Shiseido (Replicel technology) baldness cure on the market by 2018?

Stem cell; cell based hair therapy
21

Yes–I am referring to fibrosis primarily, and any other changes occurring below the visible surface of an aged scalp that are not readily apparent.

Not sure what you mean by “the whole point”–follicular unit transplants move follicles from one place to another, but bring with them the surroundings necessary for them to “take”, even if they are significantly more advanced than plug-type transplants. This is not the same as sprouting new (or re-sprouting old miniaturized) follicles from beneath the surface by injecting pluripotent cells and hoping they mix with their environment well enough for sustained success. Transplants (even FUTs) bring the environment with them. It’s not even close when you consider the size/amount of tissue in an FUT compared to size/amount of the cells at work in the proposed iPSC procedure.

What do you estimate Replicel/Shiseido’s chances of success to be with the iPSC procedure, irrespective of their self-imposed 3 year time frame?

22

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by cal[/postedby]
HT grafts can indeed thin over time. But I’m not satisfied that this isn’t due to explainable factors.

Donor-area thinning from older age is a much bigger factor than the HT world wants to admit because of its implications for that procedure. If it thins when it’s in the original location then it’s sure going to thin in the transplanted location too.

[/quote]

I had transplants in the early 1980s. I continued to lose hair to this day, but for many years the robustness of the hair that continued growing remained almost as good as when I had my transplants.

Then around 1997 I noticed the hair all over my head was getting finer and the few follicles that were still growing hair in-between the transplanted plugs, were falling out. I also noticed that my donor area was becoming see-through in spots.

Fortunately Propecia came out the following year, and it pretty much reversed the see-through in my donor area.

It also actually visibly regrew hair: the bald spot in the back of my head (I didn’t put any grafts there) grew hair near the perimeter of the bald spot, in places shrinking the bald spot by as much as a half inch.

I continue on DHT inhibitors to this day (been on Avodart for several years now).

HOWEVER, starting about 3 years ago I noticed that the hairs on my head were getting finer.

But the hairs that were transplanted were getting finest of all.

That would seem strange, because the hair in the donor area though fine, is not as fine as the hair that was transplanted.

Some of the transplanted hairs are so fine they remind me of the strands of a cobweb.

Since the transplanted hairs are much weaker and finer than the hair remaining in the donor area, what’s going on can’t simply be mpb or senescent alopecia (if there’s even a difference between those two).

I suspect two possibilities.

One would be minoxidil fatigue. I’ve been using rogaine since it came out. Possibly after all these years of rogaine reducing the time follicles can spend in the resting phase, those follicles are played out (maybe stopping the rogaine and letting them take a good nap would restore them?).

The other possibility, is that the productive lifespan of transplanted follicles is reduced from the trauma of being transplanted.

That latter may be explained by my theory that follicles are pre-programmed to grow hair a fixed number of times.

And since some of those times are used up when the follicles are transplanted (from shock fall out–both when a follicle is transplaned and later when additional follicles are transplanted next to formerly transplanted follicles).

So the above could explain why my transplanted follicles are growing weaker hair than the hair on the back and sides of my head.

23

I’m not a hair transplant patient, but as far as I know, with FUE and FT, there is virtually NO removal of what you might consider a protective bed of donor tissue along with the follicle. I believe very little surrounding tissue is preserved. It is completely different from traditional hair transplant plugs in that regard.

And some doctors like Gho and others are apparently removing ONLY the follicle or FU without any surrounding tissue at all. Essentially they’re just plucking the follicle out of the scalp. Yet the transplanted follicles remain viable.

24

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/posting-id-131061-page-0-category-1-order-last_answer.html

25

http://replicel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/RepliCel-Presentation-June-2015.pdfXXXX

Put out 4 X

26

REPLICEL Shiseido 2017 in Japan? we will see…

27

That link is broken.

28

https://twitter.com/msemporda/status/608098119864057856

the link above is where I found what yanamaka said.

however, on their facebook page replicel said that they arent working with the IPS, because I remember they said in a comment that the team was shown in the japansese documentary video (the team was working on IPS) are another research group and not the replicel one.

why does anyone speak about those article?? in those article they said a lot of wrong stuff.
further, who wrote the articles?
they said shiseido claims… etc… but why we havent seen an offical news from shiseido or replicel?

29

http://replicel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/RepliCel-Presentation-June-2015.pdfx

delete the last x link

30

There’s no reason to put the x’s after the link. By the way I tried it this morning and it didn’t work even without the x’s.

31

ok…but, hairsite does not accept direct posting.

http://replicel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/RepliCel-Presentation-June-2015.pdf

32

People post links all the time here. HairSite considers it necessary to allow us to share information. What HairSite doesn’t allow is posting links to certain competitor websites ONLY. That’s only a tiny handful of sites. Replicel is not a hair loss forum site.

OK, with respect to that slide presentation, I’ve seen it before. It’s been posted here before. This contains information about the ORIGINAL cell-based hair loss procedure being tested by Replicel, involving dermal sheath cup cells and keratinocytes.

The announcement about Shiseido’s work with induced pluriopotent stem cells is something completely different. It’s a brand new development, and personally I believe it was a DIRECT response to Sanford-Burnham, in that I believe that they got the idea from SB and wouldn’t have even thought of doing this themselves if they hadn’t seen the SB study. I think once they saw the SB study, they said, “OOOOOHHHHH, if they can do that, why can’t we???”

I also think they suspect this will work much better than their original project using the dermal sheath cup cells. There is a possibility now that they might even scrap the original project. I am not certain, but I think it’s possible.

33

Roger, if you’re right then this is huge. If you’re right hair loss could really be cured in 2 years. If Replicel found a way to do the S & B thing with a different technique then you did a good job predicting this. I thought it would be 5 - 10 years until this technology comes to market because S & B has a patent on it and they aren’t sharing their information. But you were saying that there are ways to sidestep S & B’s patent and other research groups could figure out S & B’s secrets.

Good call!

I don’t think we need to worry about S & B anymore. I think S & B threw snake-eyes. By releasing the study that they did they gave Replicel the idea. Thank God!

And if S & B wants to make any money off their invention they better start selling it someplace like Russia or else Replicel is going to beat S & B to the punch.

Does this put pressure on S & B to release their technique somewhere where it’s legal quicker?

34

from the replicel facebook about the second part of science zero video

RepliCel
Sorry for the confusion. Part 2, it’s another group; working on different types of HF cells. Ours/Shiseido’s is only in Part 1.

in my opinion some journalist less informed than us have watched the video and than wrote the article without looking for more information

35

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by thedayafter[/postedby]
from the replicel facebook about the second part of science zero video

RepliCel
Sorry for the confusion. Part 2, it’s another group; working on different types of HF cells. Ours/Shiseido’s is only in Part 1.

in my opinion some journalist less informed than us have watched the video and than wrote the article without looking for more information[/quote]

That could be true. The reason I say that is remember, I think we have only two kind of obscure sources (globalcosmeticsnews and rocketnews24) that say Shiseido is working on a plan to cure hair loss within 3 years using iPSCs. And those sources are ones we’ve never seen before. They didn’t appear to be directly connected to Shiseido.

Perhaps we should contact Shiseido and ask if they can confirm this.

36

Replicel isn’t worth believing until we’ve see the terminal hair growth on live heads.

37

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by cal[/postedby]
Replicel isn’t worth believing until we’ve see the terminal hair growth on live heads.[/quote]

Replicel is a Shiseido partner now but I think this new venture involving iPSCs is a Shiseido project that doesn’t involve Replicel. I suspect it’s a totally separate research team.

38

Hi Thedayafter – I can’t find this link to the “science zero” video on Replicel’s Facebook page. Is this one of the TV programs in Japanese? Could you also please post the link to the statement on their facebook page where Replicel explains what company is doing what, and what they’re referring to when they say part of rhe video is about “another company”? What other company and specifically what technology are they referring to?

39

hi,
yes it is the one of the japansese TV.
i am not be able to post the link because i havent a facebook account anylonger.
however, you have to go on their page scroll down until you’ll find the link at the part 2 of the video, then read the comment.
they posted that on 1th june.
they are not speaking about another company, but another researcher and in the video we can clearly see manabu ohyama.
he works with shiseido as well, and he works with IPS.
i think that they are working in the same bulding (the shiseido one).
in my opinion ohyama it is not working on rch-01 but they might work togheter in near future.

for exemple i found this on replicel website:

On March 20th at 12:00 noon local time, RepliCel’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Rolf Hoffmann and licensing partner Shiseido Company Ltd.’s, Dr.’s Manabu Ohyama and Jiro Kishimoto, will be presenting at the 14th Congress of the Japanese Society for Regenerative Medicine (JSRM) 2015 in Yokohama, Japan. Leading the discussion will be Dr. Manabu Ohyama who will talk on the “Use of human induced pluripotent stem cells for the generation of hair inductive dermal cells.”

40

I think it’s looking like they are using different cells or something like that to do the same thing that S & B did without infringing on S & B’s property rights. And I think that they have probably already performed an initial experiment using their technology on mice and that is what they will discuss at the October 2015 Hair Loss Congress.