Here is my speculation.
We have seen the measly hairs on rodents that ICX was able to grow, not very impressive, but we had hopes that the procedure would be able to be refined over time and make new hair or at least rejuvinate existing hair imprinting its donor-area DNA profile upon existing stem cells.
Now we have seen Follica, grow very thick DENSE hairs on mice. The hairs are white on mice that dont have epidermal growth factor blocked with an expensive drug for nine days post-wounding, but mice dont have pigmented skin. Its likely humans wont even need this unless its hair-growth for unpigmented scars. The hairs follica grew at l1 weeks, http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=msnbc&vid=3b251041-8028-403d-a6fc-e749264afc01 were cosmetically very signifigant. They wont be white after using EGF-blockers for the nine day re-epilithialization period as later experiments proved.
Here is my scenario: Follica will be able to be used in thinned out -donor- areas after FUE transplants and in strip scars in the future to “rebuff” the donor area with donor-area-like hair. This will enable the donor area to be “re-harvested” once or twice for more frontal hair. In effect, HM.
I worry that follica WILL NOT be very successful in frontal scalp skin that has lost a water layer, and alot of fatty acids in the baldness process. The hairs formed up front might be small and weak. BUT IN THE BACK OF OUR HEADS, the hairs formed will probably be just about as cosmetically good as the donor hairs around them, and the density should be very good.
The wounds needed have to be over a cm in circumference, so believe it or not, the donor holes post transplant will probably have to heal, and be abraded with an instrument following a shave back there to make more hairs for further transplantation.
This is what I think can be done in the near-term. Im quite frankly losing faith in Aderans by the day…they never have even been able to show us a good photo of mice growing much hair. ICX has posted a mouse’s hair growing on an ear, and one thick photo of growth in the middle of a mouse’s back (the pic that got me excited about them), and a severely up-close shot of some hair on a scalp, but it was so short as to make it impossible to judge the quality. There is evidence for de noveau hairgrowth following wounding in humans in dermatologocial archives (Klingman noted it after acne dermabrasion), and we have all seen over the years (Ive been looking on hairloss boards since about 2001) of the occasional claim that this guy or that was cut and grew hair, injected minoxidil and grew hair, was hit by lightening on his head and grew hair, or razor bladed his scalp and put garlic (lithium is in garlic) on his crown and regrew some new hair. I have personally seen a car accident victim with wierdly thick hair growth in a head wound that was very severe----right in his temple area, thicker than the other hair on his head–which struck me as strange.
Follica has went on the Today show and pretty much told the world that they think they “have it” and will have a real effective solution to baldness. They are more optimistic than I am. I just hope they can create more hair for the donor area to be used in future transplantation.
ICX may have more success if they follow what I think might be useful with Follica, focusing on getting good hair growth in donor-area skin.
For Example, if a guy gets a FUE transplant, Intercytex could do its thing, but re-inject THE DONOR AREA instead of the front. I imagine that getting big thick hairs to grow in donor area skin that is thicker, has its water layer and fatty acid layer, will be eaiser than getting the hair to grow well in frontal scalp. Once big hairs are made in the back, they can be transplanted in the FUE-manner up front. I bet if they did this, they’d find that they would have more success. The MPB-process thins out the skin in the frontal scalp, making hair FORMATION there probably a much more tricky process. Id love to be wrong about that, but I have a feeling this is why the progress hasn’t been what was orignially expected. What better place to “cultivate” the new hair growth than in the back of the head, where donor hair comes from?
Thats my best guesses for what could get a real “hair multiplication” going in the near term instead of ten more years.