[MCllorf]

I don't know if this was clear to you, but the link was no associated health problems -> less funding for research -> no available cure. I'm sure hairline surgery would be a lot more popular and people wouldn't balk at the cost nearly as much if the surgery added 20 years to your lifespan

[Teever]

This entire argument hinges on the assumption that male pattern baldness is curable with 50 year old technology. If someone could prove that then they could develop a treatment with 50 year old technology.

What's far more likely is that the 'cure' for baldness will be the merger 21st century technologies including tissue engineering and genetic modification to make perfect and long lasting hair follicles for automated transplantation.

The argument you're presenting is akin to saying that people in the 15th century didn't go to the moon because there wasn't an economic purpose for doing it and not because there is no way to go to the moon with craft made of wood and iron.