possible side effect is high blood pressure, it's a lot more of a gamble because if people start suffering heart attacks then you put their life at risk for something as minuscule as hair loss (general public perception). It's always ironic that the people criticizing people who do comb overs, and don't want to fully shave their head and live bald are generally the people with full heads of hair, who also will never shave their head.

 

[Gone]

^ I mean hair loss is both physical and often negative, but I know what you mean.

Somebody on these threads said that if you lost all the hair you'd ever lose from
balding, except lost it overnight, it would be considered a much more serious condition, and I totally agree.

 

[InfamousOne]

^ I mean hair loss is both physical and often negative, but I know what you mean.

Somebody on these threads said that if you lost all the hair you'd ever lose from
balding, except lost it overnight, it would be considered a much more serious condition, and I totally agree.

I think it'd be the opposite. If everyone just lost hair overnight, then it'd be more accepted in society. The problem is, where it's least accepted is when young people go NW5 at age 19. It makes you look older, if everyone lost all of it at once like that, in my opinion it'd be more accepted. After 65, I don't think anyone cares much about hair loss anymore. If everyone who was going to lose hair lost it all at the same age and time, it'd be more accepted than it is today. If everyone lost all their hair at the same age period (overnight), then we wouldn't need a cure. What makes people superficial and judgmental on it is that not everyone loses their hair, especially not young. Most young adults appear to have full heads of hair, I think only 30% lose a significant portion before that. That's what makes it so hard, you lost hair quickly while everyone else is slowly losing it and may maintain it for longer (for the people who are starting to lose it). If the 80% of men who will experience hair loss in their life lost it all at the same time, and they all went NW6, it'd be way more accepted.

 

[Roberto_72]

I think it'd be the opposite. If everyone just lost hair overnight, then it'd be more accepted in society. The problem is, where it's least accepted is when young people go NW5 at age 19. It makes you look older, if everyone lost all of it at once like that, in my opinion it'd be more accepted. After 65, I don't think anyone cares much about hair loss anymore. If everyone who was going to lose hair lost it all at the same age and time, it'd be more accepted than it is today. If everyone lost all their hair at the same age period (overnight), then we wouldn't need a cure. What makes people superficial and judgmental on it is that not everyone loses their hair, especially not young. Most young adults appear to have full heads of hair, I think only 30% lose a significant portion before that. That's what makes it so hard, you lost hair quickly while everyone else is slowly losing it and may maintain it for longer (for the people who are starting to lose it). If the 80% of men who will experience hair loss in their life lost it all at the same time, and they all went NW6, it'd be way more accepted.

I agree. If many more people lost their hair while younger, it would be much easier for young adults who are balding.
For many years I have realized I was the baldest man in the room. As time passed, at least this phenomenon became less frequent. Not that I wish anyone to be bald. I just do not wish I am always the one who has "something to explain"...

 

[nameless]

The problem with 'curing hair loss' is it's not considered a disability. Hair loss is considered a natural part of life for most people as they age, and therefore the industry views it as vanity more so than a condition. That's where the risk lies, because hairloss has no medical necessity it's 1000X harder and more expensive to cure. This is simply due to the fact that because hairloss doesn't negatively (at least medically) impact a persons life, the treatment for it must have 0 potential risks of side effects, because the company that cures hairloss and ends up creating another actual medical problem is going to get sued through the rear-end. Just look at what's happening to Merck with Propecia, all of those class lawsuits because healthy men, who were just losing their hair are now experiencing side effects that don't go away.

Now, if hair loss lead to death, and one of the possibly side effects was erectile dysfunction people are more inclined to accept the side effect. To cure hair loss, you almost need no side effects, and the amount of investment to go through clinical trials only to determine side effects is a huge deterrent to many venture capitalists and private equity firms.

If you're an investor and someone tells you that you can cure life-threatening cancer, but have to go through 400-500M dollars in clinical trials to get FDA approval and a possible side effect is high blood pressure, you can live with that. If someone tells you that you can cure hair loss and a possible side effect is high blood pressure, it's a lot more of a gamble because if people start suffering heart attacks then you put their life at risk for something as minuscule as hair loss (general public perception). It's always ironic that the people criticizing people who do comb overs, and don't want to fully shave their head and live bald are generally the people with full heads of hair, who also will never shave their head.

* Then why is anyone at all trying to cure it?

* And many failed treatments have been run through experiments. Why did people try to get those failed treatments through testing? Why did anyone even bother with those treatments? There are MANY failed treatments in the baldness cure scrap pile that were run through some level of testing before being abandoned.

* And why did anyone bring the drugs to market that are presently available to try to treat it?

I think that the industry understands that there is some risks but they also understand that there's a big profit potential. I think the industry wants a safe and effective treatment.

 

[nameless]

I agree. If many more people lost their hair while younger, it would be much easier for young adults who are balding.
For many years I have realized I was the baldest man in the room. As time passed, at least this phenomenon became less frequent. Not that I wish anyone to be bald. I just do not wish I am always the one who has "something to explain"...

I respectfully disagree.

I think there's much more sympathy for the people who lose all of their hair at once than for those of us dealing with the slow insidious progress of male pattern hair loss. I myself even feel more sympathy for the people who lose it all at once than I do for us who lose it slowly over time.

I can't imagine having a full head of hair and losing it all at once over a few days or weeks. It sounds horrifying. I would end up in a psych hospital. What a nightmarish thought.

 

[InfamousOne]

Then why is anyone at all trying to cure it? And why have so many companies run treatments through clinical trials that failed? Why are there some drugs already available to try to ameliorate it?

I think that the industry understands that there is some risks but they also understand that there's a big profit potential.

Most people aren't interested in curing it. All of the major hair loss solutions right now (Minoxidil, Ketoconazole, Finasteride) have been accidental discoveries. The same with the upcoming (promising) Brotzu lotion. These people aren't out there trying to cure hair loss, they're mainly interested in curing more dangerous medical conditions, and they accidentally discovered that it caused hair growth, and then started marketing it. There's money to be made in curing hair loss, but there's a lot more to be made in hair loss products that you have to use on an ongoing basis. Truthfully, i believe if hair loss was life threatening, it would have been cured by now.

 

[nameless]

They're not. All of the major hair loss solutions right now (Minoxidil, Ketoconazole, Finasteride) have been accidental discoveries.

That's not the point. The point is that people invested the time/energy/resources to run them through clinical trials. But according to you people wouldn't do that because there is too much risk. But the fact that the 3 treatments you've referenced were put through clinical trials seems to demonstrate that you're wrong. Also, dutasteride was put through clinical trials as well.

And MANY MANY other treatments were put through some degree of testing but they failed so the plug was pulled on them. And right now there are quite a few potential treatments being tested. But if you were right then none of this would be happening.

I respectfully disagree with you.

 

[nameless]

Truthfully, i believe if hair loss was life threatening, it would have been cured by now.

Again, I respectfully disagree. The technology to treat it simply hasn't been available so even if it killed people a cure was not going to be invented until the present.

There are diseases that kill lots of people that science has been trying to cure for a long time but it still takes time to develop the technology to cure those diseases. There has been major wars against heart disease and cancer for decades but it's only recently that justifiable talk of true cures for these 2 diseases is starting to emerge. For heart disease PCSK9 inhibitors and stem cell treatments look like they might be the real deal for the treatment of arteriosclerosis and heart muscle damage from heart attacks. And stunning breakthrough treatments for cancer are demonstrating revolutionary success in early testing, including human testing. But science has been at war against heart disease and cancer for a long, long time.

 

[That Guy]

Yeah, I'd have to agree with nameless on this one; it wouldn't matter if it killed people.

I've pointed out on these forums before that a lot of the new treatments being driven to market are mostly fueled by discoveries that were made decades ago, but never put into practice.

I believe 100% that this is due to a lack of doctor and investor interest because of the deeply embedded cope in society that "men don't need hair" or that you must be gay or metrosexual if you care about your hair. I had to see 3 doctors before one did anything but literally shrug their f*****g shoulders at me. Our world is becoming increasingly connected and fixated on first impressions, there is an increased focus on mental health and depression and companies see the financial potential of a legitimate cure.

It really is bizarre that we live in this time of cultural-communists championing "political correctness" and how we shouldn't judge people for things they cannot control, but pop culture and the media will openly mock bald men, turn around, and in the same breath, tell their balding friend/family member to stop being such a pussy and just go bald; it's no big deal.

 

[hairblues]

it does seem like more men are balding younger now than in the past..I don't know if that is scientifically accurate but just seems that way.

 

[That Guy]

it does seem like more men are balding younger now than in the past..I don't know if that is scientifically accurate but just seems that way.

I hear people, balding or not, saying this all the time so I really don't think it's cognitive bias.

I've read many studies that have proven that children go through puberty at much younger ages than before because due to better nutrition, obesity rates, etc. the conditions favourable and necessary for it are present earlier.

If I was to bet money on it, I'd bet on this being a possible culprit. I think it would be worth someone doing a study to examine this correlation.

 

[Dolph]

I've read many studies that have proven that children go through puberty at much younger ages

My own theory is different, although certainly not mutually exclusive of yours: I would wager a significant factor is increase in stress. Not in all cases, but as a general trend. It has been my observation that our post-Internet, post-9/11 society operates within a framework of fear, anxiety, and intense global competition. Contrast this with the 1950s-1970s when a wife, 2.5 kids, a dog, a house, apple pie, a strong economy, and blissful ignorance of the problems of the world were all standard-issue. Stress takes its hormonal toll.