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

Cotsarelis said 5-10years if we are lucky


#1

16 May 2007

“If we’re lucky, I think it’s possible we’ll have some new ways to treat hair loss and bad scars in five to 10 years,” Cotsarelis told LiveScience. “And not just the hair loss, but also thinning hair.”

may be he refered few years as 5-10 years.

and another negative thing,

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10239452

But Chuong says there’s another factor. In order to see the new hair, Cotsarelis had to make a fairly large wound and leave it open. The new hair didn’t grow when the wound was smaller. Chuong says that may explain why doctors don’t see new hair growing in patients with large wounds.

“People would try to get the wound closed, as fast as you can. So that in a way, (they would) make the condition not ideal for hair regeneration,” Chuong says. The wound has to be kept open long enough for the hair follicles to appear.

So the bad news for humans who might like to grow a little hair is that for the moment, at least, a substantial wound appears to be necessary. But the good news, says Cotsarelis, is that it may be possible to figure out how to switch on the molecular pathways that trigger hair growth without inflicting an injury.

After reading this,

I have a strong feeling that it won’t work on humans…

any thoughts?


#2

Outdated info. Even May of 2007 was a pretty long time ago in folica-years.

It’s already well-known that dermabrasion is enough to cause follicle regeneration. Dermatologists have reported it for years. And Cots himself is part of the Folica people who patented their method using . . . wait for it . . . dermabrasion.

We know they’d headed for clinical trials (if they haven’t started already).

But they wouldn’t even be trying to develop a method of hair regrowth if it needed gaping wounds everywhere for hair to grow. That would be absolutely 100% impractical to sell. Doing that, whatever hair they regrew would be outweighed by the fact that the patient’s entire scalp was now one huge uninterrupted scar.


#3

You pretty much answered your own concern:

"But the good news, says Cotsarelis, is that it may be possible to figure out how to switch on the molecular pathways that trigger hair growth without inflicting an injury.


#4

Cal,

Im having zero luck in obtaining getfitinib or arava (or any of the other drugs listed in the patent). Have you bought any? Where did you find it w/o prescript?

Ive found a place or two, but they wont accept my orders for “technical difficulties”, which I think means they wont ship to the USA because of customs. None of those drugs is available w/o a prescript that I know of…


#5

nice news… nothing before 2020. Well ! fu*kkkkkkk


#6

» I have a strong feeling that it won’t work on humans…
»
» any thoughts?

I’m confident it will work, but he’s right when he says 5-10 years. If lucky.


#7

» Cal,
»
» Im having zero luck in obtaining getfitinib or arava (or any of the other
» drugs listed in the patent). Have you bought any? Where did you find it w/o
» prescript?
»
» Ive found a place or two, but they wont accept my orders for “technical
» difficulties”, which I think means they wont ship to the USA because of
» customs. None of those drugs is available w/o a prescript that I know
» of…

post the links, if everything fails for you I can try to order some and redirect it. I’m intersted myself as well so I’ll be trying to order anyway.


#8

» Cal,
»
» Im having zero luck in obtaining getfitinib or arava (or any of the other
» drugs listed in the patent). Have you bought any? Where did you find it w/o
» prescript?
»
» Ive found a place or two, but they wont accept my orders for “technical
» difficulties”, which I think means they wont ship to the USA because of
» customs. None of those drugs is available w/o a prescript that I know
» of…

I have done two orders from goldpharma.com and received within five days, but I live in Europe.


#9

» 16 May 2007
» http://www.livescience.com/health/070516_hair_hope.html
»
» “If we’re lucky, I think it’s possible we’ll have some new ways to treat
» hair loss and bad scars in five to 10 years,” Cotsarelis told LiveScience.
» “And not just the hair loss, but also thinning hair.”
»
» may be he refered few years as 5-10 years.
»
» and another negative thing,
»
» http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10239452
»
» But Chuong says there’s another factor. In order to see the new hair,
» Cotsarelis had to make a fairly large wound and leave it open. The new hair
» didn’t grow when the wound was smaller. Chuong says that may explain why
» doctors don’t see new hair growing in patients with large wounds.
»
» “People would try to get the wound closed, as fast as you can. So that in
» a way, (they would) make the condition not ideal for hair regeneration,”
» Chuong says. The wound has to be kept open long enough for the hair
» follicles to appear.
»
» So the bad news for humans who might like to grow a little hair is that
» for the moment, at least, a substantial wound appears to be necessary. But
» the good news, says Cotsarelis, is that it may be possible to figure out
» how to switch on the molecular pathways that trigger hair growth without
» inflicting an injury.
»
»
» After reading this,
»
» I have a strong feeling that it won’t work on humans…
»
» any thoughts?

So how have we missed this article for so long?? I don’t understand where they are quoted as saying 5 to 10 years then on tv they say as little as three years.


#10

» It’s already well-known that dermabrasion is enough to cause follicle
» regeneration. Dermatologists have reported it for years.

cal, are you sure they think this is follicle regeneration, or is it brand new follicles?

anyway, where is this info published? can you give us a source for the ‘follicle regeneration from dermabrasion’ thing? i mean one which specifically says it’s follicle regeneration as opposed to anything else.

this information that was posted is most of the reason why i don’t think much will come from this wounding stuff anytime soon, or in a reasonable waiting time for us. i think the whole thing is pretty theoretical for now, as opposed to being something which is confirmed.

yeah, some of their animal experiments seemed to show some growth, and yes, given all the right conditions and a big advance in their knowledge, plus a lot of time (years) for clinical trials, everything could conceivably come together to yield a treatment that works… but definitely not any time soon!

and for all u haters out there who want to keep hatin’ on baldbaby and say i’m a whiner or too negative, i say just keep on saying that, i don’t care.

i am NOT saying there won’t be a cure for mpb. DEF not saying that!!! all i’m saying is that from icx or follica, it will not come any time soon.

what part of that don’t some of y’all understand?

this means you, reverando.


baldbaby. givin’ it large since the 0-8.

“all the vatos, down por vida homeboys”.


#11

with what icx and follica have “shown” us so far, i don’t think there’s enough there to get excited about.

i MAY be wrong but that 's the way it looks to me, on the whole!


#12

» » It’s already well-known that dermabrasion is enough to cause follicle
» » regeneration. Dermatologists have reported it for years.
»

cal, are you sure they think this is follicle regeneration, or is it brand
new follicles?

anyway, where is this info published? can you give us a source for the
’follicle regeneration from dermabrasion’ thing? i mean one which
specifically says it’s follicle regeneration as opposed to anything else.

this information that was posted is most of the reason why i don’t think
much will come from this wounding stuff anytime soon, or in a reasonable
waiting time for us. i think the whole thing is pretty theoretical for
now, as opposed to being something which is confirmed.

yeah, some of their animal experiments seemed to show some growth, and
yes, given all the right conditions and a big advance in their knowledge,
plus a lot of time (years) for clinical trials, everything could
conceivably come together to yield a treatment that works… but definitely
not any time soon!

and for all u haters out there who want to keep hatin’ on baldbaby and say
i’m a whiner or too negative, i say just keep on saying that, i don’t
care.

i am NOT saying there won’t be a cure for mpb. DEF not saying that!!!
all i’m saying is that from icx or follica, it will not come any time
soon.

what part of that don’t some of y’all understand?

this means you, reverando.


baldbaby. givin’ it large since the 0-8.

“all the vatos, down por vida homeboys”.


#13

Read this. Its experiment number 7 in the patent

EXAMPLE 7

EDIHN-INDUCES NEW HAIR FOLLICLES IN HUMAN SKIN
MATERIALS AND EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

Grafting

[000210] Discarded human, adult scalp from the preauricular area obtained from plastic surgery was grafted onto immunodeficient (scid) mice. The graft was bandaged and allowed to heal, then was used in the wound healing study 3 months after grafting.

RESULTS

[000211 ] To determine whether human skin responded to EDIHN as did mouse skin, human skin was grafted onto SCID (immuno-deficient) mice and subjected to depilation by plucking and wound induction three days later. Seven days following wound induction, formation of new HF was observed in the human skin (Figure 2 IA; arrows indicate new HF) by hematoxylin and eosin staining of paraffin embedded tissue sections.

[000212] In additional experiments, adult human skin was grafted onto mice., abraded, and examined at 7 days post-abrasion. New HF were generated in the human skkx, which mimicked normal hair follicle formation during fetal development, as evidenced by staining for SlOO A6 or S100A4 (Figure 21B).

P-7628-PC

[000213] The results of this Example show that EDIHN can be used to generate hair growth inhuman skin as for mouse skin.

EXAMPLE 8

CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THAT. IN “ADDITIONAL EXPERIMENTS” (WHICH MEANS MORE THAN ONCE) THEY ABRADED HUMAN SKIN AND GOT HUMAN HAIR WHEN IT WAS ON MICE.

SOME OF THE MICE THEY USED WERE GENETICALLY HAIRLESS MICE. MICE WITH NO HAIR ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVING HAIR.

READ BEFORE POSTING

READ BEFORE POSTING

READ BEFORE POSTING


#14

ok, thanks benji.

that experiment 7 refers to “new HF”, not causing “follicle regeneration” which is what cal said has been proven many years ago.

anyway, that of course is promising results but they don’t really tell us how many follicles were created, do they?

i mean it could be two “new” follicles on a huge swath of skin.

i don’t see anything ANYWHERE that shows experimental results that a full, thick head of hair can be grown by dermabrasion.

that’s the core of my problem with this.

there are no experimental results or data ANYWHERE on humans, that shows a bald head being dermabraded (and having chemicals added to it or whatever to stimulate shyte), with the result looking like a promisingly thick crop of hair.

maybe mice growing lots of gray hair.

maybe human skin on a mouse growing like 2 hairs or whatever (obviously it is such a small amount of hair it’s not even worth saying how much… if it was tons of hair, they would have basically said that in the patent, and everywhere else!).

most likely, they were tiny little dinky vellus type hairs, or anemic “terminal” hairs.

definitely not a huge crop of thriving hair.

how do i know this?

if it was a huge thick crop of hair, they would be touting this all over the place, on the media, etc. with lots and lots and lots of pics.

if we had seen such a HUMAN experiment (even human skin on a mouse like in the patent), but growing tons of hair, then i would jump on the bandwagon with y’all and i’d be one of the biggest cheerleaders for follica.

i’d be yelling and screaming positive shyte about follica too.

as it stands right now i’m just not that excited about it.

it seems like a whole lot of people getting really excited over NOTHING, just some speculative claims by a startup company in Mass.

i don’t think u can build a cure on speculative or hypothetical claims.


#15

have you looked at the getfitinib pictures?

The guy with the new hair on his bald scalp? pretty thick

The woman with hairgrowth all over her nose? quite thick

The pictures of the hair germs thickly congealing under the mice skin with wn7a being administered?

They look like quite thick hair will be able to be generated…

But for the sake of argument, lets say the new hair growth is kinda haphazard. You can do this again…and again…and again.

Im just hoping it works well in the donor area, so we have more FUE hair to transplant. That would be enough for me.

Relatively speaking BB, if not Follica, or Acell, or HM…then there will probably not be anything period until gene therapy, which is several decades down the pike. One reason why Im kinda “up” on this, is that I realize if it does not work, it will probably be a long while. One may as well forget it in other words.

There is nothing to talk about in HM at the moment because ICX, Aderans, Phoenixbio and Histogen arent releasing any new info, so discussion logically falls onto follica because their patent is published and is accessible.


#16

» » 16 May 2007
» » http://www.livescience.com/health/070516_hair_hope.html
» »
» » “If we’re lucky, I think it’s possible we’ll have some new ways to
» treat
» » hair loss and bad scars in five to 10 years,” Cotsarelis told
» LiveScience.
» » “And not just the hair loss, but also thinning hair.”
» »
» » may be he refered few years as 5-10 years.
» »
» » and another negative thing,
» »
» » http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10239452
» »
» » But Chuong says there’s another factor. In order to see the new hair,
» » Cotsarelis had to make a fairly large wound and leave it open. The new
» hair
» » didn’t grow when the wound was smaller. Chuong says that may explain
» why
» » doctors don’t see new hair growing in patients with large wounds.
» »
» » “People would try to get the wound closed, as fast as you can. So that
» in
» » a way, (they would) make the condition not ideal for hair
» regeneration,”
» » Chuong says. The wound has to be kept open long enough for the hair
» » follicles to appear.
» »
» » So the bad news for humans who might like to grow a little hair is that
» » for the moment, at least, a substantial wound appears to be necessary.
» But
» » the good news, says Cotsarelis, is that it may be possible to figure
» out
» » how to switch on the molecular pathways that trigger hair growth
» without
» » inflicting an injury.
» »
» »
» » After reading this,
» »
» » I have a strong feeling that it won’t work on humans…
» »
» » any thoughts?
»
»
» So how have we missed this article for so long?? I don’t understand where
» they are quoted as saying 5 to 10 years then on tv they say as little as
» three years.

I think what you saw on tv is more updated. That article was from May 2007. I think somewhere between the fine lines it has to do with making $$ - just my take on it.


#17

thanks, but they wouldn’t let me register because Im in the US


#18

» But they wouldn’t even be trying to develop a method of hair regrowth if
» it needed gaping wounds everywhere for hair to grow. That would be
» absolutely 100% impractical to sell.

I’d buy it.


#19

Everyone:

I’m sorry I left the impression to say that NEW follicle regeneration had been proven a long time ago. It had not as far as I know.

I was just intending to bring up the issue that scalp hair regrowth (of any sort) had been caused by dermabrasion in the past. Derms have reported it. (Heck, the old wives’ tale about shaving your beard & then seeing it grow back thicker . . . it could well be based on this issue.)

I don’t have a good citation for this stuff to whip out. I’m not much for remembering links & sources, I tend to just soak up relevant info from things and then mentally move on.

Benji:

As for the medication, I rolled the dice with “mypills.com” (not “mypills.org” which has complaints) a while back and the generic Arava pills arrived to my USA address after about 3 weeks.

The site looks like it’s a new upstart place in India so there’s no telling for sure about it. The credit card security & stuff generally seemed legit enough not to sell me rat poison & steal my identity. And I could not find a ton of complains about them (or much of any info at all for that matter) anywhere. So I gave it a try.

I have not tried the actual Arava pills yet to know for sure that it’s legit.

Everything about the packages of pills that were delivered at least LOOKS legit to me. The pill sheets are printed with “Torrent Pharmaceuticals” on it, which is a known brand over there. And the quality/consistency of the pills and packaging looks good enough. If the pills are fakes, then they’re top-quality fakes.

If the site is gonna rip me off in some other way with the credit card # or something, then it hasn’t turned up yet so far. My order was originally placed at least two months ago now and there’s no signs of trouble yet.


#20

» have you looked at the getfitinib pictures?
»
» The guy with the new hair on his bald scalp? pretty thick
»
» The woman with hairgrowth all over her nose? quite thick
»
»
» The pictures of the hair germs thickly congealing under the mice skin with
» wn7a being administered?
»
»
»
» They look like quite thick hair will be able to be generated…
»
»
»
» But for the sake of argument, lets say the new hair growth is kinda
» haphazard. You can do this again…and again…and again.
»

benji, this is precisely what i’m afraid you WON’T be able to do.

doing it “again and again and again” will most likey be VERY problematic, and i don’t see anyone here talking about that issue…

so on a person with mpb whose hair is ALREADY fragile, you’re gonna do serious dermabrasion “again and again and again”?

you peeps might not think so, but that’ll seriously damage, loosen, and uproot existing hairs and destroy follicles… any old follicles which are still putting out hairs, and any “new” follicles that have just been created by this procedure

don’t tell me repeated dermabrasions isn’t a serious injury to the scalp. i mean using the term “wounding” wasn’t baldbaby’s idea! i believe it was but cotsie baby’s!

my guess is at the end of the day, whatever new hair you create with this procedure will be very vulnerable to being torn out with repeated dermabrasion… and since the procedure won’t produce anything remotely approaching a full head of hair, everyone will need just exactly that: lots and lots of repeat procedures…

so it’s a catch 22 - you may grow a few new hairs with each procedure, but everytime you get dermabraded, you will risk weakening existing hairs and losing a significant amount of hair…

this wounding shyte will be like ‘one step forward, two steps back’…

not a good deal, if you ask me…

to get excited about this shyte right now is just VERY dubious, really speculative and over optimistic!

baldbaby isn’t feelin this!

» Im just hoping it works well in the donor area, so we have more FUE hair
» to transplant. That would be enough for me.
»
»
»
»
» Relatively speaking BB, if not Follica, or Acell, or HM…then
» there will probably not be anything period until gene therapy, which is
» several decades down the pike. One reason why Im kinda “up” on this, is
» that I realize if it does not work, it will probably be a long while. One
» may as well forget it in other words.
»
»
» There is nothing to talk about in HM at the moment because ICX, Aderans,
» Phoenixbio and Histogen arent releasing any new info, so discussion
» logically falls onto follica because their patent is published and is
» accessible.