-
Roger_that, why do you keep talking about the safety of Histogen’s HSC even though you can not even one ingredient inside of Histogen’s HSC that has caused any harm to even one person?
-
Worse yet, you actually raise the panic flag about cancer and you specifically refer to Wnt’s causing cancer even though the Wnt involved in HSC is Wnt7a even though it’s know that Wnt7a inhibits cancers rather than promoting cancers. Would you please cite one incident where Wnt7a has caused even one cancer in even one person???
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/46/3/1015
http://www.jbc.org/content/282/9/6001.abstract (KGF/KGF-7’s involvement in pancreatic cancer)
to name just a few.
only a true imbecile can deny a connection between growth factors and cancer.
enough said.
The true reason why we are discussing such useless topics has been the lack of any real news lately.
» 1. Roger_that, why do you keep talking about the safety of Histogen’s HSC
» even though you can not even one ingredient inside of Histogen’s HSC that
» has caused any harm to even one person?
»
»
» 2. Worse yet, you actually raise the panic flag about cancer and you
» specifically refer to Wnt’s causing cancer even though the Wnt involved in
» HSC is Wnt7a even though it’s know that Wnt7a inhibits cancers rather than
» promoting cancers. Would you please cite one incident where Wnt7a has
» caused even one cancer in even one person???
No Hotpants the true reason we are discussing these ueseless topics is that it is your time of the month and you don’t feel pretty even with your make-up on.
And not one of your 3 links demonstrates that Wnt7a is implicated in even one case of cancer.
» http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/46/3/1015
» Hepatocyte growth factor induces colonic cancer cell invasiveness via enhanced motility and protease overproduction. Evidence for PI3 kinase and PKC involvement | Carcinogenesis | Oxford Academic
» http://www.jbc.org/content/282/9/6001.abstract (KGF/KGF-7’s involvement in
» pancreatic cancer)
»
» to name just a few.
»
» only a true imbecile can deny a connection between growth factors and
» cancer.
»
» enough said.
»
»
» The true reason why we are discussing such useless topics has been the lack
» of any real news lately.
»
» » 1. Roger_that, why do you keep talking about the safety of Histogen’s
» HSC
» » even though you can not even one ingredient inside of Histogen’s HSC
» that
» » has caused any harm to even one person?
» »
» »
» » 2. Worse yet, you actually raise the panic flag about cancer and you
» » specifically refer to Wnt’s causing cancer even though the Wnt involved
» in
» » HSC is Wnt7a even though it’s know that Wnt7a inhibits cancers rather
» than
» » promoting cancers. Would you please cite one incident where Wnt7a has
» » caused even one cancer in even one person???
» And not one of your 3 links demonstrates that Wnt7a is implicated in even
» one case of cancer.
“Our results suggest that alterations in regulatory circuits involving HOX, WNT, and possibly fibroblast growth factor pathways occur frequently in lung cancer.”
I am not saying Wnt7a CAUSES lung cancer but it clearly plays some kind of role in cancer development. Be it a reduction or an increase of Wnt7a, it has some kind of regulatory influence on cell proliferation. It has been well established that you are incapable of understanding that but luckily the FDA is comprised of smarter people than yourself.
Anyway I know that you are trying hard to ignore the abundance of evidence and trying to fight your last stand, but it is only making you look more and more foolish.
There are different Wnt’s woman. The FDA also understands that. The only action on cancer I have found with regards to Wnt7a is that it inhibits cancers. Now prove otherwise or else take your PMS elsewhere.
» » And not one of your 3 links demonstrates that Wnt7a is implicated in
» even
» » one case of cancer.
»
» Altered HOX and WNT7A expression in human lung cancer - PMC
»
» “Our results suggest that alterations in regulatory circuits involving HOX,
» WNT, and possibly fibroblast growth factor pathways occur frequently in
» lung cancer.”
»
» I am not saying Wnt7a CAUSES lung cancer but it clearly plays some
» kind of role in cancer development. Be it a reduction or an increase of
» Wnt7a, it has some kind of regulatory influence on cell proliferation. It
» has been well established that you are incapable of understanding that but
» luckily the FDA is comprised of smarter people than yourself.
»
» Anyway I know that you are trying hard to ignore the abundance of evidence
» and trying to fight your last stand, but it is only making you look more
» and more foolish.
» There are different Wnt’s woman. The FDA also understands that. The only
» action on cancer I have found with regards to Wnt7a is that it inhibits
» cancers. Now prove otherwise or else take your PMS elsewhere.
try reading the article i posted. it’s about wnt7a
Not true!
http://www.stanford.edu/~rnusse/pathways/wntcancer.html
Overexpression of Wnt is a concern for cancer.
I hope you know what beta catenin is and what it is downstream of.
I expect some ridiculous reply.
First of all, my discussion about Histogen doesn’t need to specify exactly what elements of the HSC mixture may be toxic or cause cancer. That is not the point of my argument; my argument is not based on specifics (although as you can see, hairman2 and KO have already presented specifics). My argument is based on the inference from their dosing regimen (one single dose followed maybe by a second dose 6-8 weeks or 6 months later, and after that, NOTHING) that they are concerned enough about the risks of regular exposure to these compounds that they have imposed serious limitations on HSC’s use and don’t even dare promote it for daily or weekly applications in their own clinical trials and regulatory applications.
What you don’t seem to understand is that the FDA is going to examine this very closely, ask them A LOT of questions, particularly about how often the treatment can be administered. If they don’t specifically get approval from the FDA to administer the treatment more frequently than 1-2 times a year (or whatever minimal amount they are using now), then treating patients with HSC more frequently with that will be ILLEGAL – and very probably, for good reason.
The same applies to foreign regulatory authorities.
Normally when a hair loss drug comes out, dosing is DAILY.
Minoxidil / Rogaine – DAILY
Propecia / Finasteride – DAILY
Dutasteride – DAILY
Avacor – DAILY
PGD2 Inhibitors / Blockers – not approved to treat hair loss yet, but everyone agrees that dosing should be DAILY
Why should HSC be any different, then?
We can INFER (it’s called using LOGIC and INDUCTIVE REASONING) that when a company starts testing a mixture of compounds but limits dosing THEMSELVES to once or twice a year, that they are obviously concerned about administering it more frequently, and that concern obviously can be traced to TOXICITY (including potential carcinogenicity, but not only carcinogenicity).
The problem is that because of this self-imposed limit (and obviously the regulatory authorities are not going to be any more LAX or LENIENT than Histogen itself), we have a treatment here that when you inject the f*cking stuff into your scalp, it stays in there a day or two, has an effect, but then doesn’t remain – like every other organic bioactive compound, it will immediately disperse into the bloodstream and be metabolized by the cells and excreted from the system.
Therefore its RESIDUAL effects are nil. There is NO DAILY MAINTENANCE. There is NO UPKEEP. There is NO FOLLOW-THROUGH. There is NO MAINTENANCE OF ACTIVE LEVELS OF THE COMPOUNDS IN THE TISSUE.
And this is a drawback that is embedded in the HSC model, because you can’t illegally start using it every day or every week. You MUST go to a doctor and get it injected. And no M.D. is going to disobey the FDA and inject it into you more frequently than the permitted dosing frequency.
Of course, some will try to skirt this limitation and surreptitiously go to multiple doctors, without telling the other doctors, and try to get more frequent injections. I suspect you are a person who would try to do that, based on your statements and attitude on this board. Correct me if I’m wrong.
But, if you attempt something like that, you will actually be courting real risk to your health.
So it’s a Catch-22.
We have here a treatment that is inherently weak and hobbled by the limitations of very infrequent dosing (1-2 doses per year at the most) and a relatively high risk of toxicity.
Because of those limits, there can be no daily or weekly maintenance which would keep the chemicals in your scalp long enough for them to grow substantial hair.
So we have a treatment that has a huge, self-imposed, inherent limitation.
In other words, I think we have a very weak treatment here and it’s not worth getting excited about.
If and when it ever comes to the market in someplace other than Singapore or the Philippines, it will have so many strings attached and will also have been superseded by other products which are much better, that everyone will have forgotten about it by then.
Histogen is NOT worth getting excited about!!!
too much of just about anything can cause cancer. Too much red meat can cause cancer but I’m sure you 3 eat red meat regularly. I do imagine that TOO MUCH of Histogen’s HSC might, and I say MIGHT cause some cancer but it doesn’t require TOO MUCH HSC to regrow hair.
And btw, you have not demonstrated one case wherein adding Wnt7a caused cancer. All you have done is demonstrate some hypothesis that Wnt modulation might play a role in cancer. So what? Hypothesis often fails to live up to its’ advance conjecture. Scientists postulate and then they do the actual studies and then sometimes they find out their hypothesizing was spot on but sometimes they hypothesize and then they do their actual testing and they find out that their initial ideas were incorrect.
Also, Hairman your study shows that it’s a REDUCTION of Wnt7a which may be linked to lung cancer, not an increase of Wnt7a. Give me a break! Your study actually supports the idea that Histogen’s HSC may inhibit cancers rather than causing cancers. And you say I can’t understand stuff. What a joke! You set out to prove that Wnt7a causes cancer but you link a study showing that Wnt7a actually inhibits cancer. Which supports what I’ve been saying all along - that as we age, and produce less Wnt7a, we have more cancers.
And KO you’re silly study refers to Wnt1 and Wnt5a. Your study indicates that Wnt1 over-expression may be related to some cancers whereas Wnt5a may inhibit some cancers. Doesn’t this show that some Wnts are likley carcinogens while other Wnts are not? And if you agree with that concept then you should be able to figure out that even though some Wnt’s may activate some cancers that does not mean that Wnt7a does so. And then after you come to that conclusion take a close look at Hairman’s study (the atudy he cited to prove that Wnt7a causes cancer but actually demonstrates that Wnt7a inhibits lung cancer). And then think about the study I cited earlier that shows that Wnt7a inhibits another type of cancer.
- Here’s Hairman’s study:
- And here’s another study for you to chew on:
http://www.pnas.org/content/100/18/10429.long
Note that it says: Our findings provide support that E-cadherin induction by WNT/β-catenin signaling is an evolutionarily conserved pathway operative in lung cancer cells, and that loss of WNT7a expression may be important in lung cancer development or progression by its effects on E-cadherin.
- And here’s another study showing that a decrease in Wnt7a is linked to leukemia:
And what should be of particular interest to that silly @ss KO is the following quote from the study:
By restoring WNT7A expression in leukemia-derived cells, we were able to demonstrate that WNT7a inhibits cell growth. A similar effect was observed when a recombinant human WNT7a protein was used. Interestingly, restoration of WNT7A expression in Jurkat cells did not activate the canonical Wnt/β-catenin pathway.
I guess this means that adding Wnt7a might not activate the Wnt/β-catenin pathway huh KO 
- And here’s another study you all might find interesting:
Please take close look at the paragraph that says:
Previous studies have demonstrated the correlation between Wnt proteins’ expression and prognosis in various human carcinomas [17, 18]. In the present study, we examined the status of Wnt7a expression in normal, hyperplastic, and malignant endometrium and analyzed its possible roles in the clinical outcome of patients with endometrial cancer. We could demonstrate for the first time that lost or reduced Wnt7a expression was correlated with disease progression and Wnt7a might be a useful prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma.
- And here is another interesting study:
- And here is another interesting study:
Pay special attention to the part that says:
In summary, genetic and epigenetic alterations play a key role in silencing of the WNT7A gene in clear cell RCC. Moreover, restoration of WNT7A expression inhibits the growth of RCC cell lines. Therefore, we propose that inactivation of the WNT7A gene may play an important role in the development of clear cell RCC.
There are a lot of reasons to get excited about Histogen’s HSC. A reduced risk of some cancers are some of the reasons to get excited about Histogen’s HSC.
I
Said
No
Text.
» There are a lot of reasons to get excited about Histogen’s HSC. A reduced
» risk of some cancers are some of the reasons to get excited about
» Histogen’s HSC.
gold :rotfl:
The whole Wnt pathway issue is exceedingly complicated. It can’t be simplified down to a few links and soundbytes. It’s much more complicated than that. Some components of the Wnt pathway are clearly implicated in cancer induction. Of that there’s no doubt. The problem is the whole series of interlocked pathways is so complicated that the practical upshot of all this is that it will receive an immensely high degree of FDA scrutiny, which will vastly prolong the FDA’s review of HSC.
Also, remember HSC is not just one drug – it’s a cocktail of multiple growth factors.
Other growth factors in the mix, like VEGF, are also implicated in cancer promotion.
VEGF is thought to promote cancer growth by facilitating growth of new blood vessels which feed the fast-growing cancers.
Add all these growth factors together and you have a VERY volatile, high-risk mixture that the FDA will be scrutinizing for years…
Also, Jarjarbinx you seem to be arguing that what HSC does is simply restore growth factors that are present in sufficient quantities in adults who don’t have MPB, but aren’t present in adults with MPB.
That is completely wrong.
HSC isn’t restoring growth factors that exist in normal quantities in adults without MPB. HSC is restoring growth factors to their levels in EMBRYONIC TISSUES. Adults who don’t have MPB don’t have anywhere near these levels of the growth factors.
The whole focus of HSC was initially to induce brand new (de novo) hair growth by restoring cellular growth factors to EMBRYONIC LEVELS.
That is an unnatural state in an adult, period. Whether the adult has MPB, or doesn’t have MPB, it is an equally unnatural state.
Adults weren’t meant to have these growth factors present at embryonic levels, especially for a prolonged period of time, and that explains why Histogen is only doing isolated injections spaced 6 months to a year apart without any provisions for repeating injections more than that.
Restoring embryonic levels of these growth factors to adults, especially for any prolonged period of time, definitely raises the red flag of cancer risk.
-
As I’ve said at least a half a dozen times, they are already doing repeat injections. Part of the study they recently completed included having some test subjects get repeat injections 6 weeks after their original injections.
-
They might do even more repeat injections during the next study.
-
You yourself said:
“HSC isn’t restoring growth factors that exist in normal quantities in
adults without MPB. HSC is restoring growth factors to their levels in
EMBRYONIC TISSUES. Adults who don’t have MPB don’t have anywhere
near these levels of the growth factors.”
Roger_that while some cancers do occur in young adults, cancer in newborn babies is virtually unheard of because it’s virtually impossible for embryos to develop cancers. So it seems that by your position that Histogen is returning the growth factor level of these adults to the same level as it was during the embryonic period you yourself are proving that what Histogen’s HSC is doing is making cancer virtually impossible to take place.
- Yea, the whole Wnt pathway is complicated but the only Wnt that Histogen is using is Wnt7a so all that really matters is the Wnt7a pathway and by activating that pathway you reduce the risk of cancers rather than increasing the risk of cancers. I am focused on Wnt7a because that is the only Wnt pathway that Histogen is using but you are focused on the entire Wnt system because, well, you don’t really have a reason why. You just want to mislead and misconstrue the results by focusing on the entire Wnt system even though it’s scientifically unsound to do so (since the only Wnt pathway that Histogen is activating is Wnt7a) and you really don’t care if doing so is misleading.
Please Roger-that, can we please focus only on one Wnt, Wnt7a, since that is the one that Histogen is using.
-
And during the embryonic period I think that the body infuses these growth factors and proteins more than once or twice. I think that the body is infusing the skin with these growth factors and proteins in regular infusions throughout the embryonic period. I think that this shows that the human body can take more than the initial injection plus one repeat injection. I hope they do increase the number of injections from 2 to at least 4 over a 6-month period. I would do one once a month for 6 months if I could. Since I could handle it when I was a baby I can handle it now.
-
And one last thing: in a different post you raised the issue that all of these other drugs require once a day administration but I want to add to your point that all of these other drugs require once a day administration. None of these other drugs can produce the results that Histogen can with just one injection date and one repeat injection date (total of 2 injection dates). If they could do that then they would just inject them into you 4 - 6 times over a 6 month period rather than have you use these drugs once or even twice daily. The weakness of these other treatments force the drug companies to test their efficacy for daily use. On the other hand, the power of HSC allows Histogen to test for efficacy for infrequent use because infrequent use is all that’s necessary for hair regrowth.
» The whole Wnt pathway issue is exceedingly complicated. It can’t be
» simplified down to a few links and soundbytes. It’s much more complicated
» than that. Some components of the Wnt pathway are clearly implicated in
» cancer induction. Of that there’s no doubt. The problem is the whole
» series of interlocked pathways is so complicated that the practical upshot
» of all this is that it will receive an immensely high degree of FDA
» scrutiny, which will vastly prolong the FDA’s review of HSC.
»
» Also, remember HSC is not just one drug – it’s a cocktail of multiple
» growth factors.
»
» Other growth factors in the mix, like VEGF, are also implicated in
» cancer promotion.
»
» VEGF is thought to promote cancer growth by facilitating growth of new
» blood vessels which feed the fast-growing cancers.
»
» Add all these growth factors together and you have a VERY volatile,
» high-risk mixture that the FDA will be scrutinizing for years…
»
» Also, Jarjarbinx you seem to be arguing that what HSC does is simply
» restore growth factors that are present in sufficient quantities in adults
» who don’t have MPB, but aren’t present in adults with MPB.
»
» That is completely wrong.
»
» HSC isn’t restoring growth factors that exist in normal quantities in
» adults without MPB. HSC is restoring growth factors to their levels in
» EMBRYONIC TISSUES. Adults who don’t have MPB don’t have anywhere
» near these levels of the growth factors.
»
» The whole focus of HSC was initially to induce brand new (de novo) hair
» growth by restoring cellular growth factors to EMBRYONIC LEVELS.
»
» That is an unnatural state in an adult, period. Whether the adult has
» MPB, or doesn’t have MPB, it is an equally unnatural state.
»
» Adults weren’t meant to have these growth factors present at embryonic
» levels, especially for a prolonged period of time, and that explains why
» Histogen is only doing isolated injections spaced 6 months to a year apart
» without any provisions for repeating injections more than that.
»
» Restoring embryonic levels of these growth factors to adults, especially
» for any prolonged period of time, definitely raises the red flag of cancer
» risk.
» » There are a lot of reasons to get excited about Histogen’s HSC. A
» reduced
» » risk of some cancers are some of the reasons to get excited about
» » Histogen’s HSC.
»
» gold :rotfl:
Hair(wo)man, I did find where Wnt7a may be promoting some ovarian cancer development at the metastasizing level. But I’m not 100% sure of that, and a person may have to already have this specific type of ovarian cancer in mid-stage form in order for Wnt7a to worsen the cancer. But even if it turns out that Wnt7a plays a proliferation role in late-stage, poor-prognosis (one type) of ovarian cancer my attitude would be that, that just means that if a patient has this one type of cancer in its’ mid stage form already then that one person can’t use Histogen’s HSC. It would mean that HSC would be contraindicated in those rare circumstances.
And then there’s also the issue of whether or not injecting Wnt7a into the scalp of the person would really lead to any finding its’ way into the person’s ovaries anyway. And even if some would find its’ way into the person’s ovaries the person would already have to have at least mid-stage ovarian cancer in order for there to be any possibility that the injected Wnt7a would worsen the situation. And it would require enough Wnt7a to make a difference.
HSC worsening this one type of ovarian cancer is iffy Hot Pants, but in your case you could acquire ovarian cancer so I can understand you having some concerns about activating metastasizing ovarian cancer in your ovaries:rotfl:.
Maybe you shouldn’t use HSC because if you already have mid-stage ovarian cancer (of this one specific type) you don’t want to risk worsening it Hot Pants:rotfl:.
» 5. And during the embryonic period I think that the body infuses these
» growth factors and proteins more than once or twice. I think that the body
» is infusing the skin with these growth factors and proteins in regular
» infusions throughout the embryonic period. I think that this shows that the
» human body can take more than the initial injection plus one repeat
» injection. I hope they do increase the number of injections from 2 to at
» least 4 over a 6-month period. I would do one once a month for 6 months if
» I could. Since I could handle it when I was a baby I can handle it now.
be a man and just admit that you are wrong… defending your position is hopeless.