“Richard has spent over 6 years at Intercytex during which it has grown from an early-stage pre-clinical company to one with a product on the market and a late stage pipeline with substantial value.”
hmm “late stage pipeline” i wonder which product he might be referring to
cant be vavaelta cos its already on market, cant be skn cos it just started phase 2
between TRC AND PRO but TRC is of more commercial value than PRO
botox, facelift, liposuction would all be nothing compared to TRC as far as making money goes but UK economy is going into recession so perhaps the government (MHRA) would allow this be sold in the UK soon. 1 year of sales would bring in at least £25B to the economy a year.
Its way more of value than TRC. Why? Because PRO works, and is in phase III. TRC probably doesnt work yet and phase III is not planned to happen unless someone pays for more research.
If it was TRC then it would be working awesome and we would have already heard it in the last report.
Besides, its just normal corporate talk. Everything has substantial value in corporate statements.
Also, PRO’s target market value is just 80% of the current hair loss market value. Its not small as you may think. I know that real hairloss cure would have huge market. But TRC is not real hair loss cure.
I’m sure they would love to be selling it soon, if it worked well. But because in the last report they clearly said they do not plan to push it forward to phase III themselves, it probably does not work well yet. So seeing ICX-TRC being sold soon is just a fantasy.
» Its way more of value than TRC. Why? Because PRO works, and is in phase
» III. TRC probably doesnt work yet and phase III is not planned to happen
» unless someone pays for more research.
»
» If it was TRC then it would be working awesome and we would have already
» heard it in the last report.
»
» Besides, its just normal corporate talk. Everything has substantial value
» in corporate statements.
»
» Also, PRO’s target market value is just 80% of the current hair loss
» market value. Its not small as you may think. I know that real hairloss
» cure would have huge market. But TRC is not real hair loss cure.
Debris couldn’t be more right, anyways they tried saying trc was “within five years” bull just a month ago! C’mon guys
I’m very optimistic about Folica but not about TRC at this point.
TRC’s last set of results is clearly an attempt to delay showing their real hand about its progress. And the refusal to even fund a third phase on their own speaks volumes. It’s pretty close to a vote of “no confidence” in the whole project.
» I’m very optimistic about Folica but not about TRC at this point.
»
» TRC’s last set of results is clearly an attempt to delay showing their
» real hand about its progress. And the refusal to even fund a third phase
» on their own speaks volumes. It’s pretty close to a vote of “no
» confidence” in the whole project.
There is no reason nor a single one proof that follica works better then ICX. Nor a reason to think that it will be on the market sooner then ICX. Nor a reason to think that it won’t fail.
Perhaps the only proof showing that it actually could work in humans, is the gefinitib photo. One guy was able to grow hair or maybe was too shy to tell his hot cancer doctor that he’s had his crotch hair transplanted on top of his head. (actually I do not believe he had, it looked not like a HT, but well I’m not a HT doc I really cant tell for sure. And even if I assumed it was 100% genuine (which is a bit rare situation in the hairloss industry), its one guy, out of all other gefinitib patients. It still sounds like it wont be easy to reproduce it.)
ICX has never produced ANYTHING resembling the skin graft regrowth photos, which Folica seems to be able to get repeatedly. And ICX is known to be in clinical trials for all-new substances, whereas all the Folica drugs & methods are 100% available to us right now.
So Folica’s situation offers us full access to all the raw materials & methods they might use + it’s the first HM method to produce ANYTHING really cosmetically impressive on human skin of any form.
And Folica’s method also presents a case of somebody “stumbling into” some results which are already better than anything ICX-TRC has ever produced. He got this result while dying of cancer and doing 3/4ths of the procedure wrong. (Hair transplant? Man, just let the conspiracy ideas go. The patient was photographed with the hair 3 months after he started the medication. That’s not a hell of a lot of time to have a HT and also get it all healed up & grown-out.)
If all that is “no better than ICX,” then I’d love to know exactly what situation actually would satisfy your requirements for increased optimism.
I will start to be optimistic about some treatment when it repeatedly grows hair on a living mpb suferers.
As I said before, the guy with the cancer is quite significant for me. Show me another one and I’ll agree that we have something here that might help us soon.
I put no value in hair growth on mice including immunsupressed mice. I think you are mistaken when you said it was the first time we had seen something like the follica pictures. I have seen similar pictures before many times. These creatures grow hair out of thin air. If you take your balding follicles and put them onto immuno supressed mice, it grows as well. on its own. no EGRF nor WNT needed. For these reasons, mouse experiments are of very little value for me.
Yeah, but how did the fresh follicles get onto the mouse’s human skin graft in the first place?
As I understand it, they demonstrated that the EGF-R inhibition method actually CREATED new follicles from scratch. Follicles with normal cycling, direction, and characteristics.
IMO that’s huge progress no matter how you stack it.
» Yeah, but how did the fresh follicles get onto the mouse’s human skin graft
» in the first place?
»
» As I understand it, they demonstrated that the EGF-R inhibition method
» actually CREATED new follicles from scratch. Follicles with normal
» cycling, direction, and characteristics.
»
»
» IMO that’s huge progress no matter how you stack it.
Exactly - the point is they created NEW hair follicles in the human skin. Not that they got previously balding hair follicles to grow. The only thing that we dont know as to whther it will work is on actual bald/balding scalp. I think balding scalp will prove resistant but I think we/Follica have the tools and or understanding to work around that infairly short order. At any rate I dont think there will be some great insoluble mystery as to why it doesnt work in balding scalp and at worst if everything fails and the sun falls out of the sky and they get no results they will learn a lot about the balding process from looking at why it doesnt work in balding skin. Which would almost certainly give them a way around the problem anyway like I said before…
hh
they developed the longest time of all comanies we know of.
if anything will work, its intercytex. a better bet is still neosh101, but i think noone in here would consider it a cure. intercytex wont be a cure aswell, but for people with no nw6-7 it could help much.
i dont think it will be here very soon though. maybe in 5 years. so in about 2013.
though i dont understand why you are all so pessimistic about ICX. sure , they could fail, but who couldnt? acell isnt real i think. look at their website, the company just exist from 2001-2008, so they cant and dont have made FDA-tests.
we have to wait until september. maybe then ICX will come out with good news and you all change your view. maybe im wrong and they will come out with bad news, but then i think there wont be anything for a long time, at least not follica or acell.
» 1) because they are in phase II already
»
» 2) they developed the longest time of all comanies we know of.
»
» if anything will work, its intercytex. a better bet is still neosh101, but
» i think noone in here would consider it a cure. intercytex wont be a cure
» aswell, but for people with no nw6-7 it could help much.
»
» i dont think it will be here very soon though. maybe in 5 years. so in
» about 2013.
»
» though i dont understand why you are all so pessimistic about ICX. sure ,
» they could fail, but who couldnt? acell isnt real i think. look at their
» website, the company just exist from 2001-2008, so they cant and dont have
» made FDA-tests.
»
» we have to wait until september. maybe then ICX will come out with good
» news and you all change your view. maybe im wrong and they will come out
» with bad news, but then i think there wont be anything for a long time, at
» least not follica or acell.
Sure, ICX could work, but here’s why we lost faith in them:
No photos.
Extremely small cohorts.
They didn’t test if repeat treatments will increase hair counts.
No consistency without dermabrasion
No plans for Phase III without funding.
Plan to work with Bosley - the biggest crooks in town.
Even if it worked today, the market penetration would be slower than a snail because it’s solely reliant on expensive cell cultivation equipment.
Did u expect them to trial the entire male population. They r scientists and they know more than us.
No here know anything about their tests.
Do u think they will throw away 6/7 years of hard work ?? They’ve known for long that phase III is not required and have planned for it.
I couldn’t disagree more. The £2M government grant was used to develop the commercial side i’e the robot to expedite the process. The market is half the world’s male population. That is around 2 billion men and when it comes there will be a stampede.
They r not at liberty to show u photos. Their trialist were required to sign confidentialty forms and do u think they will share data with us ??
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.
