This is the first article in what I'm calling SCAMs, which stands for Supplementary, Complimentary and Alternative Medicine (an acronym coined by Dr. Mark Crislip - a skeptical writer and podcaster). There are so many of these that I feel they deserve their own type of notation. Some topics I may write about in this category include homeopathy, naturopathy, and hypnosis therapy.
 |
| Look at that; there's an article about laser hair regrowth in the paper! Oh, it seems I've wasted $700 on this thing. |
While on my flight to San Francisco, I decided to peruse the Skymall catalog which can be found on almost any American flight. I love some of the things people have come up with to solve everyday problems such as "I want to make my own soda" - the gadget displayed on the front page showed a clear bottle, filled with water and being injected with what I would assume to be carbon dioxide (that is the gas used to "carbonate" water). Although interesting to watch, I would argue that the convenience and relatively cheap price of store bought soda would steer me away from purchasing this item. Well, that and the $100-200 price tag. Still, it got my attention so I decided to take a look further. I don't mind some of these silly gadgets and other odd purchases, such as a "life-sized" statue of Bigfoot (I'm not sure how you can claim it to be life-size without actually having any proof of the mythical creature's existence, let alone it's size). There are some so-called innovations or breakthrough technologies that make my skepti-sense tingle though. The focus of my article today concerns the concept of using lasers and in some cases, red LEDs to regrow hair.
If you are one of the millions of Americans who suffer from hair loss, I feel for you. I feel like I can empathize with you a little in that I will often pull my hair back to inspect my hairline, in fear that it has receded since my last check. I don't think anyone wants to lose their hair - at least on their head. So what is the mechanism by which a laser could "reactivate" a hair follicle to regrow hair? Upon my return home, I was able to research this further. It turns out that even they admit they don't know exactly how it works (http://www.spencerforrest.com/laser-hair-growth/x5-hair-laser-faqs.asp#b3). For those keeping track, this is a second, a big red flag. The ads mention how you can sit and relax while you wear this giant apparatus on your head. No work required? Oh how tempting! They do reference the FDA, using a phrase I have never heard: "FDA cleared". Again, when I got home I was able to find out what that meant exactly:
The FDA cleared two United States companies for marketing through the Premarket Notification/510(k) process as adjunctive devices for promoting hair growth, the personal use device was cleared for males, and the prescription unit was cleared for females. Clearances were based on the presentation of clinical data to support such claims. These clearances brought global media exposure educating the public about this revolutionary hair loss treatment. iRestore has not been evaluated by the FDA and is being marketed as a cosmetic device.
 |
| Yes, even women can suffer from thinning hair and deceptive marketing. |
Everything sounds good until you reach that last sentence. The device was not actually evaluated for efficacy, and it is approved as a cosmetic device only. So these "clinical trials" were presented, but not evaluated? Maybe now you're thinking like I am, that being FDA cleared is completely meaningless. Presumably I could market a pencil as an ear wax remover and get it cleared through the FDA. There are no details of the trials such as how many people they tested, if they were using any other drugs in conjunction with their device, and how long they were tested for. Of course they only have so much ad space, so maybe they just couldn't include this information, so I searched their site. On the first device I looked up, the X5 by Spencer Forrest, there was no information. The second device I researched looked like the top of a space helmet. It was priced at about $500. Again I could find no links to the clinical data or any information on the method of action.
Maybe you are still skeptical, but you see a fail-safe. Even if the device doesn't work, you've got (in the case of the iRestore) 6 months to try it out. If it doesn't work, you can simply return it before that time for a full refund. "Those fools." You think as you rub your hands together. You've found the loophole! Almost everything has some kind of return period though. How many times have you ever returned something? Okay, how many times have you returned something which had to be shipped... and you had to pay- most likely- more than $10 to ship back? Red lasers and LEDs are not expensive at all and yet these devices range from $200-600. With such a high profit margin, I doubt they would lose money on returns. Many people won't bother, will wait too long, or convince themselves that the device does work.
 |
| I'm commenting right now! |
|
If you're still sold on the idea that a focused beam of coherent energy can stimulate a hair follicle, do me this one favor: Buy a red laser pen for about $10 and try that first. These lasers are of the same wavelength (650nm) as the $200+ ones. If you actually see results, buy the cheapest one of all of these and comment on my article about how wrong I am.
