This thread seems D E A D.... Any hope out there??

[cureplease12]

Does anyone have any faith or hope in any upcoming treatments?

 

Does anyone think their is reason to believe balding will be totally optional within the next 5-10 years realistically?

 

My largest hope right now is on Replicel.

 

It would be magical to be able to obtain your youthful, natural hairline once again without any scarring.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Future_HT_Doc
Removed Outside Link

[FinHairLoss]

balding will be for poor people....... and non unionized private sector workers

[cureplease12]

when do you anticipate this will be?

[Blake Bloxham]

Cure,

 

There is always hope for the future. However, I think the best attitude I've personally seen toward some of the "miracle" cures of the next decade is "cautiously optimistic."

 

I don't think anyone doubts the technology will keep advancing and new products will continue making hair restoration less invasive and easier, but my guess is that this will be a gradual evolution and lead to an integration of numerous modalities (surgical, cellular based, pharmaceutical, etc).

 

However, keep in mind that utilizing some of the proven hair restoration methods of today will help you maintain your hair in the time being and ensure that you won't require as much restoration from any hypothetical future products.

[cureplease12]

Thanks for your input future HT Doc...

 

What are your thoughts on ACELL and the procedure involved plucking hairs out and coating them with Acell or auto cloning?

[Blake Bloxham]

ACell is promising. It's interesting because it takes a different approach compared to most other cellular based therapies and I think the idea of an 'unlimited donor supply' with the combination of skilled "plucking" and graft placement has been the "holy grail" in hair transplantation for a number of years.

 

Frankly, my thoughts, as I stated earlier, is that the "future" will be a gradual evolution and you'll see an integration of a lot of different techniques. ACell is a good example as it takes away some of the traditional surgical aspects of hair transplantation, but still requires surgical skill in plucking, treating, and artistically placing the grafts.

 

However, as several of our recommended physicians currently utilizing ACell have pointed out, the hair duplication (autocloning/plucking) aspect of the treatment is still very much in the experimental phases and the "results" have yet to be seen. I definitely think it has potential, but I suggest reserving judgment until we see objective results.

[Pale_Rider]

Does anyone have any faith or hope in any upcoming treatments?

 

Does anyone think their is reason to believe balding will be totally optional within the next 5-10 years realistically?

 

My largest hope right now is on Replicel.

 

It would be magical to be able to obtain your youthful, natural hairline once again without any scarring.

 

If Dr. Bernstein says so, there must be something developing.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/fashion/05SKIN.html?_r=3&partner=rss&emc=rss

[mahhong]

Unfortunately science is evolution and not revolution. If someone announces something today, it's probably still anywhere from 3-10 years away from ordinary, regular use.

 

As HT_Doc says, the "magic bullet" is probably unrealistic. There isn't going to be a pill or an injection that will give you all your hair back permanently, cheaply and safely. The fight against hairloss is likely to continue on many fronts at once; surgical, pharmaceutical etc.

 

I reckon within 5-10 years anybody with enough money and dedication will be able to get a large amount of their hair back. That combined with the current ability to hold on to hair will probably see many men in good stead to have strong, healthy hair indefinitely. But it still won't be a single-shot "cure" and ongoing hairloss and the limitations of surgery and drugs will still mean its a difficult battle and one that takes much dedication.

 

That cheap and easy, single-shot cure is probably not going to be in our generation, I don't think. But I think the multi-disciplinary approach to maintaining or creating a strong head of hair and solid density really is in our grasp within the next 5-15 years, and many men are already having impressive results from drugs and the current surgical techniques available, even at Norwood V/VI. Advancements in the next decade will hopefully mean most hairloss will be treatable to a degree that produces cosmetically impressive results at densities currently better than what we're safely able to achieve.

 

It's unfortunately a long, slow waiting game - but be patient!

[cureplease12]

Your response is totally logical. I agree with a lot of the things you are saying.

 

My sentiment is that although we are several, several years away from a "magic bullet" as in a instant cure to the deficient gene that induces MPB, we are on the brink of a solution that has the potential to be just as effective. With today's FUE technique by some accomplished surgeons, if there is a way to produce or "cloone" healthy, dht free hair follicles, that is as good as a cure or close enough to it in my book. The sheer fact that their is no "donor anxiety" per se will transform the transplant industry from a skeptical business to the norm. If there is no scarring, no "donor anxiety," and you're at the hands of a skilled surgeon, there is certainly scarce reasons to not have a full head of hair.

 

I also am hoping that if replicel's technique proves to be effective at yielding permanent hair that will be nothing short of amazing even if it doesn't yield perfect density. The density lacking can be filled in with a Fue transplant thus requiring far fewer grafts than otherwise.

 

Obviously this is a lot of wishful thinking however in short, if there is simply a way to eliminate "donor anxiety" whether it be through histogen, cloning, hair duplication (autocloining), or replicel the results are really limitless.

[Spanker]

Are we not currently at a state where most men can achieve an acceptable head of hair thru current techniques?

[cureplease12]

not really because of donor anxiety.... say a 25 year old is a norwood III and is extremely wishful to return to a norwood I.... most doctors will be extremely reluctant to do such a procedure because of fear of exhausting the donor area and not being able to make up for future balding which is may be inevitable despite meds or any thing else. Furthermore, even if he did have the procedure he may not be 1000% with the density and may want to fill it in for more density with a second procedure... this will not be possible because of the exhausted donor site. This is the conundrum in a pickle of current hair restoration practice.

[mahhong]

Are we not currently at a state where most men can achieve an acceptable head of hair thru current techniques?

 

Good question! My feeling is that's probably true for Norwood III through to some Vs. There are also some men getting a good, solid result at Norwood VI, though I generally see less of those I think. I think Norwood VII is still, by and large, not treatable at densities most men would consider acceptable. I have seen some cosmetically beneficial procedures for NW7,but these tend to be on older men who simply want to frame their face and not be totally bald.

 

I think the problem is consistency still, at the higher end of the balding scale. Some men are lucky enough to have fantastic donor amounts and characteristics and can transplant at 35+ g/cm2 (sometimes a lot more) and get a solid looking head of hair. Those with more progressive balding or less optimal donor characteristics are generally still getting results that I would honestly call "fair". But I think most men, certainly in their 20's, 30's and 40's, would want better than fair results.

 

Overall though I'd definitely agree the results we can get already are pretty solid and sometimes (increasingly so) pretty spectacular. I'm seeing more and more NW V and VI patients basically having their hair restored to a density that makes it appear to all intents and purposes they have no hair loss. I think it's a case of evolving the already fantastic options out there so that those on the higher end of the balding scale can start getting the sorts of results normally reserved for an NW III or IV. When everybody starts becoming capable of seeing a solid head of hair on their shoulders again, we'll really be in exciting territory.

[Sigildark]

problem with the whole 5-10 year theory is that everyone was saying the same thing 10 years ago

 

i remember sitting around with friends at the age of 18 (20 years ago), our hair oh so important

and us all hoping we wouldnt have to deal with hairloss and that if we did, by the time it happened, great solutions would be available and while things have advanced the hair we had in the 18-20 range is largely un-recoverable for many of us at this point

 

that said, it's definitely a question of when rather then if

but the whole when thing, that's very much in the air

 

that said, here is to hoping it's sooner then later!

Edited May 19, 2011 by Sigildark

[Al - Moderator]

Are we not currently at a state where most men can achieve an acceptable head of hair thru current techniques?

 

 

I think all of the NW7 and many of the NW6 people would say no. When I'm able to at least get enough to be able to do just a simple combover and actually be able to make a part in my hair and cover my head, then I'll say yes.

[Al - Moderator]

I'm seeing more and more NW V and VI patients basically having their hair restored to a density that makes it appear to all intents and purposes they have no hair loss. I think it's a case of evolving the already fantastic options out there so that those on the higher end of the balding scale can start getting the sorts of results normally reserved for an NW III or IV.

 

 

As HT Drs get more and more aggressive doing 5000+ sessions in one sitting, there becomes a higher probability of those patients not being able to keep up with any future loss. So, while you see today that more NW5 and NW6 are getting better results, you have to ask is it because techniques are better than a few years ago or is it because they are using up more donor early on.

[mahhong]

As HT Drs get more and more aggressive doing 5000+ sessions in one sitting, there becomes a higher probability of those patients not being able to keep up with any future loss. So, while you see today that more NW5 and NW6 are getting better results, you have to ask is it because techniques are better than a few years ago or is it because they are using up more donor early on.

 

That's a good point. It's part of the reason why I'm still not 100% sold on the place of meds in hairloss. Obviously they're fantastic at keeping hair and sometimes for a long period of time, but that doesn't (or at least shouldn't) give you the opportunity to transplant at higher densities in already bald areas on the assumption you won't lost any more hair.

 

I think if you have a 5000+ transplant you need to be pretty sure where the rim of donor resistant hair is - in other words, you need to have pretty much realised the extent of your balding. The best results I've seen in NW VIs, in the sense of long term quality, are usually from men with clearly defined rims of DHT resistant hair. You can then afford to transplant maybe 60-75% of your donor hair then, and leave the rest for backup or touch-ups further down the line.

 

I still see more NW VIs with great hair than you could have even 5-10 years coming from most major surgeon's clinics. But I agree the most important thing is to transplant at a rate that is sustainable with your eventual balding pattern. That's why I'm sceptical of meds; they're great at holding on to the hair you have, but that doesn't mean you can then transplant 5000 grafts into your frontal third. It should mean you can transplant maybe 2000-3000 into your frontal third and keep the rest on the probably correct assumption the meds will one day lose their effectiveness and you'll need a further transplant to correct that.