VRAF, I live in Tel-Aviv, how can I contact Yoram to get into the trials as well?? can u mail me at: hlt9999999@gmail.com
Toda
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by aka1[/postedby]
VRAF, I live in Tel-Aviv, how can I contact Yoram to get into the trials as well?? can u mail me at: hlt9999999@gmail.com
Toda[/quote]
i’ve sent you an eamil
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by vraf[/postedby]
1. are there any chemicals involved which of we should worry about? — No chemicals
[postedby]Originally Posted by walrus[/postedby]
Are you saying there are no chemicals at all, or there are none to ‘worry about’? If there is an active substance, it is by definition, a chemical.[/quote]
copper and zinc are not chemicals per definition. you can get copper and zinc in pill form also, as adition to your normal diet.
also, there is no risk for overdose via pilox. their patent describes the average amount which is injected into the scalp. it’s nothing to worry about. toxication by zinc or copper can occur if you take very overdosed pills (> 10miligram for copper, >50miligram for zinc). pilox injects doses are in a range of nano and micrograms, altogether (all injections over the scalp together) probably below 1miligram. nothing to worry about. great stuff
I think it’s not strange to remain sceptic. As I saw the pictures of the hairdresser book for the very first time, my feelings were a mixture of “too good to be true” and “will never hit the market”.
That hasn’t really changed, and yet I’m happy that the discussion about Pilox is very different from the discussion about Histogen, Replicel or Follica.
[quote]
[postedby]Originally Posted by vraf[/postedby]If they are the inventors, which may have been said before, but I haven’t seen, perhaps our best angle at determining the validity of this product is through them.[/quote]
Well, one of the inventors was treated with Pilox (I guess Pilox II). The treatment of Prof. Ingman was from February - September 2011. You can read the result and even watch small pictures in the patent description of Pilox.
Vraf, you wrote that you didn’t really read the patent. In short, the apparatus is described like that:
(EN)A device to stimulate a scalp comprising an array of stimulating elements adapted to pierce the skin of the scalp no deeper than a thickness of a dermis, wherein the stimulating elements are arranged along a circumference of at least one wheel and the wheel is adapted to roll over the scalp.
If you read this and take a look at the drawings that can be seen in the patent, would you say the Pilox generation you are using still corresponds to the patent? Because you’re saying there aren’t any “stimulating elements” at all, if I got you right?
Moreover, you’re saying Pilox is out on the market within a year. Does that mean the Pilox generation you’re using is supposed to be the final one?
Thanks again for taking your time to answer our questions. We really appreciate that!
Greetings,
Ross
but also no laser at all? the makes me wonder.
there must be a kind of light source, or instead, any microneedling (not deep needles like a dermaroller), maybe only 0.1mm deep or anything like that. otherwise it would really be only the iontophoresis, and many of the described points in their patent wouldn’t make sense. however, laser or not, the thing seems to work.
the iontophoresis works without damaging the skin anyway. only the micro wounding/regeneration part is bit unclear to me.
[quote]I think it’s not strange to remain sceptic. As I saw the pictures of the hairdresser book for the very first time, my feelings were a mixture of “too good to be true” and “will never hit the market”.
That hasn’t really changed, and yet I’m happy that the discussion about Pilox is very different from the discussion about Histogen, Replicel or Follica.
[postedby]Originally Posted by vraf[/postedby]If they are the inventors, which may have been said before, but I haven’t seen, perhaps our best angle at determining the validity of this product is through them.
[postedby]Originally Posted by Ross[/postedby]
Well, one of the inventors was treated with Pilox (I guess Pilox II). The treatment of Prof. Ingman was from February - September 2011. You can read the result and even watch small pictures in the patent description of Pilox.
Vraf, you wrote that you didn’t really read the patent. In short, the apparatus is described like that:
(EN)A device to stimulate a scalp comprising an array of stimulating elements adapted to pierce the skin of the scalp no deeper than a thickness of a dermis, wherein the stimulating elements are arranged along a circumference of at least one wheel and the wheel is adapted to roll over the scalp.
If you read this and take a look at the drawings that can be seen in the patent, would you say the Pilox generation you are using still corresponds to the patent? Because you’re saying there aren’t any “stimulating elements” at all, if I got you right?
Moreover, you’re saying Pilox is out on the market within a year. Does that mean the Pilox generation you’re using is supposed to be the final one?
Thanks again for taking your time to answer our questions. We really appreciate that!
Greetings,
Ross[/quote]
I didn’t say “there aren’t any “stimulating elements””. I said no chemicals.
I can’t comment on your other questions.
also interesting stuff, a needle-free injection method via high pressure, at the speed of sound, watch this: http://youtu.be/M09LyLqb5qw
has probably nothing to do with pilox, but i assume that the high pressure pulses would also be suitable to create some micro-damage and stimulation in the skin. i thought i should share this with you.
and again: those who are still searching for the right CB vehicle: this would be the perfect device beside iontophoresis. it can be even filled directly with the CB powder form and through vibration it’s possible to emulate a liquid behavior and inject it normally like it was a liquid. get that device from MIT and we’re ready with CB and all other experimental powders which will pop up in the future. no need to apply ethanol and other crap and playing the guessing game regarding right vehicle.
but still doesn’t matter because pilox is the better way (no dirty chemicals involved).
Yes, copper and zinc most definitely are chemicals. You obtain chemical energy from eating food. Water is a chemical. You are made of chemicals. In recent times the word has simply become attached with negative connotations.
ok, from that point of view, you’re right. they can be seen as chemicals, but they are the good ones 
Hey vraf, thanks for answering our questions to the best of your abilities. This is all so promising!
So from our understanding, this is a device where we can operate by ourselves at home?
And also, you said it will be on the market within a year, is that only in the Israel market? Or is this worldwide?
“So from our understanding, this is a device where we can operate by ourselves at home?” - Yes
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by vraf[/postedby]
“So from our understanding, this is a device where we can operate by ourselves at home?” - Yes[/quote]
thanks again for taking the time to answer all the questions.
so, I just want to clarify, and I apologize if im being repetitive, but:
-
it still uses copper and zinc ions yes? Copper helps growth. Zinc stops DHT? (to our understanding)
-
When you say it doesn’t “wound”, do you mean it doesn’t wound with needles?
because obviously it has to do something SIMILAR to wounding that happen when needles are used–even if we can’t see the “wounding” with the naked eye or feel it very much. Right? Not a laser but maybe some sort of electrolysis or something?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by vraf[/postedby]
“So from our understanding, this is a device where we can operate by ourselves at home?” - Yes
[postedby]Originally Posted by needhairasap[/postedby]
thanks again for taking the time to answer all the questions.
so, I just want to clarify, and I apologize if im being repetitive, but:
-
it still uses copper and zinc ions yes? Copper helps growth. Zinc stops DHT? (to our understanding)
-
When you say it doesn’t “wound”, do you mean it doesn’t wound with needles?
because obviously it has to do something SIMILAR to wounding that happen when needles are used–even if we can’t see the “wounding” with the naked eye or feel it very much. Right? Not a laser but maybe some sort of electrolysis or something?[/quote] -
“it still uses copper and zinc ions yes? Copper helps growth. Zinc stops DHT? (to our understanding)” — Can’t answer that.
-
“it doesn’t “wound”, do you mean it doesn’t wound with needles?” — “Wounding” is a tricky word in this case. What i can promise you is that i’m not hurting my self in anyway. Can’t share more than that.
As i understand there’s no proof of effectiveness whatsoever. So why all the excitement ? Did i miss something ?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Lindo[/postedby]
As i understand there’s no proof of effectiveness whatsoever. So why all the excitement ? Did i miss something ?[/quote]
Well, in the patent you can read about some rather promising results. There’s also a small before/after treatment picture. Nothing too spectacular, but not bad either. At least it sounds interesting.
But let’s be honest: most of us are here because there were some really stunning results shown in a hairdresser book. Some sharp(!) photos of these results were available on an internet forum for a very short time. I don’t know if it was intention or not, at least Pilox seems to be a very hot thing in hairloss communities since then.
Of course, these photos weren’t part of an official advertisement, that’s why we can’t really rely on them. It remains to be seen if the creators of Pilox will advertise with similar or even better results when the device hits the market.
Of course no one really knows if this is the real deal here or just another marketing gag. Like you wrote, in the end there’s still no proof of effectiveness or official statement yet. But when it comes to me I think discussing about Pilox (which we didn’t know about two months before and should be out within a year) is less depressing than talking about other “cures” (we know about for many, many years) that will hit the market exactly “in five years”…
I hate to keep repeating myself here, but we have no irrefutable or reliable validation that the original photos are real, or are really the results of Pilox treatment. All we have are second-hand and third-hand accounts.
I appreciate vraf very much for coming here, but vraf, could you please give us your account of who those original photos are of, details of their treatment history (when, how long, etc.), have you met this person, do you personally know of anyone else whose results have approximated the results in those photos, etc.?
By the way I am NOT saying vraf is lying to us because he was also shown the photos by someone else, so when he undertook to test this treatment on himself, he was taking that other person’s word for it too, just like so many people here are currently doing.
And correct me if I’m wrong but we STILL haven’t seen before/after photos of vraf, to date, and we don’t have a detailed description of his results, e.g., say a percentage of hair restored, based on a visual self-examination, at least.
Vraf, anything else you could provide in these regards would be greatly appreciated.
I agree 100 percent and why can’t we at least some before after pictures
Agree Roger,i got a feeling this thread is going to be the longest and most frustrating ever here, especially as we are all going to have to wait a year at least… once every question has been asked and limited answers by Vraf given,we are going to end up going round in circles playing 20 questions for what will seem like an eternity… lol
I agree 100 percent and why can’t we get some before and after pictures at least
of course, some before/after pics would be nice. maybe yoram can give us at least one patient with good pics (even if they are cherrypicked and show a best case scenario).
by the way: do we already know why the thread with the initial hairdresser pics was taken down on the other forum? it was not done on yoram’s request, i guess. do you know something about that, vraf? (if you are allowed to talk about it)