Heretofore, Ive warned that the human immune system might be the one things that stops Follica from being successful.
You see, miniaturized hairs from men with baldness have been moved to immuno-deficient (SCID) mice before, and they grew just as well as the hairs moved from the donor area did. The resulting conclusions were clear, the immune system is doing “something” to keep miniaturized hairs small, and thus wont allow them to re-enlarge despite anti-androgens like finasteride.
The topicals administered in the Follica patent are administered 3 days after the wounding until day 12 (days “3-12” in the patent). If a man simply used cyclosporin for this nine day period…I’d imagine there would be nothing to keep the new hairs from forming “up there” at all.
For those who dont know, cyclosporin is the greatest trichotic we currently have, but if you kept taking it you wouldn’t have an immune system after a while and you’d get deathly sick. I dont think 9 days of it would be fatal however…
I just got a great deal more confident in the possibilities of this working---------surely at LEAST in the donor area.
I have been thinking the Cyclosporin angle of hair regrowth has been under-attacked for a long time.
In the big picture, it seems like the only thing preventing us from doing the Follica thing on our own right now is the unknown “9-day” topical. We seem to agree that Lithium Choloride would serve as the latter chemical and that it’s reasonably safe.
If we learn what this 9-day WNT suppression chemical is (and if we have some basic evidence that the method is safe in the first place), then it seems like we could monkey with this method before they get it released.
» Something just occured to me.
»
»
» Heretofore, Ive warned that the human immune system might be the one
» things that stops Follica from being successful.
»
» You see, miniaturized hairs from men with baldness have
» been moved to immuno-deficient (SCID) mice before, and they grew just as
» well as the hairs moved from the donor area did. The resulting conclusions
» were clear, the immune system is doing “something” to keep miniaturized
» hairs small, and thus wont allow them to re-enlarge despite anti-androgens
» like finasteride.
»
»
» The topicals administered in the Follica patent are administered 3 days
» after the wounding until day 12 (days “3-12” in the patent). If a man
» simply used cyclosporin for this nine day period…I’d
» imagine there would be nothing to keep the new hairs from forming “up
» there” at all.
»
»
» For those who dont know, cyclosporin is the greatest trichotic we
» currently have, but if you kept taking it you wouldn’t have an immune
» system after a while and you’d get deathly sick. I dont think 9 days of it
» would be fatal however…
»
»
»
» I just got a great deal more confident in the possibilities of this
» working---------surely at LEAST in the donor area.
Another great find, Benji.
As for trying to replicate the protocol ourselves, I think that will be difficult. I’d imagine that the “secret sauce” is most likely a proprietary chemical.
If I understand you correctly, it seems the treatment theoretically works by getting miniaturized hair follicles which have long since discontinued cycling (because of the immune system) to simply jump into the anagen phase by suppressing that which prevents the hair from growing/developing in the first place (the immune system). If so, then once the newly formed hairs cycle, the procedure would have to be repeated in those immune system susceptible areas. If true, then it would seem that at worst, Follica would be an ongoing type of treatment that was periodically applied (which is no big deal). Do you agree?
So far Follica’s patents have indicated that, chemically speaking, all the stuff being used in this process has already been approved for topical skin usage in humans.
The stuff might be weird. But whatever it is, it sounds like it’s gotta be already tested & on the market.
» Benji,
»
» If I understand you correctly, it seems the treatment theoretically works
» by getting miniaturized hair follicles which have long since discontinued
» cycling (because of the immune system) to simply jump into the anagen
» phase by suppressing that which prevents the hair from growing/developing
» in the first place (the immune system). If so, then once the newly formed
» hairs cycle, the procedure would have to be repeated in those immune system
» susceptible areas. If true, then it would seem that at worst, Follica
» would be an ongoing type of treatment that was periodically applied (which
» is no big deal). Do you agree?
»
» Thanks for your insight.
Follica makes brand new hairs, not revitalize old ones. They have a patent for removing hair also. They pluck the hairs, wait three days and abrade the skin, wait three more days and APPLY epidermal growth factor…no more hair.
Human and mice re-epilithialization periods are two different things. Re-reading through the patent I noticed that. In the human skin example, new hair germs were seen growing a mere seven days after wounding instead of the ten and eleven that it took on the mice.
Their time frame will look like this:
Depilate or pluck
3 days
Abrade
3 days
Apply wnt protiens, and epidermal growth factor BLOCKER, FGF, perhaps minoxidil, and some other more exotic stuff…daily for as long as nine days aferwards.
Thats it. It would be about 15 days of action and then one would be through. Hair should appear in perhaps six weeks afterwards…
» Their time frame will look like this:
»
»
» Depilate or pluck
» 3 days
» Abrade
» 3 days
» Apply wnt protiens, and epidermal growth factor BLOCKER, FGF, perhaps
» minoxidil, and some other more exotic stuff…daily for as long as
» nine days aferwards.
»
»
» Thats it. It would be about 15 days of action and then one would be
» through. Hair should appear in perhaps six weeks afterwards…
This is what has me a little concerned that it wouldn’t be a wise choice for a guy like me to have the Follica procedure. I actually still have a lot of hair. If I keep it short - no shaved, but maybe a couple of inches - its hard to notice my hairloss, though if I grow it longer, its very obvious (I’m a non-NW, diffuse thinner). I’d be afraid to have all my hair plucked and abraded, as I’d worry that what I had might not come back.
The patent link is not opening for me, but I thought I read that one variation of the technique/treatment involved thickening existing hairs. (which I interpret to mean individual hairs that have thinned in diameter). This would be ideal for many, as I fear that if Follica works only via neogenesis, we’d still have an issue concerning over-production of sebum from the prior, dormant follicles.
Human skin is really prone to fixing itself correctly every time, as long as scar tissue or some other specific damaging factor doesn’t hinder it.
I have a hard time being too concerned with the Follica method leaving any big problems in its wake. (Sebum over-production, hair growth direction issues, etc.) I think the Follica method is gonna either work beautifully, not at all, or produce new hairs that are partially sized/colored in some stage along the way. But I doubt that the method will cause any real new complications in the skin that didn’t exist previously.
But I do think Follica’s method will produce hairs without any better DHT susceptibility than the original hairs had in a given spot.
Hairs being created in adult (DHT-filled) skin is gonna be a new one. I don’t know what it will do to them. Will they bald right away in a couple of years? Not at all? Somewhere in between?
Who knows?
We might even gain a better understanding of what happens to the hair follicles & DHT during puberty as a side effect of the Follica operation.
»
» I have a hard time being too concerned with the Follica method leaving any
» big problems in its wake. (Sebum over-production, hair growth direction
» issues, etc.) I think the Follica method is gonna either work
» beautifully, not at all, or produce new hairs that are partially
» sized/colored in some stage along the way. But I doubt that the method
» will cause any real new complications in the skin that didn’t exist
» previously.
»
I hope you’re right. It looked to me, based on the number and variety of techniques listed in the patent, that Follica aims to provide a variety of options commensurate with the severity/type of baldness different people experience, although, for the most part, it appeared from the patent that undifferentiated epithelial cells would be converted into hair producing cells (hence, neogenesis, as Benji clarified). Given the collective disappointments left by all of the HM technology pursuers to this point, I’m hopeful and excited to know there’s a viable, legitimate, different approach to treating alopecia.
At the very least, it’s reassuring to know that we won’t have to wait forever to know what to expect from this type of treatment the way we have 'til now. I think I speak for many who are sick and *#%@-ing tired of being led around by the dangling carrot that is HM.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.