Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

TRX2 announcements


#21

but how do you know Whitfield is Moocow?
And is Whitfield a biochemistry doctorate at Oxford, yes or not?
I cannot believe that all the media is mentioning this if it is a lie.


#22

This has already been noted by Iron_Man, but I post here again:

We have commercialized the website to a certain degree, e.g. by introducing a membership scheme (no worry, for now you can “Pay what you want”) or linking to an affiliate store at amazon. This will not only add value to your experience as a member but also will allow us to cover the additional costs of providing & improving this service to you. 50% goes to the maintaining and improving the site and 50% towards our Research and Development.
<<<<<

eewwwww! THIS STINKS, Mr. ShïtField!!

Is this a genuine Oxford project? Or is he a charlatan misusing the Oxford name? In other words, is this the kind of projects that Oxford produces?


#23

-nt-


#24

moocow01 started this topic here – right?

He finished this 1st (and last) post absolutely clear with …

» Best,
»
» Thomas Whitfield

And exactly here, Whitfield did a BIG fault:
moocow01 clearly signed his post (look at the starting post above!!!) with his real name – Thomas Whitfield.

But that is not all: :surprised:
After noticing that (moocow01 = Thomas Whitfield), I immediately checked ALL his (moocow01’s) previous posts here on HairSite, since the beginning:

» Big bull**** #7
» Postings by Mr. Whitfield:
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/search-show_postings-1916.html

There YOU WILL find, WHY he was asking and mentioned this or that, WHY he has been specially interested in very specific topics (like ACell, Intercytex etc), and WHY he has been very often the one on HairSite, who has been very often the 1st, who started new, interesting and some of the “breakthrough” topics with articles here on HairSite, like for example:
http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-62055-page-1-category-1-order-last_answer-descasc-DESC.html

The reason behind that is (why very often the 1st user here), because THAT is exactly, what Thomas Whitfield is doing:

Furthermore, moocow01 (Thomas Whitfield) always specified the source of his findings/articles. But this time (look at his post above!!!) he did not, but instead of doing so, he simply and clear signed with “Best, Thomas Whitfield”.

And now guys, you can tell me what ever you want, but for me it is absolutely clear:

moocow01 = Thomas Whitfield,

… right, Mr. Whitfield? :wink:


#25

» Oxford Biochemistry?
» http://www.bioch.ox.ac.uk/aspsite/index.asp?sectionid=about

well mister Whitfield or cook-whatever his name is seems to be part of Oxford University:
http://www.bioch.ox.ac.uk/glycob/members.html

Whitfield, Thomas 30.14 — 75723 thomas.whitfield @chch.ox.ac.uk

but his last publication is from 2007, so i presume he finished his Phd since.

However, his website and communication seems shady, imo its pure BS indeed. We have seen too many Bazan ego-individuals to know hairloss cure is not a one man thing.

Thomas Whitfield is a DPhil candidate in Biochemistry at Oxford University. Already a successful young entrepreneur, Thomas was the founder of miomi.com, which has received funding in excess of 1 million GBP. His newest venture is a revolutionizing hair loss treatment incorporating innovative biochemical technology. A scientist by training, Thomas is eager to hone his knowledge of business, particularly finance and law. He is most interested in learning from a venture capital firm, particularly in understanding how they evaluate and support high risk start ups.


#26

He specializes in getting huge amounts of money out of VCs for risky things. Not hair loss.


#27

» » Just for the record, the ancient greek word for hair is not Trichos but
» » Tricha = Tpixa (greek letters seems to be not available)
»
» “Tricho” or “Tricha” or “Tpixa” or “Tric Trac” - that isn’t important.
»
» Important for Mr. Whitfield is, that it just sounds “magic” for the stupid
» mass out there - right?

He probably meant to do a play on “Trick yous”, yous as in us, and trick as in he is a lying bastard. Anyways, I’d like him to continue pissing off a billion men who will end up wanting to hang him by his balls. They could trick him in return into believing it is to aid in blocking all his testosterone so his hair will possibly grow back. We could say it is simply just part of an oxford study, funded by feminist venture capitalists, though really a front for them to raise money for rosie reruns. Of course, in no way is this similar or a parody of his ridiculousness.


#28

» Whitfield, Thomas 30.14 — 75723 thomas.whitfield @chch.ox.ac.uk
»
» but his last publication is from 2007, so i presume he finished his Phd
» since.
Interesting, you bring that up.

Chronological – and just for the record:

In fact, he finished his Ph.D. (in Biochemistry) in 2008.
One year before, 2007 (as student), he has been heavily involved in his “miomi.com” project, which has nothing to do with Biochemistry, which seems, that it has been come to its end, before it has ever started - whatever the reason has been. But it clearly seems, it has been the time for Mr. Thomas Whitfield in 2008, to gain interest in Biochemistry again:
http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-39066.html#p39097
His 1st post on HairSite in Sep 2008.

Just some month after his 1st post on HairSite, his 1st efforts to gain attention:
http://tressless.com/2009/01/20/thomas-whitfield-and-dr-mercola-want-to-cure-hair-loss/

So what?
Just 8 month after that, Thomas Whitfield is the great “inventor” on Wikipedia:




As you can see, Whitfield claims (sorry, I can’t imagine, that another guy created this crappy article), that he is the holder of more than a dozen patents, issued or pending, and is the author of multiple peer-reviewed publications.

More than a dozen patents within just 1 year?
AGAIN, more than a dozen patents ( :surprised: ) within just 1 year, short after he finished his Oxford study in 2008 as a young biochemistry Ph.D. ???

This guy is must be a real genius … :hungry:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1429170697948441004#

Let me make things straight:
The only thing he maybe is able to hold, are just his 2 little balls between his legs, and NOT any patents!

Sorry for mentioning that, but this guy is definitely a BIG LIAR.


#29

I appreciate your investigative effort, Iron_Man, but I think you are wrong.
If you search Hairsite for TRX2:
http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/search-search-trx2-category-0-ao-and-page-0.html

you see that in previous TRX2 topics, moocow01 didn’t participate at all.

I think this time moocow01 copied and pasted Whitfield’s newsletter (ending with his signature) from other forum, and he didn’t post the link because posting certain links is blocked here at Hairsite. In fact rev has posted this newletter again in this thread, and he says that this newsletter was posted in other forum:

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/forum_entry-id-63730-page-0-category-1-order-last_answer.html

So, my guess is that moocow01 is NOT Whitfield.
In any case, Whitfield IS a BIG CHARLATAN. He failed with his MIOMI project (shïtty timeline), and now he wants to milk easy money from poor baldies.

» moocow01 started this topic here – right?
»
» He finished this 1st (and last) post absolutely clear with …
»
» » Best,
» »
» » Thomas Whitfield
»
» And exactly here, Whitfield did a BIG fault:
» moocow01 clearly signed his post (look at the starting post
» above!!!) with his real name – Thomas Whitfield.
»
» But that is not all: :surprised:
» After noticing that (moocow01 = Thomas Whitfield), I immediately checked
» ALL his (moocow01’s) previous posts here on HairSite, since the
» beginning:
»
» » Big bull**** #7
» » Postings by Mr. Whitfield:
» » http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/search-show_postings-1916.html
»
» There YOU WILL find, WHY he was asking and mentioned this or
» that, WHY he has been specially interested in very specific
» topics
(like ACell, Intercytex etc), and WHY he has been very
» often the one on HairSite, who has been very often the 1st, who started
» new, interesting and some of the “breakthrough” topics with articles here
» on HairSite, like for example:
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-62055-page-1-category-1-order-last_answer-descasc-DESC.html
»
» The reason behind that is (why very often the 1st user here), because THAT
» is exactly, what Thomas Whitfield is doing:
» http://www.trx2.com/community/
»
» Furthermore, moocow01 (Thomas Whitfield) always specified the
» source of his findings/articles. But this time (look at his post
» above!!!) he did not, but instead of doing so, he simply and clear signed
» with “Best, Thomas Whitfield”.
»
»
» And now guys, you can tell me what ever you want, but for me it is
» absolutely clear:
»
» moocow01 = Thomas Whitfield,
»
» … right, Mr. Whitfield? :wink:


#30

» So, my guess is that moocow01 is NOT Whitfield.

So let us wait for moocow01.
I’m pretty sure, he has something to tell us - but it will be NOT very easy for him. :smiley:


#31

I have searched for Thomas Whitfield’s patents and it seems that you are right, Iron_Man, and this is a total lie.
It would be interesting to investigate deeper into this Whitfield subject, to see all the group of persons-charlatans surrounding him at Oxford. It is clear that he is not alone, otherwise he would have got no media attention at all.
Probably, they are assembling a “money-making” machinery, to squeeze money out of naive investors.

Still, I say again, that moocow01 is not Whitfield.

» » Whitfield, Thomas 30.14 — 75723 thomas.whitfield
» @chch.ox.ac.uk
» »
» » but his last publication is from 2007, so i presume he finished his Phd
» » since.
» Interesting, you bring that up.
»
» Chronological – and just for the record:
»
» In fact, he finished his Ph.D. (in Biochemistry) in 2008.
» One year before, 2007 (as student), he has been heavily involved in his
» “miomi.com” project, which has nothing to do with Biochemistry, which
» seems, that it has been come to its end, before it has ever started -
» whatever the reason has been. But it clearly seems, it has been the time
» for Mr. Thomas Whitfield in 2008, to gain interest in Biochemistry again:
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-39066.html#p39097
» His 1st post on HairSite in Sep 2008.
»
» Just some month after his 1st post on HairSite, his 1st efforts to gain
» attention:
» http://tressless.com/2009/01/20/thomas-whitfield-and-dr-mercola-want-to-cure-hair-loss/
»
» So what?
» Just 8 month after that, Thomas Whitfield is the great “inventor” on
» Wikipedia:
» http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Whitfield_(inventor)
»


»
» As you can see, Whitfield claims (sorry, I can’t imagine, that another guy
» created this crappy article), that he is the holder of more
» than a dozen patents
, issued or pending, and is the author of
» multiple peer-reviewed publications.
»
» More than a dozen patents within just 1 year?
» AGAIN, more than a dozen patents ( :surprised: ) within just 1 year,
» short after he finished his Oxford study in 2008 as a young biochemistry
» Ph.D. ???
»
» This guy is must be a real genius … :hungry:
» http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1429170697948441004#
»
» Let me make things straight:
» The only thing he maybe is able to hold, are just his 2 little balls
» between his legs, and NOT any patents!
»
» Sorry for mentioning that, but this guy is definitely a BIG LIAR.


#32

Once again:
» So let us wait for moocow01.
» I’m pretty sure, he has something to tell us - but it will be NOT
» very easy for him. :smiley:


#33

I do wish you lot would do some research before jumping to conclusions. For example, here the construct of your argument is as follows:

  1. There is a Wikipedia article about Thomas Whitfield (actually, as far as I can tell, it has long since been deleted from Wikipedia).

  2. It claims several patents have been lodged.

  3. Thomas Whitfield must have written the page himself because no one else would.

In short your argument is an assumption which would perhaps not be made if considering all the information available. Indeed, this argument is particularly easy to shoot down:

  1. Thomas Whitfield is well known enough not to need to write his own Wikipedia article. Lots of very dull people spend a lot of time writing dull Wikipedia articles.

  2. Thomas Whitfield has never claimed that he has lodged any patents. Indeed, it is quite the contrary. He has actually said he is working in stealth because he does not yet have sufficient results to apply for a patent.

Rather than simply googling for some patents, it might have been a more constructive use of your time to understand the patenting process in the UK. The UK rejects patents for useless inventions that don’t work and therefore it is pointless spending a lot of money applying for a patent until you know you can prove your invention works. This is to stop people with half finished ideas getting patents that stop others more advanced in their research being allowed to invent, improve and sell the invention.

I understand the patenting process is far more lax in other parts of the world.


#34

Actually, Iron_Man, you yet again prove to the world that you are grossly misinformed. You don’t actually have to be a paying subscriber to get the newsletter - basic membership is actually free.


#35

Sorry, but Mr. Whitfield is right now a very suspicious person. Too many red flags to ignore.
you can try to excuse him with naive explanations (like he is German and doesn’t speak a good english, blah blah,…) but these won’t convince us, at least, not me.

» I do wish you lot would do some research before jumping to conclusions. For
» example, here the construct of your argument is as follows:
»
» 1) There is a Wikipedia article about Thomas Whitfield (actually, as far
» as I can tell, it has long since been deleted from Wikipedia).
»
» 2) It claims several patents have been lodged.
»
» 3) Thomas Whitfield must have written the page himself because no one else
» would.
»
» In short your argument is an assumption which would perhaps not be made if
» considering all the information available. Indeed, this argument is
» particularly easy to shoot down:
»
» 1) Thomas Whitfield is well known enough not to need to write his own
» Wikipedia article. Lots of very dull people spend a lot of time writing
» dull Wikipedia articles.
»
» 2) Thomas Whitfield has never claimed that he has lodged any patents.
» Indeed, it is quite the contrary. He has actually said he is working in
» stealth because he does not yet have sufficient results to apply for a
» patent.
»
» Rather than simply googling for some patents, it might have been a more
» constructive use of your time to understand the patenting process in the
» UK. The UK rejects patents for useless inventions that don’t work and
» therefore it is pointless spending a lot of money applying for a patent
» until you know you can prove your invention works. This is to stop people
» with half finished ideas getting patents that stop others more advanced in
» their research being allowed to invent, improve and sell the invention.
»
» I understand the patenting process is far more lax in other parts of the
» world.


#36

» Sorry, but Mr. Whitfield is right now a very suspicious person. Too many
» red flags to ignore.
» you can try to excuse him with naive explanations (like he is German and
» doesn’t speak a good english, blah blah,…) but these won’t convince us,
» at least, not me.

Naive explanatiions? :smiley:

Let me look: “too many red flags to ignore …”

Spanish Dude is meaning, all guys here on HairSite should IGNORE the red flags … - great explanation by Spanish Dude. :smiley:

But you’re right Spanish Dude, my spoken English “blah blah” isn’t really perfect, and sometimes not really easy to understand, because I speak English sometimes too fast:


#37

arggg!:crying:
You are a nightmare Iron_Man.
You didn’t understand my post. I will try again:

My post was adressed to AZ1984.
This is what I meant:

  1. Mr. Whitfield is a very suspicious person right now.
  2. There are too many red flags. We can’t ignore them.
  3. AZ1984 can try to forgive Whitfield with naive explanations (like Whitfield is German and speaks a poor english), but these won’t convince us, at least, not me.

Did you understand now, Iron_Man?


#38

» arggg!:crying:
» You are a nightmare Iron_Man.
» You didn’t understand my post. I will try again:
»
» My post was adressed to AZ1984.
» This is what I meant:
» 1. Mr. Whitfield is a very suspicious person right now.
» 2. There are too many red flags. We can’t ignore them.
» 3. AZ1984 can try to forgive Whitfield with naive explanations (like
» Whitfield is German and speaks a poor english), but these won’t convince
» us, at least, not me.
»
» Did you understand now, Iron_Man?

Well done! :ok:


#39

Actually, I did recently remind myself of an e-mail I received 4 years ago about ‘new technology’ due to be announced. It was either from L’Oreal or Versace, someone like that. Then I got an e-mail telling me about a laser comb. Doh.

Has anyone ever had a laser comb that worked? Even the pictures on their own websites are incredibly disappointing. I mean, I can do the same with my hair just by using Revivogen shampoo!

The reason I have more faith in Whitfield is because of his background, although I don’t deny the stealth is frustrating. But you can’t get a patent for a half finished idea in this country.

Actually, I’m hoping not too many people do become premium members, because it improves my chances of getting selected as a clinical trialist! Even if what he has is bogus, who knows what he’ll spend on my scalp to make it look like he’s done something useful!


#40

Wikipedia says he has got 12 patents. Well, if this is not correct, then why Whitfield is not correcting that himself? Don’t tell me he is not informed that Wikipedia has an entry for him!! Last edit is 15th-Nov2009. He has had 4 months to correct it.

If you are making donations to Whitfield, then there are 3 alternative options:
-You are quite naive
-You are working for him and want to encourage people to make more donations.
-you are a troll and wants to have fun.