/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5552950]

Why hasnt baldness been cured yet?

[Anonymous No.5552957]

>>5552950
Because we felt like tackling cancer first.

[Anonymous No.5552961]

>>5552957
Hows that workin out?

[Anonymous No.5552971]

because we don't know how to do it

[Anonymous No.5552973]

because baldness is cool

[Anonymous No.5553006]

>>5552973
Damn, beat me to it.

[Anonymous No.5553019]

>>5552950
protip: rogaine works pretty good if you keep at it, I used to be like OPs pic, after 5years use I am almost back to normal, literally over twice as much hair grew back

[Anonymous No.5553028]

because it's dangerous to play with DNA

if you change DNA, you can't predict what will happen

[Anonymous No.5553079]

>>5553028
> you can't predict what will happen
Says the determinist faggot.

>MUH FATE!

[Anonymous No.5553086]

>>5552950
we did, its called a goddamn razor. Man up.

[Anonymous No.5553092]

It could be if you bald faggots would just stop breeding.

[Anonymous No.5553089]

>>5553079
Dude, did you not watch Jurassic Park? CHAOS!

[Anonymous No.5553096]

I'm sure it will be cured eventually. But maybe companies get more money from you bald faggots wearing tupees and using rogain that it isn't worth their time.

[Anonymous No.5553100]

>>5553028
Genetic engineering is already in full swing

[Anonymous No.5553103]

>>5553096
Ya because wig stores make more money than drug companies

[Anonymous No.5553107]

>>5553096
I always hear people bemoaning that companies prefer palliatives to cures to get more money. I have a hard time believing that. Capitalism breeds competition. If you're competitors are selling palliatives and you have the cure, you get all the monies.

The real problem is that less money to research things that the target consumers don't actually NEED. I mean you get a good cancer treatment going people's lives are on the line. Cure baldness and you just have an optional boondoggle for insecure middle-aged men.

[Anonymous No.5553110]

>>5553100
LIFE FINDS A WAY!!! CONDORS AREN'T LIKE DINOSAURS, DINOSAURS HAD THEIR CHANCE AND NATURE SELECTED THEM FOR EXTINCTION.

BALD MEN ARE DINOSAURS.
WE START INJECTING THEM WITH FROG DNA AND WE'LL HAVE BALD TRANSEXUALS. DO YOU WANT THAT?

[Anonymous No.5553129]

>>5553107
>If you're competitors are selling palliatives and you have the cure, you get all the monies.

Unless you patent to prevent competition and then sell palliatives yourself because you can sell them many times over.

Or you sell palliatives like the competition because investing in a cure is too costly.

Or you enter into agreements behind closed doors with the competition to price-fix palliatives beyond what a cure would be worth.

If there were no inherent perverse incentives in capitalism, we wouldn't need regulation.

[Anonymous No.5553134]

[Anonymous No.5553156]

>>5553129
>Unless you patent to prevent competition and then sell palliatives yourself because you can sell them many times over.
Patents disclose the discovery and have a finite life. Patents are public. If people find out you patented a cure but just sit on it they'd be pissed. Second, you lose actual time to hit the market before it goes generic. Third not all jurisdictions recognize a patent. China for example will start mass production, and if it works it will just be black market imported (if medicine) or people will go abroad if a procedure.

>Or you sell palliatives like the competition because investing in a cure is too costly.
Certainly possible, and we can't expect corporations to to do things that aren't profitable. But we have publicly funded research. Now baldness isn't a high priority for public funding, but still.

>Or you enter into agreements behind closed doors with the competition to price-fix palliatives beyond what a cure would be worth.
Its highly illegal, and you're already raking in money, and it relies on your competition not to fuck you over. Why take the risk?

>If there were no inherent perverse incentives in capitalism, we wouldn't need regulation.
Sure, but that's a long way from thinking that pharmaceutical companies are hiding the cures to diseases in a vault somewhere to bleed you dry. There's plenty of shit they'd do if they could, and which they shouldn't be allowed to do. But there's no reason I can see as to why they'd want to sit on a product that would corner the market.

[Anonymous No.5553216]

>>5553156
>Patents ... have a finite life

Unless you're a drug company, in which case you have every incentive to find loopholes in the patent system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreening

>If people find out you patented a cure but just sit on it they'd be pissed.

It actually does happen, but this is true too. In India it got so bad that the government said fuck drug patents (at least, for the diseases that the companies were sitting on).

>we can't expect corporations to to do things that aren't profitable

Yes.

>Its highly illegal

Hasn't stopped Sandoz, J & J, Merck, Roche, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Bayers all trying it on. And those are just the some of ones we know about from the last few years.

>Why take the risk?

Because it pays so well.

>pharmaceutical companies are hiding the cures to diseases in a vault somewhere to bleed you dry

That's not it at all. They simply have less incentive to cure a disease when treating it is so much more profitable. No-one's suggesting they invest in cures then bury them.

Like you said, we just can't expect corporation to do things that aren't profitable.

[Anonymous No.5553232]

>>5553019
Yes but if you stopped using it for a little while wouldn't you go strait back to having a barren scalp?

[Anonymous No.5553268]

>>5553019
>>5553096
So won't we get cheapo generic brand Rogaine in 15 years or whatever that patent thing is?

hair and moobs for all!

[Anonymous No.5553280]

I am a man of SCIANCE
I have no use for your petty 'hair' and good looks

;_;

[Anonymous No.5553301]

>>5553268
we already have generic rogaine.