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

Bad Icx-trc news


#1

http://www.investis.com/icx/pdfs/hair_morphogenesis.pdf

If anyone still think that ICX-TRC will reach the market or even go through phase 3 should read this article written by Kemp et al 2008. They pretty much talk trash about icx-trc which they dont see as efficient or suitable as treatments for humans and the need for something better and more effective (protohairs). Here are some quotes:

“Hair regeneration using implanted follicular cells has been demonstrated experimentally in a variety of animal models, but the methods are inefficient. A rapid and efficient method of hair regeneration is necessary for human hair restoration.”

“However, the means to implant DP cells such that hair formation is efficiently and reliably induced coontinues to be a difficult challenge.”

“Thus, while these systems are valuable for demonstrating the principle of hair induction by DP cells, they do not provide a means to efficiently hair in the human scalp.

So either they can use the protohair technology in phase 3 (not likely at all) or we wont see any hair growth treatment from ICX in ten years. They are back at square one.


#2

Now we know the contents of the march report!
they simply have nothing to delivered and postponed the non-results to have some cash in the meantime.


#3

» “Hair regeneration using implanted follicular cells has been demonstrated
» experimentally in a variety of animal models, but the methods are
» inefficient
. A rapid and efficient method of hair regeneration is
» necessary for human hair restoration.”
»

The “means to implant” remain a challange.

» “However, the means to implant DP cells such that hair formation is
» efficiently and reliably induced coontinues to be a difficult
» challenge
.”

The following text is Not referring to TRC. If you look at the beginning of paragraph it says “The published experimental systems…” Later it mentions three studies, only one of which is from Intercytex.
» “Thus, while these systems are valuable for demonstrating the principle of
» hair induction by DP cells, they do not provide a means to efficiently
» hair in the human scalp.

I’m Not saying that TRC would or would not work. But then again, how do you define “works”?. Dr.Kemp has always been saying that for first generation TRC an HT would be required. I think it’s fair to say that first generation isn’t going to give anyone their teen hair density back. However, it could help generate few thousand extra hair on the scalp. Which for many NW5+ still is a good deal.


#4

Proto-hairs is their new teaser(wich is ok, they have made some research in that field, anyway)to attract new investors, in march they will said TRC is a total failure but we have now Proto-hairs and it’s working but we need some more funds to our researchs and blah,blah,blah…you know the rest!


#5

Let me tell you what ICX should really be learning from all this:

Offer people a slight bit of regrowth via something boring like dermabrasion, and nobody’s interested.

Offer that same amount of regrowth, with a HUGE price increase, and being called “hair multiplication” because of some failed attempt to boost the results with DP cells . . . and people will line up for it.


#6

» Proto-hairs is their new teaser(wich is ok, they have made some research in
» that field, anyway)to attract new investors, in march they will said TRC is
» a total failure but we have now Proto-hairs and it’s working but we need
» some more funds to our researchs and blah,blah,blah…you know the rest!

If they say that TRC was a total failure that would be an Investment suicide. Considering their share price is already dropping like a sack of potatoes, doing so will hit them hard - financially!

As of whether TRC is a total failure - like I said earlier, I don’t think so. Check back any of Dr.Kemp interview he always maintained that first generation TRC would be offered alongside an HT because they probably knew that just implanting DP cells doesn’t make hair grow all over. Still, it grows some hair so if the price is right for the results it offers then I wouldn’t mind getting it.


#7

» » Proto-hairs is their new teaser(wich is ok, they have made some research
» in
» » that field, anyway)to attract new investors, in march they will said TRC
» is
» » a total failure but we have now Proto-hairs and it’s working but we
» need
» » some more funds to our researchs and blah,blah,blah…you know the
» rest!
»
» If they say that TRC was a total failure that would be an Investment
» suicide. Considering their share price is already dropping like a sack of
» potatoes, doing so will hit them hard - financially!
»
» As of whether TRC is a total failure - like I said earlier, I don’t think
» so. Check back any of Dr.Kemp interview he always maintained that first
» generation TRC would be offered alongside an HT because they probably knew
» that just implanting DP cells doesn’t make hair grow all over. Still, it
» grows some hair so if the price is right for the results it offers then I
» wouldn’t mind getting it.

They will not say exactly a total failure, of course ! just that the results are inefficient but hey! you know what? proto-hairs is working …on mouses!
they won’t affraid investors!


#8

Good catch, Z79:
this document proves what we already knew. That TRC was a failure, and ICX executives have been trying to fool us all the time.
Thankfully, Kemp, Teumer and company, keep posting credible info in speciacized magazines. Lets hope there is something solid in this research, and its not just propaganda as I suspect it is.

» http://www.investis.com/icx/pdfs/hair_morphogenesis.pdf
»
» If anyone still think that ICX-TRC will reach the market or even go
» through phase 3 should read this article written by Kemp et al 2008. They
» pretty much talk trash about icx-trc which they dont see as efficient or
» suitable as treatments for humans and the need for something better and
» more effective (protohairs). Here are some quotes:
»
» “Hair regeneration using implanted follicular cells has been demonstrated
» experimentally in a variety of animal models, but the methods are
» inefficient
. A rapid and efficient method of hair regeneration is
» necessary for human hair restoration.”
»
» “However, the means to implant DP cells such that hair formation is
» efficiently and reliably induced coontinues to be a difficult
» challenge
.”
»
» “Thus, while these systems are valuable for demonstrating the principle of
» hair induction by DP cells, they do not provide a means to efficiently
» hair in the human scalp.

»
» So either they can use the protohair technology in phase 3 (not likely at
» all) or we wont see any hair growth treatment from ICX in ten years. They
» are back at square one.


#9

I visited the Gho clinic in Maastricht just before it folded, ostensibly to get info on HT but really to find out about HM.

The surgeon said research had stalled because for every 100 injections they could get 100 or nil new hairs. They never new what growth rate they would get for any given client and it was impossible to offer a commercial service.

Intercytex are probably at the same stage. They are getting wildly variable regrowth to the extent of it not being a viable offering.

Maybe Aderans two cell approach will work better or perhaps proto hair will be available in er five years


#10

» I visited the Gho clinic in Maastricht just before it folded, ostensibly to
» get info on HT but really to find out about HM.
»
» The surgeon said research had stalled because for every 100 injections
» they could get 100 or nil new hairs. They never new what growth rate they
» would get for any given client and it was impossible to offer a commercial
» service.

Thats an incredible explanation. If, as Gho says, its a question of chance, and the lucky ones get 100% results, and the unlucky ones get 0% tesults, I am sure many people would be ready to play the game. In fact, Gho could offer a partial money-back guarantee for those unlucky, and charge more for the lucky ones.
If Gho is not offering the treatment, it is because he is unable to get decent results for any patient. That is why he has not posted any photos.

» Intercytex are probably at the same stage. They are getting wildly
» variable regrowth to the extent of it not being a viable offering.

The document just posted by Z79 shows that the result is always bad, for all patients. That is why this treatment can’t be sold to the public.

»
» Maybe Aderans two cell approach will work better or perhaps proto hair
» will be available in er five years

ARI is our best chance right now. They are using several cells, and scaffolds too (I think), and most importantly, they are engaged in credible trials, with many trialists.


#11

Ive said this before ICX was a joke. They WILL not have a hair cloning procedure out period. Not 5,10,100 years.
Now our only hope if follica and aderans (although im skeptical about them as well). We also have regenica but due to lawsuit I think it’s over.
Either way a cure WILL NOT BE HERE IN 5-10 YEARS IMO atleast 20.
BUT in the meantime why not turn our focus to an intercyrex product that actually came out http://www.vavelta.com/

why not get some of our UK bros to get their scar revised with this stuff?


#12

» Ive said this before ICX was a joke. They WILL not have a hair cloning
» procedure out period. Not 5,10,100 years.
» Now our only hope if follica and aderans (although im skeptical about them
» as well). We also have regenica but due to lawsuit I think it’s over.
» Either way a cure WILL NOT BE HERE IN 5-10 YEARS IMO atleast 20.
» BUT in the meantime why not turn our focus to an intercyrex product that
» actually came out http://www.vavelta.com/
»
» why not get some of our UK bros to get their scar revised with this stuff?

IMO, Vavelta has also been a failure. It has been commercially launched, but they don’t post any photos.


#13

» IMO, Vavelta has also been a failure. It has been commercially launched,
» but they don’t post any photos.

Yes It’s a failure, but pics of this product exist:

As you can see, it’s a completely useless product.


#14

» » IMO, Vavelta has also been a failure. It has been commercially launched,
» » but they don’t post any photos.
»
» Yes It’s a failure, but pics of this product exist:
»
» http://www.courthouseclinics.com/vavelta.asp
»
» As you can see, it’s a completely useless product.

Thanks for the photos!
They are the first Vavelta photos I have seen.

After paying a bit of attention, I can clearly see that the photos have been taken in a completely misleading fashion:
-the “before photos” are taken with harsh illumination, projected from a deep angle so that it projects shadows on every imperfection on the skin, magnifying it.
-the “after photos” have been taken with fuller illumination, which fills every pit and corner on the skin.

example:


Of course this can hardly be by chance. Most probably it has been intentional, with the intention of mislead and exaggerate the suppossed benefits of Vavelta.

Yes, it appears to be some benefit, but I can’t tell, unless the comparison has been done in identical conditions.

Intercytex is dissapointing me more and more and more…


#15

» The surgeon said research had stalled because for every 100 injections
» they could get 100 or nil new hairs. They never new what growth rate they
» would get for any given client and it was impossible to offer a commercial
» service.

I’m sure the same is happening with TRC i.e. they are getting really inconsistent results. On the other hand, it means that few lucky people would get really good & permanent results from TRC.


#16

» » The surgeon said research had stalled because for every 100 injections
» » they could get 100 or nil new hairs. They never new what growth rate
» they
» » would get for any given client and it was impossible to offer a
» commercial
» » service.
»
» I’m sure the same is happening with TRC i.e. they are getting really
» inconsistent results. On the other hand, it means that few lucky people
» would get really good & permanent results from TRC.

CORRECTION: NOONE WOULD GET REALLY GOOD AND PERMANENT RESULTS. LETS SEE IF YOU CAN UNDERSTAND IT ONCE AND FOR ALL.
Think for a moment: if 5% got really good, permanent results, and the rest would get in-between results, that would still be a step forward, and many people would be ready to pay for it and take the chance.
This would mean that 1 out of 20 bald guys would get a full head of hair.
So, in clinical trials, there would be some trialists with full heads of hair, and that would be a huge success making headlines.

But this is oviously not the case.


#17

» » » The surgeon said research had stalled because for every 100 injections
» » » they could get 100 or nil new hairs. They never new what growth rate
» » they
» » » would get for any given client and it was impossible to offer a
» » commercial
» » » service.
» »
» » I’m sure the same is happening with TRC i.e. they are getting really
» » inconsistent results. On the other hand, it means that few lucky people
» » would get really good & permanent results from TRC.
»
» CORRECTION: NOONE WOULD GET REALLY GOOD AND PERMANENT RESULTS. LETS SEE IF
» YOU CAN UNDERSTAND IT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

That’s a bold assertion, it’s supposed to be permanent because the DP cells are from permanent hairs! Unless there is something wrong with Dr.Kemp’s understanding of the science, ANY hair that you regrow as a result of TRC should be permanent. Then why can’t anyone get good and permanent results?

» Think for a moment: if 5% got really good, permanent results, and the rest
» would get in-between results, that would still be a step forward, and many
» people would be ready to pay for it and take the chance.
» This would mean that 1 out of 20 bald guys would get a full head of hair.

Just what I said, few lucky would get good regrowth and others won’t.

» So, in clinical trials, there would be some trialists with full heads of
» hair, and that would be a huge success making headlines.

They haven’t done clinical trials on entire-heads, they only did 1000 injections. 100 on bald areas and 900 on thinning areas, so why are you expecting any headlines regarding full regrowth?


#18

» » » IMO, Vavelta has also been a failure. It has been commercially
» launched,
» » » but they don’t post any photos.
» »
» » Yes It’s a failure, but pics of this product exist:
» »
» » http://www.courthouseclinics.com/vavelta.asp
» »
» » As you can see, it’s a completely useless product.
»
» Thanks for the photos!
» They are the first Vavelta photos I have seen.
»
» After paying a bit of attention, I can clearly see that the photos have
» been taken in a completely misleading fashion:
» -the “before photos” are taken with harsh illumination, projected from a
» deep angle so that it projects shadows on every imperfection on the skin,
» magnifying it.
» -the “after photos” have been taken with fuller illumination, which fills
» every pit and corner on the skin.
»
» example:
»
»
»
»
» Of course this can hardly be by chance. Most probably it has been
» intentional, with the intention of mislead and exaggerate the suppossed
» benefits of Vavelta.
»
» Yes, it appears to be some benefit, but I can’t tell, unless the
» comparison has been done in identical conditions.
»
» Intercytex is dissapointing me more and more and more…

If Vavelta is as ineffective as Isolagen, it’s a complete waste of time and money. And that’s from experience.
I can’t say that I got ANY benefits from Isolagen. The most I can hope for is that it will maintain my skin condition for a few years but there is nothing actually tangible to support any positive claims.


#19

Baccy, did you get Isolagen for acne scars? did it deliver any noticable results?


#20

» » CORRECTION: NOONE WOULD GET REALLY GOOD AND PERMANENT
» RESULTS. LETS SEE IF
» » YOU CAN UNDERSTAND IT ONCE AND FOR ALL.
»
» That’s a bold assertion, it’s supposed to be permanent because the DP
» cells are from permanent hairs! Unless there is something wrong with
» Dr.Kemp’s understanding of the science, ANY hair that you regrow as a
» result of TRC should be permanent. Then why can’t anyone get good and
» permanent results?

I meant that noone will get both things at the same time: Good results, and at the same time permanent.
would mean that 1 out of 20 bald guys would get a full head of

» Just what I said, few lucky would get good regrowth and others won’t.

No, there are no such “lucky individuals”. The results suck, for everyone.
Otherwise they would be trying to finetune the technique, in order to improve the consistency. But they have abandoned TRC, and now suppesedly trying protohairs.

» They haven’t done clinical trials on entire-heads, they only did 1000
» injections. 100 on bald areas and 900 on thinning areas, so why are you
» expecting any headlines regarding full regrowth?

I mean that if the technique allowed to get full heads of hair, no matter if only for 5% of the trialists, they would try to get one of these “lucky individuals”, give him a full head of hair, and present him to the investors so that they buy stocks.