Hm how far away

Stem cell; cell based hair therapy
41

You could take Armani’s predictions as being non-self-serving honesty . . . or you could just as easily take them as a rationalization for justifying unsafely aggressive HTs.

I’m not convicting him, I’m just pointing out that his statements can cut more than one way.

42

Everyone can search this forum and see for themselves what I said or not.

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/search.html?search=dead

That not before 2013 was before this new wave of PR articles and even some of the PR articles now do state 5 years. I do not see how that is off the mark.

If you want another prediction you can catch me on later, You can search this forum and see that few weeks ago (I do not remember exactly when) I said ICX stock is going to go up. I still think this is a case as well. See few months from now on. Here I do not advise anyone buying of course.

43

The sciences of these various treatments tell a certain tale right now: Folica & Acell either VERY soon or not at all, ICX is probably 5 years away at the absolute earliest & best case scenario, anything else is 10-15+ years, etc.

People can dig through a million old press releases & interviews to cherry-pick statements to say whatever they want to hear though.

If you want a statement that the ______ treatment should be coming to market next year, then you can find it. Or the year after that. Or the year after that. Or the year after that.

Anyone can basically decide what they want to hear, pick a certain statement to believe, and then act all indignant & betrayed when it doesn’t happen.

44

» The sciences of these various treatments tell a certain tale right now:
» Folica & Acell either VERY soon or not at all, ICX is probably 5 years away
» at the absolute earliest & best case scenario, anything else is 10-15+
» years, etc.
»
»
»
» People can dig through a million old press releases & interviews to
» cherry-pick statements to say whatever they want to hear though.
»
» If you want a statement that the ______ treatment should be coming to
» market next year, then you can find it. Or the year after that. Or the
» year after that. Or the year after that.
»
» Anyone can basically decide what they want to hear, pick a certain
» statement to believe, and then act all indignant & betrayed when it doesn’t
» happen.

sorry to say but the mans right. im staying optimistic on this whole waiting game but im not letting it blind the truth… which is it may work and may not… but i really want it to work :wink: does anyone have any updates on the human trials? im dying to see those results.

45

» It’s amazing how fast things can change, a few months ago the focus was on
» Intercytex and Aderans, now nobody talks about these two anymore, instead
» the focus is on Follica and Acell.

Many people, myself included, are desperate for anything that will give us hair. So we cling onto anything that gives us hope.

21 months ago I wrote Intercytex off as failed. That was about Sept. 2006 (maybe October of that year). During that time, Intercytex has really done nothing. They’ve demonstrated no proof of concept, no pictures, nothing.

More and more people are coming to realize that Intercytex has nothing to show for the millions they have spent. So, people are giving up hope on Intercytex. As they should.

Aderans? I don’t think they’ve ever done anything at all. They were never worth talking about.

So, now comes along Follica. And people cling to them for hope. It is possible, of course, that Follica could end up a big disappointment. Then we’ve got no hope at all.

hope

noun

  1. the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best:

  2. a person or thing in which expectations are centered

Hope is the key. For some of us, it is the only reason we get out of bed each day. Without hope, we don’t have much of anything. Intercytex has given us no reason for our hope. That’s why we’ve written them off.

46

Don’t forget about Acell.

They’re not going around singing their hair multiplication song to every reporter who will listen, but that doesn’t mean their stuff is any less viable. To my mind, their approach seems almost as likely to work as Folica’s.

47

» To my mind, their approach seems almost as likely to work as
» Folica’s.

Then, we are f*cked about follica.

48

» Then, we are f*cked about follica.

I don’t see why you’re so sure.

Acell wouldn’t really have to regrow-all new follicles just to put a lot of new hairs on our heads.

First dermabrade the scalp skin, and then see if Acell will heal the damaged follicles in the affected area back to a “younger” state. Doesn’t that sound exactly like what Acell has been very good at doing to every other human & animal tissue that they’ve tried it on so far?

49

» » Then, we are f*cked about follica.
»
» I don’t see why you’re so sure.
»
» Acell wouldn’t really have to regrow-all new follicles just to put a lot
» of new hairs on our heads.

Yes, and we know that’s soooooo easy

» First dermabrade the scalp skin, and then see if Acell will heal the
» damaged follicles in the affected area back to a “younger” state.

It might work, but I woudn’t have high hopes for it, don’t make it sound like an easy thing, it isn’t, we know.

» Doesn’t that sound exactly like what Acell has been very good at doing to
» every other human & animal tissue that they’ve tried it on so far?

Well, if I go to http://www.acell.com/med_studies.php … I can’t see anything related to hair, and don’t tell me that " Treatment of Full-Thickness Skin Wounds " equivales to " treatment of hair growth " . And do remember that medical products for human use are not currently available from acell, so we must wait and see if they are ever going to release a “hair product”. I don’t think “acell products” will work for everything, including hairloss, some people think about acell as if it were the “san grial” ( saint grail in english ? ), IMHO that’s ridiculous. I want to have hopes too, yes, I want, but hair regrowth it’s a very difficult task, I think we know it yet, don’t we ? I want something better than propecia and minoxidil for hair regrowth, something that it’s proven to work, and sorry but if follica doesn’t work at all, then I think HT is the only partial solution available … unfortunately. I think HM may be the solution we want but it’s still far away.

50

» Well, if I go to http://www.acell.com/med_studies.php … I can’t see
» anything related to hair, and don’t tell me that " Treatment of
» Full-Thickness Skin Wounds " equivales to " treatment of hair growth " .
» And do remember that medical products for human use are not currently
» available from acell, so we must wait and see if they are ever going to
» release a “hair product”. I don’t think “acell products” will work for
» everything, including hairloss, some people think about acell as if it were
» the “san grial” ( saint grail in english ? ), IMHO that’s ridiculous. I
» want to have hopes too, yes, I want, but hair regrowth it’s a very
» difficult task, I think we know it yet, don’t we ? I want something better
» than propecia and minoxidil for hair regrowth, something that it’s proven
» to work, and sorry but if follica doesn’t work at all, then I think HT is
» the only partial solution available … unfortunately. I think HM may be
» the solution we want but it’s still far away.

I’m glad someone mentioned this. Why do people assume that Acell will be applicable to hair?

51

Why do some people assume Acell WON’T be workable for hair?

Somebody emailed the company about it a few months ago. They basically said something like: “We have no plans to move forwards with testing for that purpose yet, but you’re right, it sounds like a viable thing to test our product for.”

As for the timeframe, well . . . You can wait for Acell to release a fully packaged “hair product” if you want. If it works, some of us will do it as soon as we can physically get our hands on the stuff.

52

I think HM may be the solution we want but it’s still far away.

While I agree with most of your points, I think HM falls into the same category. First, HM is not a cure at all. That alone means it’s not the ultimate solution to MPB. And unless the technology improves dramatically, HM will be just another treatment option for bald guys.

Secondly, HM was discovered and published ~ 25 years ago, and despite a number of attempts, no one has yet been able to bring this technology to market. That alone speaks volumes about the difficulty with this approach.

BTW, ‘wounding’ now appears to be an important part of Intercytex’s HM protocol (read the update posted here recently, where they talk about prepping the scalp with abrasion prior to the application of HM), just as it is with Follica’s protocol.

HM – at least the first generation version – doesn’t give me goosebumps. I think most guys are overestimating what it will be able to accomplish. It’s too early to tell about Follica.

53

» I’m glad someone mentioned this. Why do people assume that Acell will be
» applicable to hair?

I really haven’t paid much attention to Acell (and I have no idea if it will do squat for hair loss), but the concept is this: it appears to regenerate organs, at least partially. So, in theory, it may be able to regenerate hair follicles.

My idea of how it would work is that you would first injure the skin in some way, apply the Acell powder, and then the skin and all its appendages (like hair follicles) would regenerate. I have no clue if this approach would actually work in practice.

54

» Why do some people assume Acell WON’T be workable for hair?

Because what must be proven is that “it” ( whatever “it” is ) works

»
»
» Somebody emailed the company about it a few months ago. They basically
» said something like: “We have no plans to move forwards with testing for
» that purpose yet, but you’re right, it sounds like a viable thing to test
» our product for.”

so what ?

»
»
»
»
» As for the timeframe, well . . . You can wait for Acell to release a fully
» packaged “hair product” if you want. If it works,

Sorry, but what is “it” ? do you mean the powder that was said to regrow that fingertip ? Not everybody is sure about that “miracle”, see this :

» some of us will do it as soon as we can physically get our hands on the
» stuff.

55

» > I think HM may be the solution we want but it’s still far away.
»
» While I agree with most of your points, I think HM falls into the same
» category. First, HM is not a cure at all.

Yes, I agree of course, but if it would produce the same results as HT does, then I would be happy, not to mention whether it works better.

56

» > I think HM may be the solution we want but it’s still far away.
»
» While I agree with most of your points, I think HM falls into the same
» category. First, HM is not a cure at all. That alone means it’s not the
» ultimate solution to MPB. And unless the technology improves dramatically,
» HM will be just another treatment option for bald guys.
»
» Secondly, HM was discovered and published ~ 25 years ago, and despite a
» number of attempts, no one has yet been able to bring this technology to
» market. That alone speaks volumes about the difficulty with this approach.
»
» BTW, ‘wounding’ now appears to be an important part of Intercytex’s HM
» protocol (read the update posted here recently, where they talk about
» prepping the scalp with abrasion prior to the application of HM), just as
» it is with Follica’s protocol.
»
» HM – at least the first generation version – doesn’t give me goosebumps.
» I think most guys are overestimating what it will be able to accomplish.
» It’s too early to tell about Follica.

That is precisely where I stand now…hence why Im hoping the wounding really works. HM has been worked on for a good while now. ICX and Aderans have been at this since about 2002 or so in earnest, and yet we have nothing. We haven’t even seen a picture. Thats not good news at all, and we have to admit to ourselves that HM may never happen. ICX’s trialees that did better in their last trial might have seen ALL NEW GROWTH be the result of wounding. The injects might not have grown a damned hair for all we know. This is why I want Follica to get off its duff and have a trial on some bald men. If Follica fails…I’d say you can forget about any “new” hair on your head (other than body hair) for a long time.

57

I still think we’re collectively crazy for not putting more energy into the Acell possibility.

Last year we were practically rooting through ICX’s trash dumpster looking for news despite not a single decent regrowth photo from them ever.

This year we’re deciphering obtuse patent language, learning in intracacies of EGF-R suppression, WNT signalling, etc, hoping like hell that the 3-stage clinical trials process might not apply to a new treatment idea like Folica.

Meanwhile Acell has already been used on thousands of humans, and it’s merrily regenerating major missing tissue on pretty much everywhere they try it.

58

» I still think we’re collectively crazy for not putting more energy into the
» Acell possibility.
»

We are not crazy. With ACELL we still need to get a hair transplant, that’s probably the reason why people are not excited. The whole idea is to stay away from hair transplants.

59

» With ACELL we still need to get a hair transplant.

We don’t know that. We assume that based on no evidence either way.

If dermabrasion is sufficient to restart the body’s natural follicle regeneration process for both of the other two HM projects, then why does it suddenly stop being enough whenever the subject turns to this drug?

60

» » What about Aderans? How come there is zero news from Aderans?
»
» In fact there is some news from Aderans …They’ve just ousted their
» executives…not very promising is’t ?

Maybe. i dont know