Will There Be Something Better Than The Big3 On The Market Within The Next 10 Years?

[That Guy]

The advances that have been made in even just the last year regarding regenerative medicine and legit anti aging, combined with improved stem cell laws, I have trouble believing anyone who would say no treatment superior to conventional ones could be available within the next ten years is being completely honest.

At present, there are several companies developing improved anti androgens, neo-genesis inducing therapies and next-generation hair transplants backed by impressive research and human trials are close at hand.

We'll have something soon

 

[Jake lake]

Winlevi (1.0% Cb 03 01) is supposed to have it's phase 3 study finished in 2H 2017, I guessing it will be released shortly after. It won't be marketed for hair loss but it would definitely help, specially to those that can't tolerate finasteride.

nice find, it's counterpart, Breezula for hair loss ( http://www.cassiopea.com/activities/product-pipeline/breezula.aspx ) is only in stage II now, so probably years away

however I like the website, it's clearly stated and shows clear progress updates

 

[zaman]

It's been almost 20 years since Finasteride was approved for male pattern baldness, and 30 years for Minoxidil.

Many new treatments have gone to trial in the years since, only to be written off quickly for various reasons.

Maybe in another 20 we will have something slightly better than Minoxidil.

 

[That Guy]

Pretty obvious by the likes and sh*t you're throwing around that you're not receiving the answers you hoped you would.

Why not just leave this place and go back to being bald and miserable?

 

[That Guy]

but I really want to believe
You believe too, brother?
Are you a believer?

1985 my father went to a dermatologist and they said to him: "Mister MM60, there is extensive research done on genetic blablabla & stem cells and in 5 years the cure for male pattern baldness will probably be around!"

My father was a true believer...
Now he is bald and has Parkinson too...

Oh, you're one of those people...

1985 they hadn't even succesfully grown a new hair in a person using stem cells, and the Japanese Economic Journal wrote that in 2010 we would have space factories and have cured cancer, neurological diseases and heart conditions. Why? Because 2010 seemed so far away and Blade Runner was a smash hit.

Much like your dad's doctor, it was baseless predictions that assumed the next decade was going to be a sci-fi movie.

We actually have clinical research now that demonstrates that growing new hair, and not just in mice, is possible. Now, they're undergoing trials to be commercialized. That was not happening in the 80s.

As futurist Erica Orange says about predicting the future:

"In order to learn new things and become truly objective about the future, you first have to begin forgetting — by discarding no longer useful information. Change gives information, knowledge, expertise a short shelf life. Help people and organizations clear their memory banks of the now useless information that impedes their ability to acquire new and more useful information."

 

[Roberto_72]

I only say I hope so
I interpreted the question in the sense of some non-surgical remedy. Tsuji is surgical. I will take Tsuji anyways

 

[Ikkaku]

How is it obvious?

With Histogen, Follica, CB and Shiseido.

 

[Floki]

yes there will be something better on the market i believe because science and technology progress exponentially and we can be amazed!

 

[coolio]

Oh, you're one of those people...

1985 they hadn't even succesfully grown a new hair in a person using stem cells, and the Japanese Economic Journal wrote that in 2010 we would have space factories and have cured cancer, neurological diseases and heart conditions. Why? Because 2010 seemed so far away and Blade Runner was a smash hit.

Much like your dad's doctor, it was baseless predictions that assumed the next decade was going to be a sci-fi movie.

We actually have clinical research now that demonstrates that growing new hair, and not just in mice, is possible. Now, they're undergoing trials to be commercialized. That was not happening in the 80s.

As futurist Erica Orange says about predicting the future:

"In order to learn new things and become truly objective about the future, you first have to begin forgetting — by discarding no longer useful information. Change gives information, knowledge, expertise a short shelf life. Help people and organizations clear their memory banks of the now useless information that impedes their ability to acquire new and more useful information."

You've got hindsight. You see what went wrong in the past. Looking back now, it seems crazy for people to have expected it go so smoothly.

But decades ago they weren't even aware that many of those things COULD go wrong. And you aren't aware of what else might pose a problem now. Or how many more steps some process might turn out to require than originally assumed. Etc.

Logically the cure is closer now than it was decades ago. But that by itself does not prove you are so much wiser about this than people were in the past.

 

[That Guy]

You've got hindsight. You see what went wrong in the past. Looking back now, it seems crazy for people to have expected it go so smoothly.

But decades ago they weren't even aware that many of those things COULD go wrong. And you aren't aware of what else might pose a problem now. Or how many more steps some process might turn out to require than originally assumed. Etc.

Logically the cure is closer now than it was decades ago. But that by itself does not prove you are so much wiser about this than people were in the past.

We are wiser regarding the subject at hand.

The point of my last post was that hindsight is irrelevant, because it is rarely accurate regarding the future and prevents you from accepting new information.

There is a difference between emerging technologies and theoretical ones. For example, with gene editing, we could eradicate most diseases. But at the moment, its simply a possible future outcome based on current research. No one has set the wheels in motion to make this a reality because most of the world restricts experiments. Therefore, a timeline can't really be predicted.

There's predicting the future by what you think should happen and then there's predicting what might actually happen given the state of the art and present efforts to advance it.

30 years ago, nobody had anything with potential to cure baldness in the pipeline. There was just people saying "in five years" because it's what they thought should happen

 

[coolio]

30 years ago is one thing, but 10-15 is another. A decade ago there was Aderans in phase#1 & 2 (and Intercytex before that). Follica had just come out with their wounding-based regrowth thinking and it appeared the solution might come very quickly. Replicel & Histogen had less proof but they were both talking not unlike they do now.

I agree we seem closer now that ever now. I agree we probably are closer than ever in fact.
But don't think we have never had good evidence to believe we were pretty close before. We have, and it turned out to be wrong. It could happen again.

 

[GiveMeAccessToMyAccount]

When I signed up to this site in 2009, I thought in 10 years or less we would have something better than finasteride/dutasteride/minoxidil. It's been 8 years and still nothing. If you told me in 2009 that there will be nothing better in the next 10 years, i'd call you extremely pessimistic, and i'd be mad at you.

If you tell me now that we'll have nothing better in the next 10 years, I won't be mad at you. I may even borderline believe you. If something better comes out within the next 10 years, great. But idk, there's always something great in the near future that just ends up fading away.

 

[Xander94]

Relax and enjoy life guys in our 30s we will have a full head of f*****g teenager hair. Until then focus on getting better on life.

 

[GiveMeAccessToMyAccount]

30 years ago is one thing, but 10-15 is another. A decade ago there was Aderans in phase#1 & 2 (and Intercytex before that). Follica had just come out with their wounding-based regrowth thinking and it appeared the solution might come very quickly. Replicel & Histogen had less proof but they were both talking not unlike they do now.

I agree we seem closer now that ever now. I agree we probably are closer than ever in fact.
But don't think we have never had good evidence to believe we were pretty close before. We have, and it turned out to be wrong. It could happen again.

Yep, so much was happening back then, that was coming out in 5 years, 10 max.

Fast forward to those years people were talking about something big was coming and there's nothing. More promises, more timelines, no results, no pics, new treatments in the 2020s. What are the chances the 2020s come and go and we still have nothing better? That's sad to even think.

 

[Jeca Tatu]

I always wondered why nobody is making topical Dutasteride.

There is a compounding pharmacy in my city that sells allegedly '' lipossomised dutasteride gel '', which is prescribed by a doctor who hosts a local hair loss forum. I'm not a member of that forum because it's a shitty one, but I'm aware that many guys there use it.

 

[thomps1523]

I started coming to the forums around 2000. If you told me then that SEVENTEEN years later there would be nothing new that grew hair, I'd have bet lots and lots of money that you'd be wrong. Still, I'm grateful for finasteride, minoxodil, and ketoconazloe - they saved a lot of my hair, and have me in a good place for when better treatments come along. After all, every single follicle matters.

I started coming around 2005, and I've read every hopeful as well... bottom line they didn't know what we know now... maybe it won't work this time either, but you can't compare 2017 to 2000 from a technogical, or scientific standpoint, so it's irrelevant.

 

[Roberto_72]

In my opinion, and based on my long long experience as a patience, in fifteen years (I want to be less optimistic than saying ten) we might have hair multiplication, which will allow everyone of us to be basically full heads again.

But, concerning a drug to regrow hair, I frankly doubt we will have an addition to the "big three" so that we have the "big four".
The reasons?
A - Political: Big pharma is not interested in hair loss anymore. It is not because they are mean: simply put,
A.1 - the latest drug for hair loss, finasteride, has received incredible bad reputation. And it is likely this would happen with any new drug for hair loss. The hair loss sufferer is a weird patient...
A.2 - the hair cycle is very slow and does not match well with fast revenues. Minoxidil and fina have shown most people don't have the patience to use the new drug to respect the hair cycle timings; the drug goes down the drain.
A.3 - After the raise of the PFS phenomenon,
the drug administration of the biggest market in the world, the USA, will think twice before allowing a new hair loss drug that may have any kind of side effect.

B - Physiological: researchers seem to find it easier to multiply hair than to understand why it falls. Why this could be?
B.1 - I have a feeling there are so many different ways that your genes want you to lose hair (just look at the incredible variety of age and shape of onset) that it is next to impossible to find a cure for all;
B.2 - There are diseases in which surgery is so faster a solution than drugs that it is absurd to want to make up a drug to solve the same problem. Take kidney stones. Sure, you could try to use a drug that melts the stones, or that tries to prevent them. But what about the one day laser procedure that breaks the stones into small fragments that you will urinate by one month?

TL;DR
All in all, the drug for hair regrowth might be a chimera. Me, I am much more confident in hair multiplication.

 

[nameless]

I think hair loss should essentially be cured within 3 years at the most.

It could be cured in 2017/2018 with combo of Pilofocus and Replicel.

I'm hoping Pilofocus gets us full coverage and Replicel can preserve the full coverage you got from Pilofocus.

Most posters seem disinterested in Pilofocus so I'm wondering if everyone here has seen this study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19438685

 

[Pacey123]

The only thing i belive in, are the hairmultiplication treatments, i don't think there's gonna be one simple pill to swallow. Maybe there will be a better topical solution than minoxidil tho.

And like mentioned before, most users don't even stick to the approved medications. There are so much idiots that quit minoxidil after two weeks because they shed and read something like "DUDE, don't take it, it destroyed my hairline DUDE!" or they take Finasteride, read about it online and are suddenly more conscious of their body and think their balls and dick will fall off.

 

[That Guy]

Cell therapy or gtfo, in my opinion.

The only reason I have interest in the fidia product is because I think it has potential to be the last hairloss product that is worthwhile before surgical procedures render drugs obsolete.