Future Treatment impact on Current Treatment

[blkblk]

Hi,

 

In my mind it seems almost inevitable that some day (whether that is 1 year or 20 years down the track I do not know) we will be replicating healthy hairs and placing them into our bald patches, or reactivating something in our scalp to tell it to start growing hair again.

 

What I am curious to know is how this should impact on the decisions which we make in the meantime whilst this technology waits to become proven.

 

In particular, I am interested to know whether having a FUT/FUE HT now would negatively impact any future treatment using stem cell or other type of replication/reactivation.

 

1) Do these future techniques require us to have our old hair follicles in place?

2) Do current techniques damage our non-functional follicles to the extent that they would not be of use later?

3) Do current techniques use too much donor hair, leaving people unable to undergo such future techniques?

 

I realise that there are a of of unknowns still, but would appreciate some insight into what people think and why, also if you could be clear as to when you are guessing at something (which is fine!) and when you are citing something which can be backed with scientific evidence.

[NEWHAIRPLEASE]

Live for today!!!!

[Reece]

I have been monitoring interviews with some of the hair replicating scientists and executives and it has been "assumed" by the representatives that if and when the technology is available that it would be effective for both ht and non ht patients.

 

I understand your timing conundrum completely, should i wait or do what I can now? There have been ever changing timelines for possible releases but at this point its really a wait and see scenario. I believe that after q1 2012 that we may see some phase one results which can be used to interpret progress. If the results seem substantiate it might entice you to hold off on a ht short term. On the other hand if we are only getting the same dime sized photos that aderans has been using at all presentations then maybe consider the previous posters advice, live in the now

[gasto]

Merk wouldn't be happy to support a technology that replaces their hair loss treatment completely. So I am guessing big pharma is fighting back these advancements.

 

On the positive side, scientists and researchers will continue to advance these new techniques and will be available sooner than what we may think.

 

By the way, stemm cell has already been proven safe long time ago for skin reconstruction in trauma suffering patients, it simply hasn't been massively produced, nor the doctors been trained in the field of hair loss.

[orlhair1]

If you wait for the magical cure, you might not live to see it. Seriously, all this research is interesting, but people have been searching for a cure for baldness forever. Something might come along, but I think it would be nothing more than wishful thinking to let this dream of a cure impact how you decide to deal with your hair loss. We would all love for it to happen, but there is no real scientific evidence at all that anything is on the horizon.

[gasto]

That sounds like a rationalization of your hair transplant.

but there is no real scientific evidence at all that anything is on the horizon.

Now that's simply a lie. If you are here to lie then you might as well spare your time on these forums.

[orlhair1]

That sounds like a rationalization of your hair transplant.

Now that's simply a lie. If you are here to lie then you might as well spare your time on these forums.

 

Wrong on both fronts my friend. I would not be so quick to start calling people liars. An attack like that is a violation of the terms of participating in this forum as I am sure the moderators will tell you. Finally, I really don't care what you think about me spending my time on this or any other forum.

[blkblk]

could you two please discuss why it is/isn't the case as to whether there is evidence suggesting progress? It looks to me like there is, based on many of the threads in this forum

[Sean]

I agree with the above and with newhair, live for today with what we have now.

 

However, at the same time I think Replicel is on to something with their ongoing and upcoming human trials.

 

The technology is years away but it isn't a fantasy. I think it will come true one day and give pharmaceutical companies a serious challenge.

 

Don't wait and continue to wait though. Some people have been waiting for 15 years already. My estimation is we should have substantial progress within the next 10 years after all clinical trials and when the product/method is put into market. However, those 10 years having hair probably outweigh the amount of time lost due to hair loss. Live happy now, and then enhance in the future if needed. That's what I think.

[orlhair1]

could you two please discuss why it is/isn't the case as to whether there is evidence suggesting progress? It looks to me like there is, based on many of the threads in this forum

 

Sure. There is definitely exciting research going on and I hope that at some point there is a breakthrough that will benefit everyone with hair loss. That would be amazing! What is clear is that while exciting, there is no scientific evidence that a major breakthrough is on the horizon. So if you want to address your hairloss, in my opinion you should use available state of the art methods. We have no idea when or even if any of the research being done will ever pan out. There are great options available today that will provide results for you within a year. Five and ten years ago people were talking about research that could potentially be the answer and here we are with no "cure". My point is that the chance of a major widespread breakthrough in the next five years or so is extremely unlikely, though not impossible. Will something happen in the next 10 or 20 years? That is really just anyone's guess. In the meantime, I had a HT almost 6 months ago and already have results that I am very excited about......no more bald spot on my crown and a new hairline.....and over the next six months it will be even better. So my point is why wait for something that may or may not ever occur.

[Mountinvan]

Good point. Hope is good....but the reality is that HTs work in the here and now. The future may be a long way away.

[mahhong]

What most other people are saying!

 

There is lots of interesting research and I do think several of them are promising, but even the most promising are still a few years away and we have not had any absolutely concrete, latter-stage trials to hint we're really getting close at something coming onto the market. Nothing comes out of the blue in medicine!

 

In addition, people hear of Aderans and Histogen and all these other companies doing exciting research and the word "cure" is bandied about as a result, but most of these companies have much more modest goals in their trials. Nobody is close to claiming a treatment that will enable you to go in bald and come out with a full head of hair and, in fact, most are using the sorts of results propecia get as a kind of baseline.

 

In short, even if something does come out in the next 5 years, which I actually think is relatively likely, it's probably just going to be another tool in the fight. It'll likely still have to be combined with the current drugs and/or hair transplantation to give people a real net benefit. Don't get me wrong, it'll be massive progress if we can find a drug or treatment that gives you back even an additional 5-15% of your native density, but that would still have to be combined with one or more HTs and possibly also current medication to make it really worthwhile.

 

So I, too, would live for today when it comes to hairloss. I am optimistic about the future but these things are genuinely slow and usually evolve rather than coming into market as "THE" cure. I think the most rational hope is that in the next 5-10 years we can have a few more tools that can add density and improve on traditional techniques, perhaps enabling NW7 men to consider hair restoration, or giving NW5/6 men 50-70% of their native density instead of 30-50% But it's these sorts of goals that are probably, at best, achievable in the next decade. And that means it's very likely HTs, fin and minoxidil are still going to be a part of most people's hair restoration for a long time to come.

[gasto]

What most other people are saying!

 

 

 

In addition, people hear of Aderans and Histogen and all these other companies doing exciting research and the word "cure" is bandied about as a result, but most of these companies have much more modest goals in their trials. Nobody is close to claiming a treatment that will enable you to go in bald and come out with a full head of hair and, in fact, most are using the sorts of results propecia get as a kind of baseline.

 

In short, even if something does come out in the next 5 years, which I actually think is relatively likely, it's probably just going to be another tool in the fight. It'll likely still have to be combined with the current drugs and/or hair transplantation to give people a real net benefit. Don't get me wrong, it'll be massive progress if we can find a drug or treatment that gives you back even an additional 5-15% of your native density, but that would still have to be combined with one or more HTs and possibly also current medication to make it really worthwhile.

 

 

 

You can add DongQuai(Angelica), Polygonum Multiflorum, Ginseng and Thorn Apple seeds for natural remedies.

[Pale_Rider]

I surely hope that Propecia, Avodart and other medieval "medicines" will be banned for hairloss during my lifetime. I personally think that people are more and more aware of potential long term side effects that do not go away after you stop using these drugs. I would rather lose a couple of my fingers than messing with my health, especially my "mojo".

[NEWHAIRPLEASE]

I surely hope that Propecia, Avodart and other medieval "medicines" will be banned for hairloss during my lifetime. I personally think that people are more and more aware of potential long term side effects that do not go away after you stop using these drugs. I would rather lose a couple of my fingers than messing with my health, especially my "mojo".

 

Why would you want to regress? These medicines are used for other things besides hair loss as well..I don't understand why you would want to have them ban?Dont make much sense..its a personal choice..if you don't wanna take it, DONT..I don't think we need the FDA to ban it.

[DISpHAIR]

I think its funny how everyone goes off on emotional tangents that rationilize their own decisions they make. The specific questions the original poster asked are very thoughtful ones. I unfortunately do not have the answers to them. Some members imaginarily become experts in the field of cell regeneration or medicine for that matter, and will answer your questions ignorantly. I hope you are intelligent enough to see through that. It appears you are. There are very few people in the world, much less a venue like this, that are capable of remaining objective the majority of the time. With that being said, its important to be aware of why people say the things they do, or at the very least put thought into the reasons people say the things they do. After you determine someone is capable of giving a rational, objective thought, you can then value and or consider what they have to say. Terms like magical cures, and comments like there is nothing on the horizon relative to future hairloss treatment is ridiculous and inaccurate. The timelines of cell regeneration are not definitive and therefore subjective to interpretation. I think its fine to have different opinions as to when these technologies will come to fruition, but to ignore that they are being developed or exist in some capacity is at best naieve. To get a bit more philospical, think about why and how opinions are formed in the first place. How do we come to forming an opinion at all in the first place? It is really fascinating to think about and something we should all do more of, THINK, especially before ignorantly stating something that may effect a vunerable person that just is looking for the answers they want to hear and may in turn behave irrationally. I never spell check and I am horrible at spelling as shadow of an empire likes to point out. So I apologize in advance for any grammatical and spelling errors as I am sure they are plentiful. One final thought is that it is not my intention to offend anyone, I jut like to bring balance to these types of discussions. I think this site has literally saved lives and it has its contibuting members to thank for that.

Edited December 19, 2011 by DISpHAIR

[Pale_Rider]

I surely hope that Propecia, Avodart and other medieval "medicines" will be banned for hairloss during my lifetime. I personally think that people are more and more aware of potential long term side effects that do not go away after you stop using these drugs. I would rather lose a couple of my fingers than messing with my health, especially my "mojo".

 

Why would you want to regress? These medicines are used for other things besides hair loss as well..I don't understand why you would want to have them ban?Dont make much sense..its a personal choice..if you don't wanna take it, DONT..I don't think we need the FDA to ban it.

 

Now read this bold part again and again and again. :rolleyes: Personal choice is to take marijuana or heroin too but they are still banned. And BTW since you are mentioning FDA.

 

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:uBENszbSj2gJ:www.yourlawyer.com/pdf/FDA%2520Says%2520Prostate%2520Drugs%2520Can%2520Cause%2520Cancer.pdf+FDA+Propecia+can+cause+cancer&hl=hr&gl=hr&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgnWb80HXDB-2PT8FfjzhUZ3YUudhtL6G3TAdGAjEdEbQt_K1t2a8BFAqxqycRdN-_XL_mkFZLJb_Zir_zFezIS20BER7HwDJS5r-7-C0swaLFhDBc3Ow-oSK3IaGpiA-so0-20&sig=AHIEtbS3aqQPJvRH6QGGQxB57ilpmF2SDQ

 

FDA Warns Some Prostate Drugs Could Cause More Severe Cancer

Edited December 19, 2011 by Pale_Rider

[Pale_Rider]

Merk wouldn't be happy to support a technology that replaces their hair loss treatment completely. So I am guessing big pharma is fighting back these advancements.

 

On the positive side, scientists and researchers will continue to advance these new techniques and will be available sooner than what we may think.

 

By the way, stemm cell has already been proven safe long time ago for skin reconstruction in trauma suffering patients, it simply hasn't been massively produced, nor the doctors been trained in the field of hair loss.

 

1 mg Propecia patent is expiring or already expired, so new Propecia variants from other companies will be available. Other than Propecia there is no alternative drug for AA developed by Merck(at least not to my knowledge) so Merck can just kiss ass or cope with the competition and develop something that will give better results with less risk on your health.

[gasto]

I think that people that vehemently defend finasteride are in denial. Like one forum member already suggested, making an informed, objective decision is what is required.

[Pale_Rider]

For 21 st century, Propecia, Avodart and other DHT blockers are just like blood letting in medieval ages. The one who does not see that is just blind in my opinion. I mean there is no a single, specialized drug for hair loss, we are using a positive side effect from a medicine that is used for a completely different thing with potentially serious side effects that we are willing to take to maintain a few hairs. If it was not sad it would be funny.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Pale_Rider

[DISpHAIR]

I think pale rider raises an interesting issue. With that being said, every single drug there is has a reaction in our body that can cause ancillary actions. So I think the premesis that drugs in general are not an ideal solution for treatment has some truth to it. With that being said, without the use of say anitbiotics, which do also have side effects, life expectancy would be significantly lower as people would be dying from infections and bacteria almost all the time. The point im making is that while drugs in general are not an ideal solution for treatment, they are the best form of treatment we have in most cases currently.

 

In reagards to Finasterside specifically, I understand pale riders point that we take this drug, when its original purpose was intended to treat the prostate. There are a few points Id like to make in regards to your issue with finasteride. The first point is that a phyician is supposed to explain the possible side effects that are associated with any drug they prescribe. Pale, Are you against the right we have to take drugs that are prescibed legally to us? My second point is that there are other instances where drugs have inadvertantly or through the use of other treatment be found useful to treat other conditions. This is not the first time in medicine that this has happened. My final point is that all we are trying to accomplish when taking any drug whatsoever is to increase our quality of life. Having hairloss does significantly decrease your quality of life unfortunately. Will you die from hairloss? No. Will you die from diabetis, without insulin? Yes. You have to be aware that some people would rather be dead than to have to experience hairloss. That is extreme, however does exist. More realistically, some are willing to suffer the consequences of taking finasteride, whatever they are, to maintain their hair. Judging somone for making this decision is not an intelligent way to think. You are obviously very passionate about this isssue, and I think thats not a bad thing. You have to think about why you are so passionate and opinionated about this. I mean this is a complete tangent of what the original posters questions were.

 

It is by belief that because of the effects drugs have on our bodies and for other reasons, cell therapy will revolutionize and resorb the way we practice medicine altogether. Instead of taking a drug to treat liver cancer, we will just recrecreate your liver when it was healthy. This is the direction medicine is going. This is why I am so passionate about companies like Replicel and its competitors. Timelines are not definitive and therefore subjective to debate, but I dont think we are that far off. I think it will happen in my lifetime and im 28.

[blowdry]

DISpHAIR.

 

Pale's point is that he took the medication knowing that if he stopped he would return to normal. At least that is what Merk proclaimed.

 

fyi

[gasto]

 

It is by belief that because of the effects drugs have on our bodies and for other reasons, cell therapy will revolutionize and resorb the way we practice medicine altogether. Instead of taking a drug to treat liver cancer, we will just recrecreate your liver when it was healthy. This is the direction medicine is going. This is why I am so passionate about companies like Replicel and its competitors. Timelines are not definitive and therefore subjective to debate, but I dont think we are that far off. I think it will happen in my lifetime and im 28.

 

I agree, especially with the Artificial Intelligence boom that is soon coming, it will help tremendously to accelerate technological advancement.

[Blake Bloxham]

Personally, I think the best attitude is remaining "cautiously optimistic" toward future treatments, but not at the expense of utilizing effective current options.

 

Having said that, I think we will see some non-invasive, interesting therapies within our lifetimes. Furthermore, I completely agree with the member who discussed using these new treatments in conjunction with others to achieve a better overall result.

 

Additionally, I've been pretty satisfied with the newest data about Propecia (finasteride): Japanese Study Finds Propecia Safe and Effective for Male Hair Loss.

 

However, I truly feel for any hair loss sufferers experiencing ongoing adverse effects.

[Pale_Rider]

I think pale rider raises an interesting issue. With that being said, every single drug there is has a reaction in our body that can cause ancillary actions. So I think the premesis that drugs in general are not an ideal solution for treatment has some truth to it. With that being said, without the use of say anitbiotics, which do also have side effects, life expectancy would be significantly lower as people would be dying from infections and bacteria almost all the time. The point im making is that while drugs in general are not an ideal solution for treatment, they are the best form of treatment we have in most cases currently.

 

Antibiotics were made to fight bacteria and they did a great job, Finasteride was made to treat prostate problems NOT hair loss. It is just if you have given your young son a shot of morphine when he fell of a bicycle and got his knee and elbows bloody just because morphine eases pain potentially making him a drug addict. It is just silly and a bit of mad. Giving young men Finasteride made for old age pensioners with enlarged prostates is more than a shame for 21 century medicine in my opinion. DHT is in our bodies for a very good reason and attacking it is just "killing the wrong person", risking some serious side effects of your reproductive system at such a young age is form of crime in my opinion.

 

In reagards to Finasterside specifically, I understand pale riders point that we take this drug, when its original purpose was intended to treat the prostate. There are a few points Id like to make in regards to your issue with finasteride. The first point is that a phyician is supposed to explain the possible side effects that are associated with any drug they prescribe. Pale, Are you against the right we have to take drugs that are prescibed legally to us? My second point is that there are other instances where drugs have inadvertantly or through the use of other treatment be found useful to treat other conditions. This is not the first time in medicine that this has happened. My final point is that all we are trying to accomplish when taking any drug whatsoever is to increase our quality of life. Having hairloss does significantly decrease your quality of life unfortunately. Will you die from hairloss? No. Will you die from diabetis, without insulin? Yes. You have to be aware that some people would rather be dead than to have to experience hairloss. That is extreme, however does exist. More realistically, some are willing to suffer the consequences of taking finasteride, whatever they are, to maintain their hair. Judging somone for making this decision is not an intelligent way to think. You are obviously very passionate about this isssue, and I think thats not a bad thing. You have to think about why you are so passionate and opinionated about this. I mean this is a complete tangent of what the original posters questions were.

 

I am not against the right to use finasteride/dutasteride but you will have to agree at this post atomic and high tech information age using THAT quackery is just unacceptable. And I know that hair loss can decrease a quality of life and that some of the people would rather die than to be bald but if you look at the pros/cons you are in shit anyway. You are bald but have a libido and a healthy reproductive system, some girls will not want to talk to you because you are bald and that is ok, bad but ok, they do not like you, you move along and find a girl that will not mind if you are bald or not(there are lots of good looking girls out there that do not mind that or even quite the opposite, they like shaved bald men). On the other scenario you take finasteride/dutasteride maintain what you have, most of the girls dig you, but your libido is for shit and you can not stay up very long, guess how long that girl(or even the one that likes bald men) will stay with you if you are bad in bed? Third scenario, you get married and you can not get her pregnant even if you stopped using that drugs long time ago or get a sick child, you will never know is that child sick, deformed, mentally challenged etc. because of your years of using fin/dutas. Side effects that were never written by Merck. I say tough call on all scenarios. If you ask me the quality of your life will fail in any scenario it is just the matter of severity. In first one you are bald but physically healthy and have limited girlfriend options, second you have hair but you cannot screw like you used to and you are probably less enjoying it and third one you got married, stopped taking the drug(or a drug is not working for you anymore since it does not work forever) when the two of you decided to start a family, you are now bald, have a low libido, big boobs, potentially sterile and old. Your wife will divorce you or screw aside eventually. If you ask me I would rather have the first scenario, save up money for HT and get the best I can for I have left in my donor region.

 

Call me a pessimist but I have done a lot of research on these drugs and every time I decide to take fin/dutas I find at least a dozen more reasons not to do it.

 

Best thing a man can do is to stop taking this half cocked products, refuse to buy and finance this profit hungry inefficient pharmaceutical companies and make them that way to start making products that will actually work and that we will all finally have benefits from it. That is why capitalism is so great, you can punish someone where it hurts him the most, his pocket.

 

 

It is by belief that because of the effects drugs have on our bodies and for other reasons, cell therapy will revolutionize and resorb the way we practice medicine altogether. Instead of taking a drug to treat liver cancer, we will just recrecreate your liver when it was healthy. This is the direction medicine is going. This is why I am so passionate about companies like Replicel and its competitors. Timelines are not definitive and therefore subjective to debate, but I dont think we are that far off. I think it will happen in my lifetime and im 28.

 

I too believe in future medicine I am 27 years old and if I can get full head of hair at the age of 40-47 I would still be a happy man.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Pale_Rider