Understanding The "Glitch" In Modern Medicine And The Pharmaceutical Industry.



Again....I'm just stating my opinion!


Anyone serious about keeping their hair needs to understand the "glitch" that exists in modern medicine and the pharmaceutical industry. FDA regulations are such that to be able to advertise something as "proven to regrow hair" it must first be tested in the appropriate way. This involves what is known as Phase I, II and III double blind testing. Without going into all the details, suffice it to say this is a long and very expensive process. The cost can be hundreds of millions of dollars. Yet that is not where the "glitch" really lies and we must understand this "glitch" before we can proceed to save what hair we have.

The glitch involves patent laws. Without a patent there simply is no financial incentive for a company to invest the millions to prove a substance is helpful. If they were foolish enough to do so, once the substance was proven to regrow hair, it would be relatively easy for competitors to begin manufacturing the same medication. This competition would drive down the price. The company that paid all the money to get approval could never hope to recover their investment.

In the world today there are literally billions of different compounds. 99.9% are not patentable. They are either old medications where the patent has expired or they are natural compounds. None of these substances can be protected through patent laws. Only new "man made" substances can be patented or in some cases only the process by which the compound is extracted can be patented.

So there are literally billions of different compounds in the world today that can't be patented and only a few thousand substances where a patent has been secured. I don't think it's a stretch to say there are thousands of compounds that could be helpful for treating male and female pattern hair loss. Substances which could probably completely halt the hair loss process. Substances probably much more effective than Propecia or Minoxidil which are the only two substances "proven to regrow hair". Yet we will never know which substances actually work for sure. We will never really know which substances are the most effective because of this "glitch"

Topical minoxidl (Rogaine) is a relatively benign substance. It is available over the counter in any pharmacy. Few people, who use it as directed, will ever experience and real systemic side effects. Unfortunately minoxidil is not very effective. True it can regrow some lost hair and also slow or sometimes stop the balding process but usually the results are less than desirable. Recently I have tried to improve minoxidil and make it more effective by adding saw palmetto and beta sitosterol.

Propecia is a prescription medication you take orally once per day. It is only approved for men. In my opinion this substance is more effective than minoxidil however the side effects can be much more severe. If you spend some time scanning the hair loss related message boards you can find hundreds of posts from people who have suffered some of these side effects. Side effects like the loss of libido and sexual function or a condition known as gynecomastia which is the growing of female type breast in men. Yet even if you experience no side effects from propecia, many people still continue to lose their hair.

So there are our choices among the proven treatments. Propecia and or topical minoxidil. Unfortunately if you wait for the pharmaceutical industry to discover something better you're liable to lose most of your hair before they come up with something.

Understanding the "glitch" allows us to logically conclude there must be other substances that could be helpful for our condition. True, these substances will not be proven to regrow hair but perhaps we can make a bit of a "jump" logically speaking. Afterall we know the conversion testosterone to DHT is at least partially responsible for the balding condition. Therefore any substance that has been demonstrated in studies to reduce this conversion will probably be helpful for the condition. This will not be proof but we can classify these substances into the "probable" category. This is exactly why we need to learn to read journal abstracts regarding the various compounds that have been already studied. We must understand that "studied" however does not consitute proof according to the FDA.









Supporting Journal Abstracts

STUDY #1   STUDY #2   STUDY #3   STUDY #4   STUDY #5   STUDY #6  

STUDY #7  STUDY #8  STUDY #9  STUDY #10  STUDY #11  STUDY #12 

STUDY #13  STUDY #14  STUDY #15  STUDY #16  STUDY #17  STUDY #18 

STUDY #19  STUDY #20 


All Rights Reserved