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

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.