Why does a drug that does not work exist? I feel I am missing something.
Plenty of drugs exist that don't do much if anything because....people buy them out of hope.
As an example, I went to the dermatologist a while ago to get a mole on my back removed. While I was there, I asked for some advice on cleaning up some chronic backne I've dealt with my whole life.
Asked about life style changes, clothing changes, anything....what does the 25 year old Physicians Assistant tell me? He starts cracking jokes then immediately tries to get me to buy a foam that, and I quote, "You can't buy it through the pharmacies." I went hrm.......ok. Maybe I'll try that. Meanwhile, all the practical advice I was looking for was non-existent, the PA basically said "it's this thing or nothing." (Other than a broad based antibiotic or something in the neighborhood of Tetracycline, which I've used in the past for a long time and decided I don't want to be eating pills my whole life to deal with my acne.)
So about 30 minutes after leaving the dermatologist I get a call from a rep working for the drug company that makes this shit....all bubbly and happy and eager to get me to buy the product.
I told them to fuck off.
The PA was clearly in the pocket of the drug company, just funneling patients straight to their sales reps. He didn't listen to my problem or offer any tangible solutions other than trying to peddle this "medicated wonder foam" that is so amazing pharmacies refuse to sell it to you.
Drugs exist as long as there is a market for the problem they claim to address. And I'm not saying your GP doesn't have their own bias. But hair loss is a very, very easy lever on men to get them to spend money to try and solve a problem that, historically, isn't really solvable. I've been seeing hair fixes advertised for 20+ years now, I remember watching the first rush of Rogaine commercials when it was just starting out. Just like fat loss solutions that don't involve diet and exercise are an easy lever on women to get them to spend money.
I guess my point is: don't take the existence of a drug as an indicator of its efficacy. Shit, drug companies manufacturer drugs to sell you, to counteract side effects of OTHER drugs they sell you. The opiod epidemic is just another example of profits being more important than the actual application of drugs.
That said, if you didn't get the details from your GP that you believed you should, see a different doctor or do your own research. If your doctor has already told you it's shit, and you're not inclined to trust their opinion, then I think you're free to make your own informed decision. Just make sure that decision comes from a place of being informed, and not out of desperation.