Maybe so. But hats aren't hair, and as I said, I like having hair. I like the sun protection in the day. I like the cold protection at night. I like how it feels when a woman runs her fingers through it.

These are not life-shattering things. If and when I eventually go bald, I'll be fine. I am capable of wearing hats, and head scratches feel pretty good, too.

But, if I had a safe way of keeping mine, I'd do so. Just because a project isn't solving cancer or world hunger doesn't mean it isn't something worth doing.

I understand where you’re coming from and I’m confident that, I’m the future, there will be a solution for baldness — the market segment is too large to ignore.

Plus, I do believe people should be happy and having hair is a lifestyle improvement for most.

Your confidence is misplaced. From a business point of view they’re making more money now by managing symptoms than if it were possible to completely cure baldness.

All that means is that there's a market opportunity for someone else to develop a cure and compete against them.

While the thesis of your argument is valid (based on US healthcare and their sentiment), your argument is, most likely, flawed.

The premise is that a “cure” is a one time expense, hence why it’s less appealing than managing symptoms. However, in this particular case, I believe the cure will be similar to ED solutions: continued stream of income.

Per the article, the amount of work to replace hair is costly. In addition, it requires follow ups and maintenance. Hence, between the multi-stage process and maintenance procedures, it will be a goldmine.

In the future, a solution for baldness will, most likely, resemble skincare products or vision correction.