» Hey Marco- I just want to say first off, I value your contribution to this
» site. But I would just like to know your opinion of Histogen and the
» science behind it.
Here is a bit of a rant:
If I were to make a truly valued judgment then I would have to take a very deep dive into wnt and all the evidence + a full inter species proteomic study, expression sequence analysis, tempero spacial analysis of hair differentiation events etc etc (probably to the extent that many at histogen have not done). If I did all of that then maybe I could shorten the odds of making a call just a little. I will not pretend to have done that or that it could be done and I have heard enough scientist championing their ideas cherry picking the evidence to support them.
Science is often not as intelligent process as people would like. one could take a few highly intelligent scientist (with limited resources) and ask them to find a the best solutions to a problem or use the hundreds of thousands of scientist and institutions to come up with as many theories that have some backing and test them all. The answers then just become evidence based. ie forget the deepest science, just find out which one worked. Biochemistry and physiology is now so complex that the later is often actually more efficient (if the money is there to do this).
The point is that we just have to see what comes out and it is impossible to second guess.
A couple of comments:
wnt was original linked to the hair differentiation pathway in mice, i believe, which is not promising based on other rodent work.
Would I try it: yes
would I invest in the company rather than have a hair transplant:…NO
I know i haven’t really answered your question.