When challenged about the lack of scientific evidence supporting what they espouse, promoters of quackery may claim that they lack the money to carry out research. However, preliminary research does not require funding or even much effort. The principal ingredients are careful clinical observations, detailed record-keeping, and long-term follow-up "to keep score." Advocates of hair loss cures often never do any of these things. Most who clamor for research do so as a ploy to arouse public sympathy.

The last thing they want is a scientific test that could prove them wrong. If a scientific study is performed and comes out negative, proponents invariably claim that it was conducted improperly or that the evaluators were biased. Proponents of so-called "natural" products (such as dietary supplements and herbs) often complain that funding is difficult or impossible to obtain because the products cannot be patented and therefore drug companies have little incentive to study them. That may be true for some products, but it is certainly not true for all. Consider ordinary aspirin. Although not patentable, it has been subjected to thousands of published studies.