
Accidental Find May Lead to a Cure For Baldness - ubasu
http://singularityhub.com/2011/04/02/accidental-find-may-lead-to-a-cure-for-baldness-2/
======
giberson
I notice this was the result of testing stress relievers on [stressed] mice.
It occurs to me, it's very likely that this "cure" would only work on stress
related baldness, not necessarily genetic baldness.

PS. I also feel compelled to mention previous experience with stress related
baldness in animals. A few years back, I adopted a ferret from a friend who
was heading off to the marines and wouldn't be able to take care of it. The
ferret in question was bald along it's tail due to stress (my friend also
owned two dogs that would harass the ferret). In only a few weeks of taking
ownership of the ferret the hair had returned to his tail. In other words, it
would appear that stress related baldness cures itself in when stress is
relieved. So again, I don't really see this medication as any actual direct
benefit for balding men. It may perhaps work wonders in relieving stress but
the hair regrowth is not a result of the drug its a result of stress relief. A
subtle but important difference.

~~~
Cossolus
The same thing occured to me. The same thing probably occured to everyone that
read the article, because that's exactly what the article says:

"The findings in the current study are limited in their application as this
study models hair loss related to stress and thus may not be relevant to hair
loss brought on by factors other than stress."

------
codingthebeach
Related article that appeared a while back (focusing on growing hair follicles
from stem cells).

[http://news.bioscholar.com/2010/12/a-cure-for-baldness-
could...](http://news.bioscholar.com/2010/12/a-cure-for-baldness-could-be-
available-in-5-years.html)

------
TheSwede75
I can't help but not care about this. Sure it's a fun finding, but WHY is
baldness considered something that is so badly in need of a 'cure'?

Of course I do understand it from a purely capitalistic viewpoint in that a
'cure' would no doubt be worth a ton of money but seriously. What's so bad
about baldness?

Sometimes you really piss me off Humanity!

~~~
Udo
Being bald is a huge stigma. Simply put (if overly generalized): most women
find bald men very unappealing. I started losing my hair in my mid-twenties,
and incidentally this was the last time when a woman was interested in me. Of
course, some people can compensate for this, but apparently I can't. I
probably shouldn't write this publicly, but I had some success going to
parties with a wig. Really! So yeah, baldness needs a cure.

It's debatable whether it's an illness, however there are some findings that
suggest the underlying condition not only affects follicle cells but also
prostate tissue, leading to a higher chance of developing cancer. But even if
there were no ill effects, a cure would still enable bald people to lead a
normal life.

That being said, I don't believe this cure exists. There are good preventative
drugs, but it's highly doubtful any medication could actually restore dead
follicles in humans. Those effects on mice are very likely not transferrable.

~~~
presidentender
Hear me out, my chrome-domed friend.

This man, the women would not find appealing. His appearance reduces his
status:
[http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VlmHNP9So5Y/Sm86i7qHqLI/AAAAAAAACe...](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VlmHNP9So5Y/Sm86i7qHqLI/AAAAAAAACeI/n31ynhFM2Lw/s400/patrick_stewart.jpg)

In holding on to the effectiveness of his remaining fertile follicles, he
fails to display the very might and youthful vigor he seeks.

This man, on the other hand, the women love: [http://filmpopper.com/wp-
content/uploads/2009/12/Patrick-Ste...](http://filmpopper.com/wp-
content/uploads/2009/12/Patrick-Stewart.jpg)

This is not only because men improve with age (to a certain point), but also
because he cuts his remaining hair very short. He is, as Stephen King once
described a character, "unabashadly bald." His confidence is such that he does
not cling to the ghost of locks he lacks.

Another example: <http://www.philosophyblog.com.au/images/alain-de-
botton1.jpg> as opposed to <http://metkere.com/images/alain-de-botton-
thumb-500x356.jpg>

Now, I would encourage De Botton to cut his hair even shorter than in the
second picture. But by cutting it as short as he has, and shaving the straggly
portions up top, he has improved his appeal by indicating his comfortability
with the situation.

You might also note a certain Mr. Jason Statham and that fellow who used to be
called The Rock.

~~~
Udo
> _Hear me out, my chrome-domed friend._

Thanks for making me laugh :-)

Yes, I do shave my head as well. Sadly, I still don't have the charisma, the
fame or the good looks of Patrick Steward. Like I said, some people can pull
it off, but not that many. And what if Patrick Steward had the choice? Chances
are, he'd opt for a full head of hair and probably even more women would find
him sexy because of it.

Also, I thought Sinéad O'Connor was quite attractive without the hair. That
doesn't mean I would recommend it for 99% of the women either.

On a personal note, two women told me point blank they'd be attracted to me if
I had hair and others have made remarks about how important nice hair is for a
man. Sure, it would be great to have other qualities to compensate for this,
but since I don't it apparently comes down to hair over baldness.

~~~
thaumaturgy
There is a (possibly apocryphal) story that, when ST:TNG was to begin filming,
Stewart was being encouraged to use a wig "because baldness would have been
cured by the 25th century"; his response was that baldness shouldn't be a
social stigma in the 25th century.

I couldn't quickly verify the story, but, as someone whose gradual pattern
baldness can be most gently described as "hilarious", I appreciate it even if
it's not true.

I also think -- and I'm about to be a lot crude here -- that male baldness is
a little like breast size for women. Sure, guys will notice average-to-larger
sized breasts, but there's a lot more to how attractive they think a woman is:
posture, attitude, a smile, for example. Is baldness a disadvantage? Sure.
Does it, by itself, make you unattractive? Nah.

~~~
Udo
I'm not sure it compares to breast size. For instance, I really _like_ women
with smaller breasts, the larger ones just don't seem very aesthetic to me
(especially with no clothes on).

Compared to that, baldness is a style that may look good on a few men; it may
look neutral on a few more. But the overwhelming majority of men would be
better off (dating-wise) with a full head of hair. All other things being
equal, having hair is a plus.

Many people are surprised to hear this, but huge breasts can actually be a
turn-off to many men. However I never heard a woman say: " _I'd find him
attractive if only he was bald, that full lustrous head of hair just doesn't
do it for me_ ".

~~~
Mz
_Many people are surprised to hear this, but huge breasts can actually be a
turn-off to many men. However I never heard a woman say: "I'd find him
attractive if only he was bald, that full lustrous head of hair just doesn't
do it for me"._

Many people are surprised to hear it because it rarely gets said. I believe
you are the first man I have heard state that he _prefers_ smaller breasts.
Just because you don't hear women _say_ "If only he were bald..." doesn't mean
there are no women thinking it.

I will also note that women tend to talk less about men and their physical
attributes than men do about women and their physical attributes. Women are
generally not in a good position to pursue sex for mere fun and typically need
to consider the possibility that, oops, she might wind up pregnant and then it
will matter a good deal more if he is decent, loyal, has a reasonable income
and so on. I will also note that lots of women like older men and older men
are often losing their hair. So I think that is indirect evidence that some
women are perfectly happy to get with a man with less hair.

I'm sorry this is such a huge issue for you. But I don't think your argument
really holds water.

~~~
Udo
> _I will also note that women tend to talk less about men and their physical
> attributes than men do about women and their physical attributes_

This has not been my experience.

> _I'm sorry this is such a huge issue for you._

It's not, actually. Mainly I just enjoy the discussion.

Actually, you make an interesting point. I believe there is a social norm
involved that tells men they have to like large breasts or else they're
gay/weak/whatever. I _do_ know a few men who are really and credibly into huge
pendulous breasts, but I also know some who just try to conform to the
"standard" outwardly and privately they prefer them smaller.

So your point is that women prefer hair _because_ being bald is a social
stigma, being an analogous process to the stigmatization of preferring small
breasts? I'm not convinced, but it's an interesting thought.

~~~
thaumaturgy
I didn't really want to derail this into a conversation about boobs; the
takeaway should have been that, while certain physical attributes are more or
less appealing to _most_ people, the particulars matter a lot less than the
attractiveness of the person as a whole.

~~~
Udo
I think the boob analogy was interesting, so why not talk about it.

But to bring this back together: my main hypothesis really comes down to the
point that "hair" trumps "no hair" if all other factors are eliminated. Sure
some people may look awesome without hair, and most men can make up for this
and other shortcomings in many ways.

I agree, the whole person counts. But I assert that even an attractive and
successful bald man would be more desirable if he had hair. And for the not so
attractive and successful, the difference of having hair can be the whole bowl
of wax.

------
eddanger
Awesome, long flowing hair... On your back!

