With such a small sample, they need to provide the before and after hair counts for each individual, as well as the treatment area size.
blueshard, 18.02.2008, 23:17
seems pretty unexciting and shittty if you ask me.
i think we all need to live our lives and forget about this mess.
we are letting these companies play with our lives.
coming to this site all of the time is just making it worse for us.
Post reply
I don’t get it. Intercytex has yet to release it’s next report, and everybody is ready to proclaim them as charlatans. Can’t we wait until March before we get completely demoralized?
There are a few reasons to reserve judgment for the time being.
- Firstly, Intercytex is in the middle of phase II trials (i.e. efficacy trials). That mean’s they fully understand their trial discrepancy, and they understand the need to further refine their process. Remember, some patients resulted 106% yields; I’m sure Intercytex is seeking to reach middle ground.
- Secondly, I don’t understand how anyone can compare Intercytex to rogaine. Let’s imagine rogaine 2xdaily yields 13% regrowth; rogaine 4xdaily won’t yield 26%, and rogaine 8xdaily won’t yield 52%. Most importantly, rogaine does not produce DHT resistant hair, so if you don’t use it, you lose it. By contrast, Intercytex is DHT resistant, and there’s reason to believe a patient can have repeated treatments until they achieve their desired density (even if every treatment only increases your haircount by 13%). Theoretically, one cryopreserved biopsy can serve all your repeat needs.
Again, I rather give them the benefit of the doubt… for now.
.
» There are a few reasons to reserve judgment for the time being.
» I don’t understand how anyone can compare Intercytex to
» rogaine.
I agree that it’s way too early to throw in the towel. Phase I consisted of treating a 1cm^2 area of hair-bearing skin. If the email above is accurate, it appears they are doing the same thing in phase II except they are pre-stimulating the epidermis this time around. Phase I achieved an amazing average of 66 hairs cm^2 in those that responded. Remember, phase I did not involve pre-stimulation, so I would expect phase II pre-stimulation technique to result in a higher yield. The email claims some patients had over 200 existing hairs before the start of the study. Thus, the only hair in the 1cm area to regenerate would be the telogen hair, which represents between 10 to 15% of hair in a non-balding scalp. So in that case, 13% would be a monumental achievement. By the same token, a man with 85 hairs in a cm^2 that walked away with 105% rejuvenation is effectively cured.
Yes, I’m painting a rosy picture that is most likely not the way things are being carried out. But it does show that it is way, way, way too early to get down in the dumps and throw in the towel. You can paint the information in any light you see fit, as there is not enough info to make an accurate call. I suggest chilling out for a few months and we’ll get more info from the upcoming milestone. Most likely, the results will prove to be a step forward but nowhere near a complete cure for everybody. But hey, I expect it to be a large step up from the current vitamin theory of hair restoration. 
BTW, please post the complete email transcript. We are bound to sling some mud around, but let us have our fun.
Yeah, the comparisons to Rogaine are a little much.
I’d sure like to apply Rogaine one time in my life and get 10-100% regrowth with permanent DHT resistance.
All bullsh*t aside –
Hypothetically, if ICX’s treatment didn’t regrow one single hair, and just gave DHT resistance to the existing hairs for life . . . even just that would already be the biggest improvement in MPB treatment in human history.
» Thats what I’m somewhat relieved about too. It definitely won’t make NW7s,
» NW0. But it would give decent coverage to NW5+ and thicken up NW4-.
» Probably not ideal for rebuilding temples either.
I don’t think it makes sense for HM to be Norwood class dependent because the more bald area you have, the more injections you can get. So HM will work for a NW 7 just the same as for a NW 5 or 4.
» » Thats what I’m somewhat relieved about too. It definitely won’t make
» NW7s,
» » NW0. But it would give decent coverage to NW5+ and thicken up NW4-.
» » Probably not ideal for rebuilding temples either.
»
» I don’t think it makes sense for HM to be Norwood class dependent because
» the more bald area you have, the more injections you can get. So HM will
» work for a NW 7 just the same as for a NW 5 or 4.
There are some biochemical changes that take place in a bald pate that may make it more difficult to grow hair. We just don’t know if the number of existing hairs can determine the viability of new grafts. I would guess that the more hair one has initially, the better the result.
» There are some biochemical changes that take place in a bald pate that may
» make it more difficult to grow hair. We just don’t know if the number of
» existing hairs can determine the viability of new grafts. I would guess
» that the more hair one has initially, the better the result.
Yes, it might be more difficult to grow hair in completely bald areas than in partially covered areas. But are the totally bald areas of a NW 7 any less capable of growing hair than the totally bald areas of a NW 5?