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

High dose results are worse than low dose


#1

This is for Vavelta:

http://www.intercytex.com/icx/investors/rep/rep2008/2008-03-18/2008-03-18.pdf

page 12.

For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting more cells.

I believe this is what happened with TRC.
Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even losing hair!!
(before prestimulation was used).

ICX is able to multiply DP cells almost “endlessly”, by a factor of 4000 or more, but I am afraid that the number of DP cells is not as important as we thought. In fact, injecting too many cells seems to yield bad results.


#2

» For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
» This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting more
» cells.
»
» I believe this is what happened with TRC.
» Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they
» increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even
» losing hair!!
» (before prestimulation was used).

I wouldn’t read too much into the little information in this report.

As for the subjects who lost hair, I wouldn’t automatically blame it on ICX.

Aren’t the subjects people who have a hair loss problem to begin with?

Chances are if they would have continued to lose hair during the test period with or without ICX.

AND in any event, pre-stimulation fixed it. You’re just in a negatvie mood.


#3

» This is for Vavelta:
»
» http://www.intercytex.com/icx/investors/rep/rep2008/2008-03-18/2008-03-18.pdf
»
» page 12.
»
» For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
» This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting more
» cells.
»
» I believe this is what happened with TRC.
» Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they
» increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even
» losing hair!!
» (before prestimulation was used).
»
» ICX is able to multiply DP cells almost “endlessly”, by a factor of 4000
» or more, but I am afraid that the number of DP cells is not as important
» as we thought. In fact, injecting too many cells seems to yield bad
» results.

With regards to TRC that is not a fact, you simply assumed that because it says that for Vavelta.
Intercytex continue to say(even after this shady announcement) that they believe the more the injections, the better the results.
The people that lost hair were the ones who received no pre-stimulation, ALL those that had pre-stimulation had regrowth.
You can not compare Vavelta to TRC on any level.

Ahab Is also correct from what I can gather, the people who were treated are suffering from MPB and could just be progressing they were treated with an older technique which ICX has said is less effective, Although they haven’t said that any of the ones that had pre-stimulation have lost hair, only regrowth which could be promising.

Why are people making so many threads with the same subject? Are people In a bad mood over the results, or am I being to hopeful? I don’t see them as being that bad and definitely could have been worse.
People are reading far to much into the announcement and creating all these dooms day threads, it quite depressing to read.
Members on this board are making guesses and assumptions, while theres nothing wrong with theorizing and contemplation (about all we can do with how quiet ICX are). The problem is people are reading the opinions of others and they are getting spread around as fact, people aren’t realizing that a lot of the posts created today/yesterday are peoples personal opinions and mostly not fact. No offense to anyone and of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

The following is just MY opinion based on the Announcement and other things that I think about TRC. I could be completely wrong but in my mind this is what I make of it:

1. ICX are NOT scrapping TRC or even selling it, they are seeking a partner(which means they would still own/part own ICX) so trials/commercialization can continue with the help/experience/funding of the potential company, If Bosley were to agree to a partnership then I have no doubt ICX would share more info with them, If not they will release all their findings at the END of the current phase of trials for everyone.
I believe they would also need the help of a company like bosley to get to market faster and on a larger scale than they would be able to alone (its not easy for a company like ICX to raise the funds as and when they need, there are to many uncertainties and why not let the pressure lie with a much larger company that potentially wouldn’t be that damaged in the lose off millions as ICX would if they blew all there money on commercializing one product or something went wrong, they would go bust). Bosley would also be able to do better at marketing TRC so it would reach as many people as possible (anti Bosley people excluded, remember most people don’t know about their reputation. I myself are on the fence on this as I don’t see how they could bodge TRC?)
Also this could take a long long time and ultimately could never happen. If Bosely and no other company want to go into partnership then that would sound the end for TRC for the foreseeable future.

2. TRC has not failed, If thats the case then they would have stopped altogether and would not be completing phase II like they are (although it is possible results weren’t as good as they are expecting) but they do say they are continuing to see increased hair growth. I don’t think ICX are aiming for complete NW7 to NW1 restoration any time soon. The fact that they are still growing more hair and improving points to success, they could still market, with the help from the likes of Bosely a product that grows minimal hair, It may not be what a lot of people want if thats all the technology can produce at the moment then it is still VERY possible to see a TRC on the market that needs to be combined with a HT to provide acceptable density. The deal with Bosley suspiciously points my thoughts in this direction. However for all we know they could be getting significantly acceptable regrowth right now because they are not cleat at the moment. There is also the possibility of getting more and more procedures to get better results.

3. They wouldn’t release pictures or more detailed info for the simple reason that Phase II is still incomplete!(I admit I was hoping for pics etc but I was under the impression this was the end of phase II) If you want that then you are going to have to wait for the end of the current stage.

4. Be realistic, ICX are not going to LIE, they may be vague at the moment but they are under no obligation to release detailed info yet, they have hinted in the past that they will show pics and individual details at the end of phase II. There is also the risk of exposing to much information to potential competitors while a lot could still be un-patented at the moment such as delivery techniques and what they call pre-stimulation. Also it is not thair fault that they are behind as often in life things don’t go as expected.

5. In the press release they mention Commercialization a few times, they say they are looking for a partner so they can finish trials and then release! they just need help, although it could just be spin but they still seem pretty confident that it is marketable and say it would be relativity easy.

6. I think they are low on cash, but I think they are saving what little cash they have to push their other product as they probably see them as being more valuable to them. In the meantime licensing TRC to another company would still generate revenue for them as they would get an initial payment and a cut of profits after that. They probably think Bosley are chomping at the bit to get their hands on TRC, and they do obviously want it.

7. The fact that they are only going to continue TRC with the help of a partner seems like a huge set back and it could be, but Bosley are very interested in TRC (draw your own conclusions their, I know all you conspiracy theorists out there believe that Bosley want to keep any effective treatments/cures so they can keep peddling HT’s, I however don’t think so, they could REPLASE the revenue made from HT’s with that of HM or even both, for example HM may not grow any hairs in severe scarring so a HT may be needed)

8. I don’t know why but I believe they are more sure that they are performing regenesis rather than neogenesis, which is bad for long term baldies, no so bad for recent thinners. Maybe I’m reading in between the lines to much

9. IF they get Bosely as a partner and they Don’t need phase III they would most likely release in the USA first, therefore needing FDA approval, which means ATLEAST another year from when the partnership is completed to get approval, although if they want to release in the UK first then it would also need a similar timescale to get the regulative authority’s approval.

10. IF phase III is needed you can add ATLEAST another year onto that, but if in the UK they could commercialize at the same time, under strict guidelines.(not sure if this could be done in the US) This depends though if Bosely would be willing to continue trials at Farjo’s clinic.

11. They are still filling patents for TRC, which leads me to believe the procedure itself is increasingly more successful. Notice that they are filling patents for the USA.

12. Someone posted that ICX have removed the ‘2010 earliest possible release date’ from their site , it is still there, the info on TRC remains unchanged at the moment.

We shouldn’t completely loose hope in TRC yet, at least not until after they release final phase II data. If no specific information and/or pictures are released by then then I think it would be a much safer bet that its not going to be here any time soon.
I too am disillusioned by the frankly pathetic last 2 announcements but they still deserve another chance to show they have something.
For me, if by this time next year they haven’t proven themselves then I am through with TRC but at the moment we still don’t know enough to ultimately call fail or success, for all we know they could have something up their sleeves with this partnership deal, like near term commercialization (wishfull thinking) :stuck_out_tongue:

Sorry for the long post everyone I just felt I needed to write all that down to get it off my chest.
Most of it is just my personal opinion, I know no more than every one else hear and am trying to learn myself, so none should be taken as fact and I could also be completely wrong.

should too much emphasis be placed on the stock price considering they have other products?

Does anybody know what they mean by pre-stimulation? do they mean the DP cells or stimulation of the scalp?

On another note, I know a Trichologist who works “closely”(in their own words) with Farjo’s clinic, Although I don’t know how closely, could be very insignificant as in just recommending patients.
Never the less I am going to ask the Dr’s opinion tomorrow and try and see if they know any additional info, could be promising as they have mentioned to me they are aware of the trial at the Farjo clinic.


#4

» » This is for Vavelta:
» »
» »
» http://www.intercytex.com/icx/investors/rep/rep2008/2008-03-18/2008-03-18.pdf
» »
» » page 12.
» »
» » For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
» » This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting
» more
» » cells.
» »
» » I believe this is what happened with TRC.
» » Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they
» » increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even
» » losing hair!!
» » (before prestimulation was used).
» »
» » ICX is able to multiply DP cells almost “endlessly”, by a factor of
» 4000
» » or more, but I am afraid that the number of DP cells is not as
» important
» » as we thought. In fact, injecting too many cells seems to yield bad
» » results.

»
» With regards to TRC that is not a fact, you simply assumed that because
» it says that for Vavelta.
» Intercytex continue to say(even after this shady announcement) that they
» believe the more the injections, the better the results.
» The people that lost hair were the ones who received no pre-stimulation,
» ALL those that had pre-stimulation had regrowth.
» You can not compare Vavelta to TRC on any level.
»
» Ahab Is also correct from what I can gather, the people who were treated
» are suffering from MPB and could just be progressing they were treated
» with an older technique which ICX has said is less effective, Although
» they haven’t said that any of the ones that had pre-stimulation have lost
» hair, only regrowth which could be promising.
»
» Why are people making so many threads with the same subject? Are people In
» a bad mood over the results, or am I being to hopeful? I don’t see them as
» being that bad and definitely could have been worse.
» People are reading far to much into the announcement and creating all
» these dooms day threads, it quite depressing to read.
» Members on this board are making guesses and assumptions, while theres
» nothing wrong with theorizing and contemplation (about all we can do with
» how quiet ICX are). The problem is people are reading the opinions of
» others and they are getting spread around as fact, people aren’t realizing
» that a lot of the posts created today/yesterday are peoples personal
» opinions and mostly not fact. No offense to anyone and of course everyone
» is entitled to their own opinion.
»
» The following is just MY opinion based on the Announcement and other
» things that I think about TRC. I could be completely wrong but in my mind
» this is what I make of it:
»
» 1. ICX are NOT scrapping TRC or even selling it, they are
» seeking a partner(which means they would still own/part own ICX) so
» trials/commercialization can continue with the help/experience/funding of
» the potential company, If Bosley were to agree to a partnership
» then I have no doubt ICX would share more info with them, If not they will
» release all their findings at the END of the current phase of trials
» for everyone.
» I believe they would also need the help of a company like bosley to get to
» market faster and on a larger scale than they would be able to alone (its
» not easy for a company like ICX to raise the funds as and when they need,
» there are to many uncertainties and why not let the pressure lie with a
» much larger company that potentially wouldn’t be that damaged in
» the lose off millions as ICX would if they blew all there money on
» commercializing one product or something went wrong, they would go bust).
» Bosley would also be able to do better at marketing TRC so it would reach
» as many people as possible (anti Bosley people excluded, remember most
» people don’t know about their reputation. I myself are on the fence on
» this as I don’t see how they could bodge TRC?)
» Also this could take a long long time and ultimately could never happen.
» If Bosely and no other company want to go into partnership then that would
» sound the end for TRC for the foreseeable future.
»
» 2. TRC has not failed, If thats the case then they would
» have stopped altogether and would not be completing phase II like they are
» (although it is possible results weren’t as good as they are expecting) but
» they do say they are continuing to see increased hair growth. I don’t think
» ICX are aiming for complete NW7 to NW1 restoration any time soon. The fact
» that they are still growing more hair and improving points to success,
» they could still market, with the help from the likes of Bosely a product
» that grows minimal hair, It may not be what a lot of people want if thats
» all the technology can produce at the moment then it is still VERY
» possible to see a TRC on the market that needs to be combined with a HT to
» provide acceptable density. The deal with Bosley suspiciously points my
» thoughts in this direction. However for all we know they could be getting
» significantly acceptable regrowth right now because they are not cleat at
» the moment. There is also the possibility of getting more and more
» procedures to get better results.
»
» 3. They wouldn’t release pictures or more detailed info for
» the simple reason that Phase II is still incomplete!(I admit I was
» hoping for pics etc but I was under the impression this was the end of
» phase II) If you want that then you are going to have to wait for the end
» of the current stage.
»
» 4. Be realistic, ICX are not going to LIE, they may
» be vague at the moment but they are under no obligation to release
» detailed info yet, they have hinted in the past that they will show pics
» and individual details at the end of phase II. There is also the
» risk of exposing to much information to potential competitors while a lot
» could still be un-patented at the moment such as delivery techniques and
» what they call pre-stimulation. Also it is not thair fault that they are
» behind as often in life things don’t go as expected.
»
» 5. In the press release they mention Commercialization a few times,
» they say they are looking for a partner so they can finish trials and then
» release! they just need help, although it could just be spin but they
» still seem pretty confident that it is marketable and say it would be
» relativity easy.
»
» 6. I think they are low on cash, but I think they are saving what
» little cash they have to push their other product as they probably see
» them as being more valuable to them. In the meantime licensing TRC to
» another company would still generate revenue for them as they would get an
» initial payment and a cut of profits after that. They probably think Bosley
» are chomping at the bit to get their hands on TRC, and they do obviously
» want it.
»
» 7. The fact that they are only going to continue TRC with the help
» of a partner seems like a huge set back and it could be, but Bosley are
» very interested in TRC (draw your own conclusions their, I know all you
» conspiracy theorists out there believe that Bosley want to keep any
» effective treatments/cures so they can keep peddling HT’s, I however don’t
» think so, they could REPLASE the revenue made from HT’s with that of HM or
» even both, for example HM may not grow any hairs in severe scarring so a
» HT may be needed)
»
» 8. I don’t know why but I believe they are more sure that they are
» performing regenesis rather than neogenesis, which is bad for long term
» baldies, no so bad for recent thinners. Maybe I’m reading in between the
» lines to much
»
» 9. IF they get Bosely as a partner and they Don’t need phase III
» they would most likely release in the USA first, therefore needing FDA
» approval, which means ATLEAST another year from when the partnership is
» completed to get approval, although if they want to release in the UK
» first then it would also need a similar timescale to get the regulative
» authority’s approval.
»
» 10. IF phase III is needed you can add ATLEAST another year onto
» that, but if in the UK they could commercialize at the same time, under
» strict guidelines.(not sure if this could be done in the US) This depends
» though if Bosely would be willing to continue trials at Farjo’s clinic.
»
» 11. They are still filling patents for TRC, which leads me to
» believe the procedure itself is increasingly more successful. Notice that
» they are filling patents for the USA.
»
» 12. Someone posted that ICX have removed the ‘2010 earliest
» possible release date’ from their site , it is still there, the info on
» TRC remains unchanged at the moment.
»
» We shouldn’t completely loose hope in TRC yet, at least not until after
» they release final phase II data. If no specific information and/or
» pictures are released by then then I think it would be a much safer bet
» that its not going to be here any time soon.
» I too am disillusioned by the frankly pathetic last 2 announcements but
» they still deserve another chance to show they have something.
» For me, if by this time next year they haven’t proven themselves then I am
» through with TRC but at the moment we still don’t know enough to ultimately
» call fail or success, for all we know they could have something up their
» sleeves with this partnership deal, like near term commercialization
» (wishfull thinking) :stuck_out_tongue:
»
» Sorry for the long post everyone I just felt I needed to write all that
» down to get it off my chest.
» Most of it is just my personal opinion, I know no more than every one else
» hear and am trying to learn myself, so none should be taken as fact and I
» could also be completely wrong.
»
» should too much emphasis be placed on the stock price considering they
» have other products?
»
» Does anybody know what they mean by pre-stimulation? do they mean the DP
» cells or stimulation of the scalp?
»
» On another note, I know a Trichologist who works “closely”(in their own
» words) with Farjo’s clinic, Although I don’t know how closely, could be
» very insignificant as in just recommending patients.
» Never the less I am going to ask the Dr’s opinion tomorrow and try and see
» if they know any additional info, could be promising as they have mentioned
» to me they are aware of the trial at the Farjo clinic.

Well reasoned post.

Oh, and by the way, I was not expecting pictures (were there pictures in their report for any of the other products they’re developing?).


#5

» Well reasoned post.
»
» Oh, and by the way, I was not expecting pictures (were there pictures in
» their report for any of the other products they’re developing?).

I think a lot of other people were expecting pics though.
No there were no other pics for their other products.

Maybe the problem was, like me people were expecting this to be the end of phase II and therefore we’d be having pics but now we know this is not the case.

However they did say that pictures would be analyzed at the end of phase II, but whether they release the pictures to the public is a different matter.

If I recall correctly they produced before and after pictures after the phase I safety trial but they had to be ‘leaked on to the internet’

I dont know If you saw the phase I pics? even though they used low dosages, non pre-stimulated procedure I was mildly impressed.

they were zoomed in pics of a small area with a tatted dot in the middle, the existing hair was shaved short.
In the after pic you could see what looked like a few new short little hairs poking through where they weren’t before.
On the forum where I found the pics people tried overlapping the pics, some people speculated that they weren’t the same people as there looked like a mole or something that was in the before pic but didn’t seem to be in the after one, IIRC people were even saying that the new hairs were already there but shaved shorter and allowed to grow out in the after pic.
Other people believed them to be real as a lot of the pre existing hairs lined up perfectly.
I don’t see why or how ICX would have used fake pictures, maybe mixed up before and after pics of different patients? but they looked like they aligned up to me.
I can’t remember where I found them now as it was a long time ago but I remember I was told to type the file name something like cell01 or something like that in Google.

Maybe someone could post them both if they saved them?so those that haven’t seen them yet can draw their own conclutions.


#6

Yes, we can compare Vavelta and Trichocyte because:
-both are based on the same technology, i.e., multiplication of cells.
-because TRC phaseI was a low dosage trial, and 5/7 patients improved. PhaseII without preestimulation was the same as Ia, but with higher dose, and the results were worse.

ICX mentioned before in their website that TRC was planned for commercialization in 2010. Now, I cannot find any mention to this 2010 launch.
Correct me if I am wrong.


#7

» ICX mentioned before in their website that TRC was planned for
» commercialization in 2010. Now, I cannot find any mention to this 2010
» launch.
» Correct me if I am wrong.

http://www.intercytex.com/icx/products/aesthetic/icxtrc/faqsicxtrc/
2. When will ICX-TRC be on the market?
ICX-TRC is classified as a medicine by the regulatory authorities and hence has to undergo a series of clinical trials before it can be offered on the market. We currently estimate that the earliest that ICX-TRC would be available on the market is 2010 although we don’t know in which country it will be launched first.

Naturally it may be argued that they haven’t updated the page yet.

One thing which no-one has commented on yet is the following line: “The barrier
to commercial success for ICX-TRC is relatively low, being the ability to increase hair count in transplanted or thinning areas (my bold).” Once more that would suggest rejuvenation over neogenesis.


#8

» Yes, we can compare Vavelta and Trichocyte because:
» -both are based on the same technology, i.e., multiplication of cells.
» -because TRC phaseI was a low dosage trial, and 5/7 patients improved.
» PhaseII without preestimulation was the same as Ia, but with higher dose,
» and the results were worse.
»
» ICX mentioned before in their website that TRC was planned for
» commercialization in 2010. Now, I cannot find any mention to this 2010
» launch.
» Correct me if I am wrong.

Vavelta is still very different to Trichocyte.

Yes but reason would assume that they are only going to peruse pre-stimulation (if they continue) as they have noted it is much more affective, with all patients and they have stated the chances are, the more injection the better.


#9

» » ICX mentioned before in their website that TRC was planned for
» » commercialization in 2010. Now, I cannot find any mention to this 2010
» » launch.
» » Correct me if I am wrong.
»
» http://www.intercytex.com/icx/products/aesthetic/icxtrc/faqsicxtrc/
» 2. When will ICX-TRC be on the market?
» ICX-TRC is classified as a medicine by the regulatory authorities and
» hence has to undergo a series of clinical trials before it can be offered
» on the market. We currently estimate that the earliest that ICX-TRC would
» be available on the market is 2010 although we don’t know in which country
» it will be launched first.
»
» Naturally it may be argued that they haven’t updated the page yet.
»
» One thing which no-one has commented on yet is the following line: “The
» barrier
» to commercial success for ICX-TRC is relatively low, being the ability to
» increase hair count in transplanted or thinning areas (my
» bold).” Once more that would suggest rejuvenation over neogenesis.

That is probably the most promising line in the article, its like they are trying to persuade potential partners its easy/ready to market :smiley:

Also it suggests they have tried it in a transplanted area? or are they guessing as I wasn’t aware of this?


#10

» Yes but reason would assume that they are only going to peruse
» pre-stimulation (if they continue) as they have noted it is much more
» affective, with all patients and they have stated the chances are, the
» more injection the better.

I am talking about higher dose, no more injections. Higher dose seems to be worse.
Furthermore, they don’t know if more sessions will mean more hair, because they don’t have clinical data for that.


#11

» » » ICX mentioned before in their website that TRC was planned for
» » » commercialization in 2010. Now, I cannot find any mention to this
» 2010
» » » launch.
» » » Correct me if I am wrong.
» »
» » http://www.intercytex.com/icx/products/aesthetic/icxtrc/faqsicxtrc/
» » 2. When will ICX-TRC be on the market?
» » ICX-TRC is classified as a medicine by the regulatory authorities and
» » hence has to undergo a series of clinical trials before it can be
» offered
» » on the market. We currently estimate that the earliest that ICX-TRC
» would
» » be available on the market is 2010 although we don’t know in which
» country
» » it will be launched first.
» »
» » Naturally it may be argued that they haven’t updated the page yet.
» »
» » One thing which no-one has commented on yet is the following line: “The
» » barrier
» » to commercial success for ICX-TRC is relatively low, being the ability
» to
» » increase hair count in transplanted or thinning areas (my
» » bold).” Once more that would suggest rejuvenation over neogenesis.
»
»
» That is probably the most promising line in the article, its like they are
» trying to persuade potential partners its easy/ready to market :smiley:
»
» Also it suggests they have tried it in a transplanted area? or are they
» guessing as I wasn’t aware of this?

are you on ICX payroll
just curious


#12

»
» http://www.intercytex.com/icx/products/aesthetic/icxtrc/faqsicxtrc/
» 2. When will ICX-TRC be on the market?
» ICX-TRC is classified as a medicine by the regulatory authorities and
» hence has to undergo a series of clinical trials before it can be offered
» on the market. We currently estimate that the earliest that ICX-TRC would
» be available on the market is 2010 although we don’t know in which country
» it will be launched first.
»
» Naturally it may be argued that they haven’t updated the page yet.

Ok, but I think they mentioned 2010 in the main TRC page. Or other pages in their website.

»
» One thing which no-one has commented on yet is the following line: “The
» barrier
» to commercial success for ICX-TRC is relatively low, being the ability to
» increase hair count in transplanted or thinning areas (my
» bold).” Once more that would suggest rejuvenation over neogenesis.

Thats weird. “transplanted areas”??? what does that mean? do they refer to the donor site, or the recipient site?
well, I am afraid that at this point, this is not so important now. We must know if TRC is dead or can be “re-estimulated”.


#13

» » For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
» » This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting
» more
» » cells.
» »
» » I believe this is what happened with TRC.
» » Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they
» » increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even
» » losing hair!!
» » (before prestimulation was used).
»
»
» I wouldn’t read too much into the little information in this report.
»
» As for the subjects who lost hair, I wouldn’t automatically blame it on
» ICX.
»
» Aren’t the subjects people who have a hair loss problem to begin with?
»
» Chances are if they would have continued to lose hair during the test
» period with or without ICX.
»
» AND in any event, pre-stimulation fixed it. You’re just in a negatvie
» mood.

oh, yeah, its just my negative mood!
May I remind you, that in phase Ia, 5 out of 7 subjects had increased hair numbers, even if it was a safety trial, and hair growth was not expected??
Then, Phase II, where hair growth was expected, you get only 3/5 of the sujects with increased hair numbers, and 2/5 with decreased hair numbers.

You can call it… “spanish dude’s bad mood”.
I prefer to call it, simply, a disaster.

Then the magical preestimulation technique solves the situation.
This is mentioned in the September 07 report. All patients treated this way increase hair numbers. They mention percentages (13-105%).
Now, after 6 months, the number of treated trialists are the same, and they say that they all keep increased hair numbers, but they don’t mention figures anymore.

why???
if everything works so good, and they need money, why don’t they publish the numbers at least, to drive the stocks higher, and to attract investors?


#14

» » Yes but reason would assume that they are only going to peruse
» » pre-stimulation (if they continue) as they have noted it is much more
» » affective, with all patients and they have stated the chances are, the
» » more injection the better.
»
» I am talking about higher dose, no more injections. Higher dose seems to
» be worse.
» Furthermore, they don’t know if more sessions will mean more hair, because
» they don’t have clinical data for that.

Oh I see, you mean a higher dose per injection?

They keep saying that more injections could mean more, I don’t know if they have tested this theory, maybe they are basing it on something like 2 injections in an area grows more than 1?
I don’t know. They also mentioned "by using the Intercytex cell therapy technique
almost limitless hair regeneration is possible"
Which sounds very promising to me.


#15

» » » For Vavelta, high dosage results are worse than low dosage.
» » » This is bad, because you cannot improve the results just by injecting
» » more
» » » cells.
» » »
» » » I believe this is what happened with TRC.
» » » Phase I, low dosage results were surprisingly good, but when they
» » » increased the dosage in Phase II, it was a disaster, with people even
» » » losing hair!!
» » » (before prestimulation was used).
» »
» »
» » I wouldn’t read too much into the little information in this report.
» »
» » As for the subjects who lost hair, I wouldn’t automatically blame it on
» » ICX.
» »
» » Aren’t the subjects people who have a hair loss problem to begin with?
» »
» » Chances are if they would have continued to lose hair during the test
» » period with or without ICX.
» »
» » AND in any event, pre-stimulation fixed it. You’re just in a negatvie
» » mood.
»
» oh, yeah, its just my negative mood!
» May I remind you, that in phase Ia, 5 out of 7 subjects had increased hair
» numbers, even if it was a safety trial, and hair growth was not expected??
» Then, Phase II, where hair growth was expected, you get only 3/5 of the
» sujects with increased hair numbers, and 2/5 with decreased hair numbers.
»
» You can call it… “spanish dude’s bad mood”.
» I prefer to call it, simply, a disaster.
»
» Then the magical preestimulation technique solves the situation.
» This is mentioned in the September 07 report. All patients treated this
» way increase hair numbers. They mention percentages (13-105%).
» Now, after 6 months, the number of treated trialists are the same, and
» they say that they all keep increased hair numbers, but they don’t mention
» figures anymore.

»
» why???
» if everything works so good, and they need money, why don’t they publish
» the numbers at least
, to drive the stocks higher, and to attract
» investors?

Its because this was intended to be a minor update to show things are going well. They are expected to analyses all data at the end of phaseII and then probably release figures.


#16

» Oh I see, you mean a higher does per injection?

Yes, higher dosage means that they inject more cells per injection.

»
» They keep saying that more injections could mean more, I don’t know if
» they have tested this theory, maybe they are basing it on something like 2
» injections in an area grows more than 1?
» I don’t know. They also mentioned “by using the Intercytex cell therapy
» technique
» almost limitless hair regeneration is possible”
» Which sounds very promising to me.

These coments about “limitless hair” are based on the fact that ICX solved the multiplication problem. ICX is able to multiply DP cells as much as they want. They have unlimited supply of DP cells now.

It was previously thought, that if DP cells were in unlimited supply, then you would have unlimited hair.
But, now it seems that this is not so easy.
So, this sentence must now be corrected. “Is possible” express a possibility, not a certainty.


#17

» Its because this was intended to be a minor update to show things are
» going well. They are expected t analyses all data at the end of phaseII
» and then probably release figures.

well, they did a hell of an “update”.
“downdate” I would say.


#18

» » Its because this was intended to be a minor update to show things are
» » going well. They are expected t analyses all data at the end of phaseII
» » and then probably release figures.
»
» well, they did a hell of “update”.
» “downdate” I would say.

:smiley:


#19

http://www.vavelta.com/vavelta/mp/story/vaveltaface/cell02.pdf

page 19


#20

» http://www.vavelta.com/vavelta/mp/story/vaveltaface/cell02.pdf
»
» page 19

Those are the phase I pics I saw. :smiley:

And hanging, no I’m on Aderans pay roll :wink: J/K

On another note, I’m going to give up trying to put my point across because I simply no longer care, I’m not in any disparate need for TRC to come out any time soon so I’m just going to take it as it comes. If TRC comes out, great. If it doesn’t, oh well never mind.
I will be checking for any new news and will probably continue to post, but i’m going to try and not get involved in any debates anymore.
This hole topic of TRC is getting far to repetitive.
The point I was just trying to make is we don’t have a legitimate reason to discount TRC yet nor do we have a legitimate reason to be overly optimistic, we still don’t have enough info.