You Can’t Compare Cloning Advances nowadays with Promises Made Decades Ago

Posted by on September 7th, 2010 at 06:04pm

Hey Doc. Thanks again for your blog. final night I was pondering the future and was wondering whether or not you could help me with something that has been niggling absent at me for a couple of weeks now.

Can you please give us a history on the folded ideas and companies that made promises for a hair loss cure 20 – 50 years ago. Just the ones that had any scientific merit would suffice, well of course the others might supply some good comedian relief so its your shout

My own thoughts are as chases, food for thought?

It is my understanding that the folded promises of 50 years ago did not include stem cell research, regenerative medicine, and whatever contemporary approach to ‘hair cloning’, companies like Histogen and Aderans use nowadays. They simply could not have had today’s recent scientific break through technology to back them up.

In which case what where the promises back in the day? Or were the doctors of 50 years ago merely just saying that ‘there will be a cure in 3-5 years’ to spread hope. Very kind of them.

What about Propecia citizens may say? I agree that Propecia has been around for a faraway moment but that was an accidental find by researchers hunting out a cure for mens prostate problems. In other words precisely like your recent scoop on how researchers discovered they could change human cells from one type of cell to a skin cell total with hair follicles. In that exposition you state why would they change their research. Well I’d say for precisely the same reason that Propecia did when they accidentally became a billion dollar company.

Today we see companies like Histogen, Aderans, and a few others that are actually showing positive results and backing them up with photographs. whether they are valid images next the future looks promising. By promising who couldn’t do with just a little increasingly transplant hair – perhaps whether we’re lucky Histogen will be able to simply increase the yield in our donor areas. That alone would be great.

50 years ago things were different. Nobody had heard of, or at least practised, things like Nano Technology or Stem Cell research. I wasn’t even born. We didn’t have cellphones and the US military were not growing peoples limbs back!

With all the contemporary changes going on I’m just not certain whether it is helpful to compare today’s tech with the tech of 50 years ago. All I build out is that 20-50 years ago they promised us that there will be a cure in 3-5 years. Well what were they promising – I’d love to know

Yours with love to all my balding brethren.

In regards to the accidental stem cell follicle discovery, I suppose it depends on the priorities of the researchers on whether they want to switch gears or start another study. It could be that the news of their accidental discovery was made public to garner interest in the project and to take on investors. I’m just guessing here, though.

Propecia is made by Merck, a large pharmaceutical company that didn’t become a billion dollar company by accident and makes increasingly medication than just Propecia… but I see what you’re getting at and agree that money talks.

I do thank you for the input, but I am not a cloning expert nor a historian on cloning of hair. I could spend weeks or increasingly researching the paths taken in hair loss cures by the past 50 years, and while it would likely form for interesting reading, it is beyond my scope at that instance. What I do know is that doctors have been stating and vaguely projecting that cloning of hair is on the horizon within most of our lifetimes. I certainly hope that is the case, but the timelines have been moving with such frequency that it’s easy for public to grow skeptical until there’s an actual working model in place.