| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free |
In a recent story in Huffington Post Follica seems to indicate that they have a breakthrough treatment for hair loss that Follica could put into the marketplace now.
Is Follica going to put a breakthrough hair loss treatment into the marketplace in the next few months to one year?
If Folica has a breakthrough hair loss treatment that could be put into the marketplace but is not going to put it into the marketplace in the next few months to one year then why not?
Here is a plain vanilla non-confrontational question:
I really just want to know when Follica can bring his new technology to market. Follica seems to be giving mixed messages about when they COULD make it available and even the interviewer in the Huffington Post article stated that Follica was being “coy.”
I’m thinking that they might have a breakthrough treatment but they are having a hard time figuring out how they can protect their rights to the money acquired from it if they release the treatment to the general public. So they might be sitting there with something innovative but are withholding it over money concerns.
I think we should ask him simply,
“does wounding and lithium grow terminal hairs?” They ran an actual Phase 2 clinical trial on this, and I think we should know, and that is the ONLY clinical data they have on humans AFAIK.
A few years back, a number of people in the MPB web community tried wounding + lithium experiments using a few different specific protocols. They got essentially nothing beyond the slight regenerating effects of the wounding itself.
If it was that simple then we would know about it, I’m sure of that.
One could argue that the DIY experimenters might not have nailed the protocol quite right. But they didn’t just fail to match the effects that Follica implies, they failed to produce ANYTHING to speak of. And Follica conspicuously doesn’t ever call their results full terminal hairs. I think its pretty clear what the real story is.
Maybe the Lithium experiment is part of the deal and they haven’t revealed what else they are doing to provoke those effects to go terminal. Maybe they don’t know how in the hell they can turn the lithium results terminal. I dunno.
Occam’s Razar. It could have been written about HM research. The simplest conclusion is that Follica has not been able to produce cosmetically viable terminal hairs yet.
[quote]Anyway it’s cool that Dr Cole is keeping an open-minded and is willing to investigate Dr Nigams technique. If such a respected surgeon as Dr Cole were to promote Dr Nigams donor doubling, then I think that that might lead to the long awaited breakthrough for this technique for the entire HT industry.
I wonder if Dr Cole is only interested in the donor doubling techniques or if he is also interested in Dr Nigams cell based treatments as well.
[postedby]Originally Posted by roger_that[/postedby]
I think he’s interested in all of it. Anything Dr. Nigam has to offer. Also, these doctors all know that in most developed countries (the USA, Europe, etc. – I don’t know about India), use by a doctor of a medical procedure discovered by another doctor (even if it has been granted a patent) no longer constitutes patent infringement, so even if a doctor takes an entire medical procedure discovered and patented by someone else, and uses it on his patients, he cannot be successfully sued for infringement.
I think a lot of the general public, including most people on these hairloss forums, don’t know that. In the US, that law was passed by Congress in 1996 and signed into law by President Clinton in 1997.
If Cots/Follica really do have a breakthrough treatment that involves removing the top layer of skin I think this could be the reason why Follica is not forthcoming with that treatment. I think it could also explain why Cots was trying to work a deal with the drug companies that have GPR44 blockers in the pipeline. I think that he might have a breakthrough “procedure” type of treatment for hair loss but he can’t protect a patent of this type of treatment so he’s reluctant to bring it to market.
I think everyone has had plenty of time to put their questions into this thread so are you going to organize the questions and put them into an email since you have established back-and-forth email communication with Dr. Garza. Garza told you he would respond to you if you sent him an email with the questions so I think you should be the one to ask the questions in the email to him.
Again, my question is that Follica and Cotseralis seem to be saying that they have completed all of the clinical studies while at the same time saying that their technology is well-suited for clinical development. From this I can’t tell if they are saying that they have a treatment that they could bring to market in the near future or not (say within 15 months. So that is what I would like to know - when will they be able to bring their treatment to market?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by georgex6[/postedby]
Guys i emailed yesterday luis garza telling him that our community wants an intereview and very friendly he told me to email him the questions to answer.I have done this in the past so guys start to write your questions to send to him[/quote]
You have established an email contact with Garza in which he invited you to send him these questions so you are the person who should send the email (with the questions) to Garza. Are you going to do it?
Does FGF-9 increase progenitor cells in humans?
FGF9 and FGF20 maintain the stemness of nephron progenitors in mice and man.
Barak H, Huh SH, Chen S, Jeanpierre C, Martinovic J, Parisot M, Bole-Feysot C, Nitschké P, Salomon R, Antignac C, Ornitz DM, Kopan R.
Source
Department of Developmental Biology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8103, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Abstract
The identity of niche signals necessary to maintain embryonic nephron progenitors is unclear. Here we provide evidence that Fgf20 and Fgf9, expressed in the niche, and Fgf9, secreted from the adjacent ureteric bud, are necessary and sufficient to maintain progenitor stemness. Reduction in the level of these redundant ligands in the mouse led to premature progenitor differentiation within the niche. Loss of FGF20 in humans, or of both ligands in mice, resulted in kidney agenesis. Sufficiency was shown in vitro where Fgf20 or Fgf9 (alone or together with Bmp7) maintained isolated metanephric mesenchyme or sorted nephron progenitors that remained competent to differentiate in response to Wnt signals after 5 or 2 days in culture, respectively. These findings identify a long-sought-after critical component of the nephron stem cell niche and hold promise for long-term culture and utilization of these progenitors in vitro.
That’s a good question.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by georgex6[/postedby]
Guys i dont want to ask him the same things i asked last year http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-109308-page-0-order-time-category-0.html
no one of you didnt mention fgf9.I m thinking of asking him about a personal experiment with dermaroller and something to increase fgf9[/quote]
goerge,
I think the wording should be very careful because I don’t think that Dr Garza is going to give us advice on diy home experiments. Being a medical doctor he would be putting his reputation at stake if he supported or condoned such experiments by giving us advice.
I think he would be much more willing to part with information if we formulated our questions in a more general manner.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by georgex6[/postedby]
Guys i dont want to ask him the same things i asked last year http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-109308-page-0-order-time-category-0.html
no one of you didnt mention fgf9.I m thinking of asking him about a personal experiment with dermaroller and something to increase fgf9[/quote]
In my opinion is very important to ask him if he saw, at a prostaglandin level, a difference between who uses finasteride and who not. IF there’s a connection, probably it could be useful to follow the PGD2 path if not I’m not so sure that prostaglandin theory can be a game changer…
Hairman’s right. georgex6 unfortunately it’s not a good idea to ask him for advice about home experiments. If you ask him for any advice about DIY home experiments he might ignore the entire email and refuse to answer any questions.
Sorry guys i was very busy but today i found time and i send the followng quwstions
Q: Do you have an update on your latest research about fgf-9?
Q: MPB hair follicles grow as normal on immunodeficient mice is this because they do not produce pgd2?
Q: Why dont transplanted hairs get affected by pgd2?
Q: Do you plan on testing(in the clinical trial) pro-growth factors (eg pge2) as well?
Q: have you tested available substances on animal or human models to examine what happens when PGD2 or the GPR44 is inhibited.
Q:what is your opinion about replicel.com & aderansresearch.com
Q:Does wounding and lithium grow terminal hairs?
Q:-You have demonstrated that Neogenesis+Lithium creates “neogenic-like” hair follicles in vivo in humans. Do these automatically become terminal hairs or is there another treatment necessary?
Q:* Do you know anything about how your procedure will work on scalp areas which have already had HT work? Is normal HT recipient area scarring a major roadblock, possibly decreasing the density of the patch of new follicles generated? Growth direction issues? Etc? HT scarring varies from patient to patient but do you have any general comments?
Q: in order to increase fgf9 what did you use in your experiments.
and last one
Q:I want your future prediction about Is Follica going to put a breakthrough hair loss treatment into the marketplace in the next few months or years?
Sorry george but why u did not ask my question about the correlation between finasteride and pgd2…?
Why, you think he’s gonna answer all these questions to begin with? Smh, he’s just gonna dodge them just like he did mine two years ago with an answer more like be patient with us.I even asked him in Greek. He has something i wont deny, but you will definitely not get detailed answers to those kind of questions. I do hope he does, but i doubt.
so mr Garza you said that you found in your research that prostaglandin d2 is elevated in bald scalp much higher than normal,
any idea why this is happening? is this related to testosterone levels or dht?
-------- yes in other systems pgd2 is made when testosterone is high. Therefore we believe also in the scalp that when testosterone is high pgd2 goes up. Yes dht is stronger than testosterone so we believe the active hormone is actually dht…
what were you quoting here?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by georgex6[/postedby]
so mr Garza you said that you found in your research that prostaglandin d2 is elevated in bald scalp much higher than normal,
any idea why this is happening? is this related to testosterone levels or dht?
-------- yes in other systems pgd2 is made when testosterone is high. Therefore we believe also in the scalp that when testosterone is high pgd2 goes up. Yes dht is stronger than testosterone so we believe the active hormone is actually dht…[/quote]
Yes george however we should see if with finasteride when the dht goes down also the pgd2 goes down…we know that finasteride works…we should see if we see that it works by decreasing dht and pgdd2
| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Terms of Use & Privacy |
This is an advertising site for paid advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.