You guys keep mentioning 60 and 70%. Where is that information? The way I read the report is that 60 or 70% of the participates responded to the treatment and of those responders they had 50% success of terminal hairs. ANYBODY ELSE READING IT THIS WAY?
» you probably had never even sensed
» » that it was thinning yet.
»
» Absolutely bang on. If even 60 percent density could be achieved with good
» coverage on a previously bald scalp it would be an amazing result. I
» personally would be 32 if this comes to fruition. At 32 i dont need or want
» a pre teen hairine. I long for a nice manageable head of hair with good
» coverage and decent density.
» You guys keep mentioning 60 and 70%. Where is that information? The
» way I read the report is that 60 or 70% of the participates responded to
» the treatment and of those responders they had 50% success of terminal
» hairs. ANYBODY ELSE READING IT THIS WAY?
»
»
»
» » you probably had never even sensed
» » » that it was thinning yet.
» »
» » Absolutely bang on. If even 60 percent density could be achieved with
» good
» » coverage on a previously bald scalp it would be an amazing result. I
» » personally would be 32 if this comes to fruition. At 32 i dont need or
» want
» » a pre teen hairine. I long for a nice manageable head of hair with good
» » coverage and decent density.
basically speculating or hoping that it will reach those figures
I am very satisfied with this new info.
Note the percentage of responders. It was just 30% in phase I, and now they have reached 70% in Phase II with one of the formulations. I am sure they will reach almost 100% responders in Phase III.
Also, it seems that they are not using a 1-hair per injection approach. the new hairs appear at random sites, not at pre-planned locations. This suggests that they are growing several hairs per injection.
The “before-after” photos are not impressive, but at least they are simple and easy to understand.
The direction of the new hairs seems correct. How is this possible if they are not using scaffolds? Looks to me this is rejuvenation.
Vellus count is increased, this points to neogenesis, or rejuvination of “sub-vellus” hair.
On the dark side, they don’t say anything about “cycling”.
Overall, it is ovious that they are trying very hard. I am very satisfied.
I couldn’t agree more. I have been following this forum (and other forums) for over 5 years now. This is the most solid and detailed trial info I have seen the entire time.
If you watch Washenik’s presentation, he states that they are currently testing one of four different formulations, and they expect increased efficacy from each of the next three formulations. He goes on to say the most effective formulation will be chosen as the product for market.
This is awesome. They have now achieved almost 70% efficacy on their first formulation, and they expect the next three to be better still. Plus they have four chances at making this work. There is still a long way to go before this is on the market, but I am pretty excited about this. Aderans is our best chance at a new treatment by far.
» I am very satisfied with this new info.
» Note the percentage of responders. It was just 30% in phase I, and now
» they have reached 70% in Phase II with one of the formulations. I am sure
» they will reach almost 100% responders in Phase III.
» Also, it seems that they are not using a 1-hair per injection approach.
» the new hairs appear at random sites, not at pre-planned locations. This
» suggests that they are growing several hairs per injection.
» The “before-after” photos are not impressive, but at least they are simple
» and easy to understand.
» The direction of the new hairs seems correct. How is this possible if they
» are not using scaffolds? Looks to me this is rejuvenation.
» Vellus count is increased, this points to neogenesis, or rejuvination of
» “sub-vellus” hair.
»
» On the dark side, they don’t say anything about “cycling”.
»
»
» Overall, it is ovious that they are trying very hard. I am very
» satisfied.
»
» »
» Aderans Co., Ltd.
mmhh. I think the 70% response is for the 4th formulation. Look at the pdf.
They have tested 4 formulations so far. One in Phase 1, and three in phase 2.
» I couldn’t agree more. I have been following this forum (and other forums)
» for over 5 years now. This is the most solid and detailed trial info I
» have seen the entire time.
»
» If you watch Washenik’s presentation, he states that they are currently
» testing one of four different formulations, and they expect increased
» efficacy from each of the next three formulations. He goes on to say the
» most effective formulation will be chosen as the product for market.
»
» This is awesome. They have now achieved almost 70% efficacy on their first formulation, and they expect the next three to be better still. Plus
» they have four chances at making this work. There is still a long way to
» go before this is on the market, but I am pretty excited about this.
» Aderans is our best chance at a new treatment by far.
Nah, BaldIsMe is correct. The 4 formulations on the graph do not correspond to the 4 actual formulations that are intended to increase efficacy. You’ll notice on the next slide that the trials for JiGami C, N and CN have not even started yet. That means they couldn’t possibly have 18 week data.
» You’ll notice
» on the next slide that the trials for Ji Gami N, C and CN have not
» even started yet. That means they couldn’t possibly have 18 week data.
» 2014 best case, wow. Considering Washenik said end 2009 in 2005, i would
» not be surprised the trials reach an end something close to 2020.
»
» woo-hoo, roll on hm
Basically – you’re right …
Dr. K. Washenik – March 2007:
DIALOG EXCERPT
“This whole concept IS already in clinical testing. There is … we have a
group based in Atlanta and Philadelphia research labs and there is a
research group [Intercytex] over in the UK that’s working on at the same
time.
So depending on who … late 2009 - early 2010"
“Other companies are trying variations of this method. Washenik said he once predicted a treatment would be ready in five years. “But at this point I think it’s better not to make an estimate because I’m really not sure,” he said.”
» » 2014 best case, wow. Considering Washenik said end 2009 in 2005, i would
» » not be surprised the trials reach an end something close to 2020.
» »
» » woo-hoo, roll on hm
»
» Basically – you’re right …
»
» -----------------------
» Dr. K. Washenik – March 2007:
»
» DIALOG EXCERPT
»
» “This whole concept IS already in clinical testing. There is … we have a
» group based in Atlanta and Philadelphia research labs and there is a
» research group [Intercytex] over in the UK that’s working on at the same
» time.
» So depending on who … late 2009 - early 2010"
»
» Source:
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair_multiplication/washenik_tv_interview.htm
» -----------------------
»
» Just 1 year later …
»
» -----------------------
» Dr. K. Washenik – March 2008:
»
» EXCERPT
»
» “Other companies are trying variations of this method.
» Washenik said he once predicted a treatment would be ready in five years.
» “But at this point I think it’s better not to make an estimate because
» I’m really not sure,” he said.”
»
» Source:
» http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/07/BU4IVBIV2.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0puChwMlx
» -----------------------
»
» Reason(s) for the “I’m really not sure …” just 1 year later:
»
» Additional NEW scientifically approaches through Dr. Anthony
» Atala’s work …
»
» AND finally, Histogen with their technology, has become a very SERIOUS
» competitor as well during this time …
Iam honestly not into interviews any more, cause all the time they give moronic answers and give us stupid timelines.
I say “If the results will be awesome they wil star earlier”
If the results suck, hm is done and we have to wait for something else or use the gho technique.
But nevertheless Iron Man is right about the C and the N.
The one will provide hair from the scratch and the other will regenerate all follicles which are functional.
» BTW - The question thereby is, what for the “N” and the “C”
» stands ?
»
» N = “Neogenesis” (with scaffolds - cognisably
» new hairs from scatch) ?
»
» C = Just “Cell-injection” (without scaffolds -
» just to evoke hair growth through re-programmed cells) ?
Maybe C is for “Culture” or “Cell Culture” (focusing on the harvest of cells and the culture protocol) whereas “N” is for Neogenesis (what you said, basically studying how new hair grows) ?
» » BTW - The question thereby is, what for the “N” and the
» “C”
» » stands ?
» »
» » N = “Neogenesis” (with scaffolds -
» cognisably
» » new hairs from scatch) ?
» »
» » C = Just “Cell-injection” (without scaffolds
» -
» » just to evoke hair growth through re-programmed cells) ?
»
» Maybe C is for “Culture” or “Cell Culture” (focusing on the harvest of
» cells and the culture protocol) whereas “N” is for Neogenesis (what you
» said, basically studying how new hair grows) ?
»
» Just my imagination.
speculations as to what C and N stand for are honestly quite ridiculous. There are a zillion possibilities.
» » » BTW - The question thereby is, what for the “N” and the
» » “C”
» » » stands ?
» » »
» » » N = “Neogenesis” (with scaffolds -
» » cognisably
» » » new hairs from scatch) ?
» » »
» » » C = Just “Cell-injection” (without
» scaffolds
» » -
» » » just to evoke hair growth through re-programmed cells) ?
» »
» » Maybe C is for “Culture” or “Cell Culture” (focusing on the harvest of
» » cells and the culture protocol) whereas “N” is for Neogenesis (what you
» » said, basically studying how new hair grows) ?
» »
» » Just my imagination.
»
» speculations as to what C and N stand for are honestly quite ridiculous.
» There are a zillion possibilities.
So be it then, please then tell us the jillion gazillion possible names BUT under one condition
They have to be connected to hair and regeneration
» » » » BTW - The question thereby is, what for the “N” and the
» » » “C”
» » » » stands ?
» » » »
» » » » N = “Neogenesis” (with scaffolds -
» » » cognisably
» » » » new hairs from scatch) ?
» » » »
» » » » C = Just “Cell-injection” (without
» » scaffolds
» » » -
» » » » just to evoke hair growth through re-programmed cells) ?
» » »
» » » Maybe C is for “Culture” or “Cell Culture” (focusing on the harvest
» of
» » » cells and the culture protocol) whereas “N” is for Neogenesis (what
» you
» » » said, basically studying how new hair grows) ?
» » »
» » » Just my imagination.
» »
» » speculations as to what C and N stand for are honestly quite
» ridiculous.
» » There are a zillion possibilities.
»
» So be it then, please then tell us the jillion gazillion possible names
» BUT under one condition
»
» 1) They have to be connected to hair and regeneration
C and N are mere letters and must not even comply to hair related words. We know nothing about their internal notation. Perhaps they are name abbreviations of the person in charge for each the trail, perhaps it has something to do with the location where the trail is taking place, or maybe N and C denote the block of the building in which the trails are taking place. But most probably it is something completely different. As said before… speculation on a single letter is simply ridiculous.
» C and N are mere letters and must not even comply to hair related words.
» We know nothing about their internal notation. Perhaps they are name
» abbreviations of the person in charge for each the trail, perhaps it has
» something to do with the location where the trail is taking place, or maybe
» N and C denote the block of the building in which the trails are taking
» place. But most probably it is something completely different. As said
» before… speculation on a single letter is simply ridiculous
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.
