I did read the PNAS abstract (don’t have access to the full article) and it does apear that the FHIT gene does play a role in both alopecia areata and some forms of cancer but a direct link between alopecia areata and cancer wasn’t stated.

This seems to be the article which started the story
Pat

Is gene therapy the hope of all bald men everywhere?

Right there, in your question, is the heart of the issue. The word “hope” implies baldness is a problem, a defect, something for which a remedy ought to be sought. This isn’t necessarily the case, though culture would like us to think so. Some instances of hair loss could, in my opinion, be called a problem, as they are expressive of a significant auto-immune dysfunction. Think alopecia totalis, the complete loss of all body hair. Most occurances of hair loss, such as those associated with aging, do not qualify. It’s no more a “problem” than being left-handed or a red head.

So, to answer the question with as little cynicism as possible: No, gene therapy will more likely become yet another method of fleecing insecure men, and that will overshadow the real potential held in the finding. Imagine: cancer treatments that do NOT have the side effect of hair loss? That seems a real and meritorious possibility.