» Hey, this is for John the Revelator. I remember reading a while back that
» you thought there was some kind of anti-HM lobby in the USA, consisting
» mainly of HT doctors and the like. I’m wondering: do you have any evidence
» for this? The few docs I’ve talked to don’t seem to be anti-HM, rather they
» just seem uninvolved or ignorant about HM. but indifference is not the same
» as opposition…
There is no organized group that does business under the name “The Anti-HM Lobby” or anything like that. And none of the participants would ever admit they’re part of such a group. In fact, even a real organized group like ISHRS wouldn’t come out publicly and proclaim they’re anti-HM. If they are conducting any activities, such as writing letters to the FDA expressing concern over the “dangers” of HM, they are doing it covertly, either through individual HT surgeons, or in such a way that it doesn’t garner publicity.
However, all that said, I would have to say “yes”, there is most likely an anti-HM “lobby”. If the activities of these doctors involve pressuring FDA officials, in ANY WAY, to “go slow” on approving HM trials in the US, or to slow down or reject FDA applications, then yes, it does amount to a “lobby”.
I’m referring to probably the most politically-active 1% of hair transplant surgeons, who wield disproportionate clout with regulators because of their knowledge of the internal workings of the FDA bureaucracy and how to manipulate it, combined with their overriding concern that competition from HM will financially cripple their HT practices.
When HM does come out, probably many of the headlines or sub-headlines will read something like this:
“HAIR CLONING PROCESS, NOW AVAILABLE, COULD MAKE TRANSPLANTS OBSOLETE”
Just the publicity alone could be financially devastating to the vast majority of HT surgeons, who are not connected with Intercytex or Bosley.