Lee Jae-myung, the presidential candidate of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), is reportedly considering granting insurance coverage to hair loss treatments as an election pledge, drawing an explosive response from people with thinning hair.

However, there are voices of concern in the medical community. Medical insurance experts point out that the reimbursement of hair loss treatments would be difficult realistically if for no other reason than the priority in determining insurance benefits.

On Sunday, the DPK’s Youth Election Campaign Committee proposed Candidate Lee include the “health insurance coverage of hair loss treatments” in his election pledges.

In response, Lee said, “We could link it to ‘So-hwak-haeng’ (Small but Definite Happiness)’ pledge,” and his campaign headquarters are reportedly discussing the possibility seriously.

Now, the online space, including the “Hari Loss Gallery” within DCincide, the nation’s largest community portal website, is overflowing with comments vowing to support Lee.

Some supporters used the term “shim-da (to sow or implant)” instead of “ppop-da” (the Korean word for both “to elect” and “to pluck out”). Others compared Lee to Propecia (an oral hair loss drug for men).

Candidate Lee’s camp responded in kind. Lee put a video on the website on Tuesday, saying, “We need your help for the perfect and in-depth completion of the hair loss pledge. We are open to additional ideas for it.”

In the video, Lee went on to say, “Are you pulling Lee Jae-myung me out?” No. Lee Jae-myung should be implanted. Please sow Lee Jae-myung firmly from now on. And all this is four your hair.”

However, it is uncertain whether the proposed policy will become a real pledge.

That's because hair loss treatments cannot receive health insurance benefits even due to aging or heredity, let alone cosmetic improvement.

According to article 9 of the national health insurance treatment and reimbursement criteria, activities, drugs, and treatments used in cases where there are no problems in conducting duty, leading daily lives, or improving essential bodily functions are subject to non-reimbursement. Included in these categories are drugs to treat hairiness, hairlessness, and acne.

Dermatologists also raised concerns about the proposed policy. They noted that the national health insurance operators could not help but decide on reimbursing priority given the limited insurance finance, saying it will not be easy to grant insurance benefits to hair loss treatments, citing that if people start taking the hair loss drug, they have to take it forever.

“If insurance managers turn non-payment items into payable ones, they assess them according to priority. If hair loss treatment is selected, it will be like ignoring all evaluated but unselected items so far,” a dermatologist said on condition of anonymity for privacy reasons. “It will not even pass the feasibility test.”

To give insurance benefits to certain drugs, he said it is necessary to assess the severity of conditions and the efficacy of drugs when administered to patients. However, pointing out that hair loss treatments require lifetime taking, he stressed that it is impossible to assess their feasibility.

“The campaign headquarters put forth the policy as a populist pledge without deeply considering insurance finance,” he said. “Most doctors think anticancer drugs have far greater priority.”

Another dermatologist agreed, saying, “The health insurance’s finance is already tight enough. If they allow the insurance coverage of hair loss treatments, there will be too many items, including new anticancer therapies, to receive the same treatment. In a word, it is nonsense to reimburse hair loss drugs.”

According to medical data, up to 10 million Koreans have hair loss problems out of the population of 52 million.