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

From histogen speech 17 feb - wnt and tgf-b expression


#1

http://www.histogeninc.com/downloads/stem_cell_summit.pdf

wnts seem boosted and tgf-b decreased …good ,according to follica.

edit :quite interesting there’s the type of laser used and some aspect of protocol used in trial.

edit2 :
LiCl is present in wnt-promoter graph.


#2

20% increase in follicles within 12 weeks isn’t bad. Remember, this isn’t entire head, the area in the pictures is probably 1 square-inch.

On a side note: The presentation also talks about how ReGenica increase various forms of Wnt. And it increases Wnt3a three fold. I’m pretty sure it’s the Wnt thats doing most of the magic here. So DIY experimenters need to use LiCl for a lot more than 10 days, maybe 2-3 months.


#3

» http://www.histogeninc.com/downloads/stem_cell_summit.pdf
»
» wnts seem boosted and tgf-b decreased …good ,according to follica.
»
» edit :quite interesting there’s the type of laser used and some aspect of
» protocol used in trial.
»
» edit2 :
» LiCl is present in wnt-promoter graph.

Excellent find!

There are many before/after photos in that pdf! Some of the subjects actually seem to have cut their hair to about the same length in the before/after photos, which is good since the subject in their press release had markedly longer hair making unbiased comparison difficult. See subject 20 for instance.

There is also some interesting points about the next steps for the project.

Thanks!


#4

…hair follicles born also only with vehicle (w/o Regenica compound, pag. 9 ).

Ok for now out there are very few clear number/info …but i’m in trouble … follica also obtains few follicles only with wounding.

Are regenica-mices immunosuppressed ?

Anyway now we’ve some little idea about laser for dermoabrasion.

Subject 20 i.e. received laser .

…english of course is not my first language so i’m not sure about the meaning of “active; no perturbation” patient (N° 16).

edit :
regenica is literally injected so…maybe topical LiCl or gefitinib(-like)
are not enough. Could be subcutaneus administration?


#5

» …hair follicles born also only with vehicle (w/o Regenica compound, pag.
» 9 ).
»
» Ok for now out there are very few clear number/info …but i’m in trouble
» … follica also obtains few follicles only with wounding.
»
» Are regenica-mices immunosuppressed ?


#6

I mean, its 100x easier to grow hair in areas that have some hair already. And to be honest, the photographs suggest, that the guy not only had some hair, he had pretty much elvis hair on the before picture.


#7

» I mean, its 100x easier to grow hair in areas that have some hair already.
» And to be honest, the photographs suggest, that the guy not only had some
» hair, he had pretty much elvis hair on the before picture.

Are you nuts? One of the criteria for getting on the trial is you have to be balding, there is a clear picture of one of the trialists whole head and he is clearly balding.
have you even read the pdf? or did you just glance at the pictures in this thread.

I love the way people are making assumptions about the results and trying to pick holes in them when they are only 12 weeks into a low dosage safety trial.

I suppose you don’t believe in them because they plan to release in 2015 (if all goes well, not following your 10 year and no less rule for trials?


#8

I have to agree with debris here,

from the pic, it looks more like “another rogaine” rather than a treatment for near cure type - “NW5 to be NW1”


#9

» I have to agree with debris here,
»
» from the pic, it looks more like “another rogaine” rather than a treatment
» for near cure type - “NW5 to be NW1”

Well if rogain can induce brand new follicles to grow in just 12 weeks I must be using the wrong brand.

Seriously, you came to that conclusion by looking at the pic in this thread?
Did you read any of the info from histogen?

You do realize that a full head of hair wont sprout over night what ever you do don’t you? Even when minoxidil slightly thickens up those vellus hairs it takes months to make a cosmetic difference.

12 weeks into phase I (LOW DOSAGE which means if they inject more, or repeat injections the results could increase) and all 24 test subjects have had new growth is good news!


#10

This is one of the most interesting thing in term of results that i have seen so far but we are talking about a product with a release date far away from today!


#11

» I have to agree with debris here,
»
» from the pic, it looks more like “another rogaine” rather than a treatment
» for near cure type - “NW5 to be NW1”

I’d be happy with a new topical that was an improvement over rogaine. Its unreasonable to expect a treatment to give a slick bald head NW1 coverage. That kind of miracle is far, far away. But if we can start developing protocols that are incramental improvements over previous therapies, eventually we’ll get there. Personally, I’m a NW 1.5 or so, so a 20% improvement would be significant for me. Further, this kind of treatment may prevent younger men from ever losing significant hair. Every product doesn’t have to be a “cure”, just an improvement.

I’m impressed with Histogen so far, if for nothing else but for doing real science and being transparent with their data. They wouldn’t invest the money and time they have to test on people with full heads of hair. This isn’t Europe - they won’t get away with that kind of fraud in the States. Read the PDF - they say they are going to send the data to an independent lab to do an independent count of their results.


#12

» » I have to agree with debris here,
» »
» » from the pic, it looks more like “another rogaine” rather than a
» treatment
» » for near cure type - “NW5 to be NW1”
»
» I’d be happy with a new topical that was an improvement over rogaine. Its
» unreasonable to expect a treatment to give a slick bald head NW1 coverage.
» That kind of miracle is far, far away. But if we can start developing
» protocols that are incramental improvements over previous therapies,
» eventually we’ll get there. Personally, I’m a NW 1.5 or so, so a 20%
» improvement would be significant for me. Further, this kind of treatment
» may prevent younger men from ever losing significant hair. Every product
» doesn’t have to be a “cure”, just an improvement.
»
» I’m impressed with Histogen so far, if for nothing else but for doing real
» science and being transparent with their data. They wouldn’t invest the
» money and time they have to test on people with full heads of hair. This
» isn’t Europe - they won’t get away with that kind of fraud in the States.
» Read the PDF - they say they are going to send the data to an independent
» lab to do an independent count of their results.

I agree, every development raises the bar for future treatments and furthers our understanding of the disease in general.

I really love the transparent nature of their progress as well, however, I am worried they may start stonewalling us as soon as they receive funding (ala Follica). We shall see


#13

Just theoretically bullsh*tting, but I don’t really agree with the tone you guys are taking here. I don’t think anything we would consider “incremental” is worth much attention and hope, honestly.

All of you that want HT work if there was unlimited donor supply: Let’s say we tripled the effectiveness of Minox. How many of you would REALLY feel like you MPB issue was treated? As in, you DON’T still want the HT work? Probably almost none of you. Maybe 1 in 20 or something.

The track record of treating MPB by way of androgens is even worse. Dutasteride, RU58841 . . . this stuff absolutely DEMOLISHES levels of the relevant hormones (which are also 100% normal and necessary for adult males to have at full strength). And even with severe drugs like this, you can’t even assume that your MPB problems will STOP WORSENING! There are 6 Norwood levels of worsening hair condition, and it can’t be assumed that the patient will even back it up ONE GODDAMN NOTCH with all this severe treatment!

This problem is virtually untreatable with current meds. Getting 200 or 300% of damn near nothing is still not very much.

IMHO we’re trying to untie a Gordian knot when we just need to invent a fresh piece of replacement rope and cut the goddamn thing. We will see progress when we come up with something that does a total end-run around the effects of MPB entirely. Stop trying to beat this sh*t and just pass it by. “Reboot” the existing hair follicles, or cause new ones to regenerate with skin care advancements, or find a practical way to multiply donor follicles somehow, etc.


#14

» Just theoretically bullshtting, but I don’t really agree with the tone you
» guys are taking here. I don’t think anything we would consider
» “incremental” is worth much attention and hope, honestly.
»
»
»
» All of you that want HT work if there was unlimited donor supply: Let’s
» say we tripled the effectiveness of Minox. How many of you would REALLY
» feel like you MPB issue was treated? As in, you DON’T still want the HT
» work? Probably almost none of you. Maybe 1 in 20 or something.
»
» The track record of treating MPB by way of androgens is even worse.
» Dutasteride, RU58841 . . . this stuff absolutely DEMOLISHES levels of the
» relevant hormones (which are also 100% normal and necessary for adult males
» to have at full strength). And even with severe drugs like this, you can’t
» even assume that your MPB problems will STOP WORSENING! There are 6
» Norwood levels of worsening hair condition, and it can’t be assumed that
» the patient will even back it up ONE GODDAMN NOTCH with all this severe
» treatment!
»
»
»
» This problem is virtually untreatable with current meds. Getting 200 or
» 300% of damn near nothing is still not very much.
»
» IMHO we’re trying to untie a Gordian knot when we just need to invent a
» fresh piece of replacement rope and cut the goddamn thing. We will see
» progress when we come up with something that does a total end-run around
» the effects of MPB entirely. Stop trying to beat this sh
t and just pass
» it by. “Reboot” the existing hair follicles, or cause new ones to
» regenerate with skin care advancements, or find a practical way to multiply
» donor follicles somehow, etc.

I couldn’t disagree more. I started losing my hair at 20 (or earlier, given I only noticed it at 20). I got on Minox and Fin immediately, and a few years later, Nizoral. I’ve kept most of my hair. If I didn’t have those three drugs, I’d be a NW6 right now. Every drug is another piece of the puzzle, and lets us keep that much more hair. Of course I’d like HM to work (although, for me, I don’t know how it would benefit me currently, as I have way too much hair to get a HT), but every treatment doesn’t have to be a magic bullet. For you guys who are NW4+, I understand your frustration, but for those of us with more hair, and more importantly, the younger guys who haven’t started loosing their hair yet, these incremental improvements are very valuable. The type of work you’re talking about is in its infancy and will in all likleyhood take decades to perfect (if in our lifetimes at all). What should we do while we wait? Keep loosing hair?


#15

»
» I couldn’t disagree more. I started losing my hair at 20 (or earlier,
» given I only noticed it at 20). I got on Minox and Fin immediately, and a
» few years later, Nizoral. I’ve kept most of my hair. If I didn’t have
» those three drugs, I’d be a NW6 right now. Every drug is another piece of
» the puzzle, and lets us keep that much more hair. Of course I’d like HM to
» work (although, for me, I don’t know how it would benefit me currently, as
» I have way too much hair to get a HT), but every treatment doesn’t have to
» be a magic bullet. For you guys who are NW4+, I understand your
» frustration, but for those of us with more hair, and more importantly, the
» younger guys who haven’t started loosing their hair yet, these incremental
» improvements are very valuable. The type of work you’re talking about is
» in its infancy and will in all likleyhood take decades to perfect (if in
» our lifetimes at all). What should we do while we wait? Keep loosing
» hair?

Oh, come on. If you’re “younger and haven’t started losing yet,” then you’re not gonna be risking your dick buying a bunch of expensive meds to treat a problem that you don’t think you’ll even get for decades (if ever).

Guys who have anything good to say about the existing meds usually aren’t getting side effects from DHT inhibitors. And usually started the protection before they lost anything significant. If that’s your situation, then I’m happy for you. But you’re in a real minority of all the guys trying to fight MPB.

The existing meds are basically crap in the big picture. And more importantly, their avenues of action have known limitations for the most part.

Look at it this way:
Let’s say you find out that Aspirin can reduce some cancer pains (very slightly, with side effects) but it can’t possibly cure the disease. Well, do you want to see big cancer efforts being dumped into slightly better Aspirins? No! Becuase it’s trying to polish a piece of sht in the big picture! When you’re in this situation, you want the biomedical community working on getting your goddamn problem FIXED. And it’s already clear that no amount of fcking around with Aspririn derivatives can ever come anywhere close to doing that.


#16

» »
» » I couldn’t disagree more. I started losing my hair at 20 (or earlier,
» » given I only noticed it at 20). I got on Minox and Fin immediately, and
» a
» » few years later, Nizoral. I’ve kept most of my hair. If I didn’t have
» » those three drugs, I’d be a NW6 right now. Every drug is another piece
» of
» » the puzzle, and lets us keep that much more hair. Of course I’d like HM
» to
» » work (although, for me, I don’t know how it would benefit me currently,
» as
» » I have way too much hair to get a HT), but every treatment doesn’t have
» to
» » be a magic bullet. For you guys who are NW4+, I understand your
» » frustration, but for those of us with more hair, and more importantly,
» the
» » younger guys who haven’t started loosing their hair yet, these
» incremental
» » improvements are very valuable. The type of work you’re talking about
» is
» » in its infancy and will in all likleyhood take decades to perfect (if
» in
» » our lifetimes at all). What should we do while we wait? Keep loosing
» » hair?
»
» Oh, come on. If you’re “younger and haven’t started losing yet,” then
» you’re not gonna be risking your dick buying a bunch of expensive meds to
» treat a problem that you don’t think you’ll even get for decades (if ever).

First, the sides for Niz and Rogain are all but non-existent, and the sides for fin/dut are nearly so. People claim the contrary based on anecdotal evidence, not data. As for younger guys, I’m talking about those who have only begun to lose their hair (as I was), or those who, having been given the new test that can determine if you carry the gene(s), are looking to be preemptive.

But I understand what you’re trying to say. There are two categories of people suffering MPB: those that have lost their hair (NW3+), and those that will (NW1.5-NW2.5). Up to this point, the available protocols benefited the latter, not the former. Who knows what category Histogen could fall into, if it even works at all. But if it does offer a reliable 20% benefit, then it certainly has value for a large number of people. For example, this may offer those who do find the sides of fin/dut intollerable another option in the treatment of their problem. And for those who have slowed their loss, Histogen could be the drug that closes the gap between what they have and what they once had.

20% is a large number when talking about hair; 20% can be the difference between looking bald (NW3+), and looking normal under most circumstances (NW 1.5).


#17

»
» First, the sides for Niz and Rogain are all but non-existent, and the
» sides for fin/dut are nearly so. People claim the contrary based on
» anecdotal evidence, not data.

Fin/Dut sides aren’t “nearly nonexistant.”

If I want to prove that the earth is only a couple thousand years old and everything in the Bible is 100% true to the letter, there is TONS of data out there that has been gathered to support the idea.

Some of it actually sounds quite convincing if you read only that data in the total absence of any data to the contrary, and if you’d never been brought up with the common knowledge that the earth was much older.

And yet that doesn’t make the young-earth theories true.

»
» 20% is a large number when talking about hair; 20% can be the difference
» between looking bald (NW3+), and looking normal under most circumstances
» (NW 1.5).

Here is where I really fork with your opinion about this stuff.

The problem is that if the current fight against MPB is any indication, then most men who lose 20% of their hair probably WON’T get 20% of it back from a drug that boosts growth by 20%.

In reality, balding men will probably get a bunch of thickening in areas that are still basically hairy, and the areas that were lost when they started will still be bald.

So if the new drug can do 20% regrowth, it probably won’t make a NW#5 into a NW#2-3 or anything like that. It’ll probably barely make a NW#5 into barely a NW#4-4.5, with the rest of his remaining hair getting all the gains and becoming 20% thicker than it was when he started. That’s where all the progress will stop.


#18

» »
» » First, the sides for Niz and Rogain are all but non-existent, and the
» » sides for fin/dut are nearly so. People claim the contrary based on
» » anecdotal evidence, not data.
»
» Fin/Dut sides aren’t “nearly nonexistant.”
»
»
» If I want to prove that the earth is only a couple thousand years old and
» everything in the Bible is 100% true to the letter, there is TONS of data
» out there that has been gathered to support the idea.
»
» Some of it actually sounds quite convincing if you read only that data in
» the total absence of any data to the contrary, and if you’d never been
» brought up with the common knowledge that the earth was much older.
»
» And yet that doesn’t make the young-earth theories true.
»
»
»
»
» »
» » 20% is a large number when talking about hair; 20% can be the
» difference
» » between looking bald (NW3+), and looking normal under most
» circumstances
» » (NW 1.5).
»
»
» Here is where I really fork with your opinion about this stuff.
»
» The problem is that if the current fight against MPB is any indication,
» then most men who lose 20% of their hair probably WON’T get 20% of
» it back from a drug that boosts growth by 20%.
»
»
»
» In reality, balding men will probably get a bunch of thickening in areas
» that are still basically hairy, and the areas that were lost when they
» started will still be bald.
»
» So if the new drug can do 20% regrowth, it probably won’t make a NW#5 into
» a NW#2-3 or anything like that. It’ll probably barely make a NW#5 into
» barely a NW#4-4.5, with the rest of his remaining hair getting all
» the gains and becoming 20% thicker than it was when he started. That’s
» where all the progress will stop.

I don’t won’t to turn this thread into a debate on Fin/Dut sides, but I’ll say this: hard, scientifically sound data shows sides are well under 10%. Those claiming it is higher have no contradicting data, only anecdotal evidence and hear-say collected on internet forums.

As for your 5 to a 4.5-4 example, who wouldn’t take a drug if it could promise an entire NW scale improvement? I would jump on anything that could do that reliably. Like I said, for those of us who still have a lot of hair and want more, these drugs are useful, and for those NW3+ guys, they may find that a combination of drugs yields results that any one protocol can’t deliver.


#19

»
» I don’t won’t to turn this thread into a debate on Fin/Dut sides, but I’ll
» say this: hard, scientifically sound data shows sides are well under 10%.
» Those claiming it is higher have no contradicting data, only anecdotal
» evidence and hear-say collected on internet forums.

I don’t wanna turn it into a Fin sides thread either.

But regardless of whether the existing data supports it or not, in the last decade oral Finasteride has made nowhere near the impact and benefit that it should be having on the MPB community. You tell me why.

(“High price of the drug” - Among a group that’s thrilled with the advent of $10/graft FUE transplants?)

(“They’re just too scared to try it” - Um, look at the collective amount of desperation men have in fighting MPB. Paying thousands of dollars for repeated sessions at Bosley chop-shops. Sh*tty topicals. Large numbers of me who continue to take Fin even WITH sexual sides, when plenty of men avoid all kinds of serious necessary medical treatment over that issue all the time.)

»
» As for your 5 to a 4.5-4 example, who wouldn’t take a drug if it could
» promise an entire NW scale improvement? I would jump on anything that
» could do that reliably. Like I said, for those of us who still have a lot
» of hair and want more, these drugs are useful, and for those NW3+ guys,
» they may find that a combination of drugs yields results that any one
» protocol can’t deliver.

No, I don’t think you’re getting quite what I’m saying.

If this stuff “grows back an entire Norwood level,” it’s probably NOT gonna be a whole level of regrowth. Not REAL regrowth, like how a person off the street (who is not already well-versed in MPB’s lowered expectations) would define the term.

IMHO if any new drug does regrow some “moderate” amount, then it’s probably gonna be the difference between slick-bald skin and shtty thin looking coverage that has to be covered in Toppik forever. Or the difference between shtty thin coverage and good-looking coverage.

But I seriously doubt anything resembling the existing topical meds will be consistently offering even one centimeter of real hairline-lowering regrowth. Real honest-to-God, “the skin went from slick shiny bald to full density as if I had just put on a hairpiece” type of regrowth.

With all the meds so far, it just doesn’t ever really happen like this once the follicles have been dead & fibrosis sets in. With existing meds, the loss is essentially irreversible once it’s happened. You can literally castrate a guy and the lost hair won’t come back.


#20

» »
» » I don’t won’t to turn this thread into a debate on Fin/Dut sides, but
» I’ll
» » say this: hard, scientifically sound data shows sides are well under
» 10%.
» » Those claiming it is higher have no contradicting data, only anecdotal
» » evidence and hear-say collected on internet forums.
»
» I don’t wanna turn it into a Fin sides thread either.
»
» But regardless of whether the existing data supports it or not, in the
» last decade oral Finasteride has made nowhere near the impact and benefit
» that it should be having on the MPB community. You tell me why.
»
» (“High price of the drug” - Among a group that’s thrilled with the advent
» of $10/graft FUE transplants?)
»
» (“They’re just too scared to try it” - Um, look at the collective amount
» of desperation men have in fighting MPB. Paying thousands of dollars for
» repeated sessions at Bosley chop-shops. Shtty topicals. Large numbers of
» me who continue to take Fin even WITH sexual sides, when plenty of men
» avoid all kinds of serious necessary medical treatment over that issue all
» the time.)
»
»
»
»
» »
» » As for your 5 to a 4.5-4 example, who wouldn’t take a drug if it could
» » promise an entire NW scale improvement? I would jump on anything that
» » could do that reliably. Like I said, for those of us who still have a
» lot
» » of hair and want more, these drugs are useful, and for those NW3+ guys,
» » they may find that a combination of drugs yields results that any one
» » protocol can’t deliver.
»
» No, I don’t think you’re getting quite what I’m saying.
»
» If this stuff “grows back an entire Norwood level,” it’s probably NOT
» gonna be a whole level of regrowth. Not REAL regrowth, like how a person
» off the street (who is not already well-versed in MPB’s lowered
» expectations) would define the term.
»
» IMHO if any new drug does regrow some “moderate” amount, then it’s
» probably gonna be the difference between slick-bald skin and sh
tty thin
» looking coverage that has to be covered in Toppik forever. Or the
» difference between sh*tty thin coverage and good-looking coverage.
»
»
»
» But I seriously doubt anything resembling the existing topical meds will
» be consistently offering even one centimeter of real hairline-lowering
» regrowth. Real honest-to-God, “the skin went from slick shiny bald to full
» density as if I had just put on a hairpiece” type of regrowth.
»
» With all the meds so far, it just doesn’t ever really happen like this
» once the follicles have been dead & fibrosis sets in. With existing meds,
» the loss is essentially irreversible once it’s happened. You can literally
» castrate a guy and the lost hair won’t come back.

Fin/Dut is not a wonder drug, and its cost is prohibitive. In the States, many insurance companies won’t pay for Propecia, and most have figured out that 30 year-olds with scripts for Dut are not suffering from BHP, and thus refuse to pay for it as well. That turns a $10 bottle of pills into a $120 bottle of pills. Further, some are afraid of the sides, however unlikely they may be. In the end, the cost - both in price and potential sides - are not worth what minor gains they may get.

As for a topical turning slick bald heads into "Real honest-to-God, “the skin went from slick shiny bald to full density”, I think that’s an unreasonable expectation that is only applicable to a percentage of those suffering from hair loss. Many men aren’t slick bald, but they are thinning. For them, something that can turn their thinning hair into something that is cosmetically acceptable would be of great value. Further, it could offer an alternative to those who really ARE suffering sides from one of the other meds, allowing them to treat their loss side-free.

I agree that something that regrows 5% or 10% of hair is of little value. But 15-20% is a significant amount of hair, even if it can’t cover a slick bald pate.