» » » i know that they abrade your
» » » scalp, but didn’t they submit a patent that included dozens of
» possible
» » » chemicals that could be applied to the abraded scalp?
» »
» » In a way, the patents do list a lot of drugs but they are mostly going
» to
» » be combined and used for different purposes, I.e Gefitnib (a cancer
» drug,
» » for EGFR inhibition) finasteride (to inhibit DHT) anti-inflamitory (for
» » inflamation) etc.
»
»
» okay, listen you complete and total dumbass, you have absolutely no
» concept of how patents are written and why they make lists of things.
I do know how patents are writen, thanks.
» they DO NOT include a list of potential growth factors and chemicals to
» use in sequence in the same procedure. they put a list in their patent so
» that the patent covers all the different possibilities of what MIGHT WORK.
Yes they do list a drugs that MIGHT be used in sequence in the same procedure.
Thats how they find out what works, testing different techniques and variations.
They have got a good idea of what substances they needed to do particular things and they have patented all the variations to stop others doing something similar.
» they have no evidence at his point that any specific one of these things
» WILL work. they just make a list of things that they think MIGHT work
» (based on their understanding of the science at the time they are writing
» the patent, NOT based on experiments they have already done on all of these
» chemicals.)
They injected various things in the Mice experiments, so you are wrong.
» then they include all these things in the patent to COVER ALL THE BASES so
» that (1) they are covered in case they test one of these things later and
» it happens to work, so they don’t have to write a brand new patent; and (2)
» just in case someone else tries to test one of these things, it will fall
» under follica’s patent, so the other researchers can’t use it or patent
» it.
Already said.
» » Its not like they are going to abrade, try a cancer drug and if thet
» » doesn’t work move onto something like wounding and finasteride. They
» will
» » abrade and use a concocsion of different things for different purposes.
»
» no, no, no, you DO NOT know they will necessarily use a “concocsion”
» (whatever that is… i’ve heard of a concoction but not a concocsion.) it
» may very well turn out that only one of the chemicals and drugs that
» they’ve listed works by itself. in fact, if anything at all works, it is
» just as likely to be one factor by itself rather than a random concoction.
Did I say the concotion would be random? No I don’t think I did.
If it works in humans it is VERY unlikely that wounding followed by one thing will work, if it did we would hear about a lot more people taking gefitnib regrowing hair after they scrape they get sunburned or their scalp scraped for example.
They may try wounding and an egfr inhibitor in one test.
In another, wounding, an egfr inhibitor and an antiinflamitory.
In another, wounding, an egfr inhibitor, an antiinflamitory and antihistamine.
The most extreme would be along the lines of; depiate then 3 days later wound followed by adding at different stages a Small molecule EGFR inhibitor, an antihistamine, an anti-inflammatory, retinoid, anti-androgen, immunosuppressant, a channel opener, antibiotic and antimicrobial.
Of course they could discover that fewer are needed but it very unlikely going to be wounding followed by one thing.
At the very least, in my opinion, wounding followed by a small molecule egfr inhibitor could work, but not very likely, the other thigs such as an atiinflamitory are used to aid in the inflamation of the skin, so they are likely to be used in sequence.
For example, how likely do you think it would be if wounding followed by minoxidil would regenerate lots of hair follicles? not very, they stand a much better chance in sequence.
(minox is in the patents, you obviously havent read any of them)
» making a concoction is NOT why they list all those chemicals in the
» patent. learn a little something about how patents are written, guy…
» this is done ALL THE TIME in writing patents, in fact i believe gho did
» this too, and so does almost anyone writing a patent for almost anything.
» if you have a specific idea, you list ALL THE DIFFERENT WAYS you can think
» of that will likely make the idea work, because when you apply for the
» patent you don’t have to know for sure that it will work, you just have to
» believe it will work. so you list all the ways that could make it work.
Look they have an Idea of what might work in sequence, they listed lots of different types of each to stop people doing similar procedures with different variations of a drug.
They will only need 1 type of egfr inhibitor, they may test to see which is most effective but the rest will be to protect from others doing similar procedures.
For example, lets look at the the small molecule egfr inhibitor, in the patents they have leflunomide, gefitinib, erlotinib, lapatinib, canertinib, vandetanib, CL-387785, PKI166, pelitinib, HKI-272, or HKI-357.
Now lets look at the antihistamine, in the patent thy have; mepyramine, diphenhydramine, or antazoline. In the final procedure they are likely going to need one of these.
» like if i think of a brand new type of car engine, something truly
» revolutionary, but haven’t done extensive testing on it yet, i might put in
» the patent that it could run on gasoline, ethanol, biofuels, hydrogen,
» natural gas, and lemon oil, etc. even though i haven’t tested all of those
» things, and maybe haven’t even tested one of them.
BY THE WAY, they have tested different compounds by injecting them into mice and mice with human scalp skin, they are soon going to be testing on humans.
» THIS IS HOW PATENTS ARE WRITTEN… learn something rather than making wild
» speculations here and spouting out a bunch of crap as if you know anything.
» it’s so obvious you are talking over your head and spouting a bunch of
» made-up garbage just to look smart.
What I said wasn’t speculation, I even posted a link to back up what I was saying.
Its not my fault if you don’t understand what I have written, I think it is you that needs to learn something.
Your the one “spouting” a load of crap you know nothing about, its obvious and you have pretty much already admited it.
You have plain as day written that you understand not even the basics of what follica are doing and now you are making a feeble atempt to seem you know what your on about, back tracking and making up a whole load of rubish.
The patents are filed, they are getting on with tests so we will know once and for all if it will work or not and how they do it.
What I know about patents is not important anyway, infact I don’t even care what you think I know.
I still stand by what I said.
Whats with all the lame signatures and refering to your self in the third person anyway?
You do generally come accross as quite stupid.
» you have FAILED!!!
»
» GOOD DAY, sir!!!
