Treating Baldness is "Not Like Growing Grass"

Progress may seem slow, but new treatments for hair loss are underway

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

More than 40 percent of men in the U.S. will show signs of male-pattern baldness sometime between the ages of 18 and 49. But studies looking at the genomes of this group of men have failed to turn up a genetic cause, which makes a true cure seem an unlikely prospect.  

Treatments for male-pattern baldness, also known as androgenic alopecia, may be forthcoming, however. Recent work is homing in on three types, including one that was reported in March in the journal Science. In the new paper, George Cotsarelis of the University of Pennsylvania and his team found that a compound known as prostaglandin D2 (PD2) was elevated in the blood of men with male-pattern baldness. When they blocked PD2 receptors in mice, they ensured that the hair did not stop growing. Those blockers could be applied topically, Cotsarelis says.

He is also working on growing new hair. Researchers have noticed that if you wound a mouse, the animal generates new hair follicles as part of the healing process. The new follicles come from skin cells that turn into hair follicles through what is called the Wnt-mediated signaling pathway. It is the same pathway that helps you generate new hairs naturally as they fall out. Cotsarelis is working with a company to replicate that process.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


A third approach, called follicular neogenesis, would allow doctors to remove, multiply and then reimplant the stem cells found inside a person’s hair follicles. So far, though, when researchers remove the stem cells and culture them, the cells appear to “forget” they were ever hair cells. Researchers are now attempting to figure out how to restore their “memory.”

As scientists continue to search for treatments to androgenic alopecia, they recommend patience. “People think of it like growing grass or something, but it’s nothing like that,” Cotsarelis says. “It’s like trying to treat cancer; it’s a complicated process.”

This article was published in print as "It's Not "Like Growing Grass"."

Rose Eveleth is a writer and producer who explores how humans tangle with science and technology. She's the creator and host Flash Forward, a podcast about possible (and not so possible) futures, and has covered everything from fake tumbleweed farms to million dollar baccarat heists.

More by Rose Eveleth
Scientific American Magazine Vol 306 Issue 5This article was published with the title “It's Not 'Like Growing Grass'” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 306 No. 5 (), p. 27
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0612-27

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe