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

Is there any news about research into these progenitor cells?


#1

Now that we know that the stem cells are not the problem and the progenitor are the problem doesn’t it seem like efforts to clone stem cells might as well stop and the effort should now be on cloning these progenitor cells instead???


#2

» Now that we know that the stem cells are not the problem and the progenitor
» are the problem doesn’t it seem like efforts to clone stem cells might as
» well stop and the effort should now be on cloning these progenitor cells
» instead???

What frustrates me is that there is so much foot dragging and everything moves at a glacial pace. I work as an engineer and i can tell you that if i took anywhere as long as these scientists at solving a problem, my ass would be fired. I have to produce results, not sit around researching for years on end and come up with nothing.


#3

» Now that we know that the stem cells are not the problem and the progenitor
» are the problem doesn’t it seem like efforts to clone stem cells might as
» well stop and the effort should now be on cloning these progenitor cells
» instead???

well,
“We have developed a means for introducing plasmid DNA into human hair follicle progenitor cells by applying a mixture of DNA and liposomes topically to human skin transplanted to immunodeficient (scid) mice. The long-term goals of this project are to treat disorders of the skin and hair using this approach”

The means was developed in the year…suspense…2000!
11 years. No more to say.


#4

» » Now that we know that the stem cells are not the problem and the
» progenitor
» » are the problem doesn’t it seem like efforts to clone stem cells might
» as
» » well stop and the effort should now be on cloning these progenitor cells
» » instead???
»
» well,
» “We have developed a means for introducing plasmid DNA into human hair
» follicle progenitor cells by applying a mixture of DNA and liposomes
» topically to human skin transplanted to immunodeficient (scid) mice. The
» long-term goals of this project are to treat disorders of the skin and hair
» using this approach”
»
» The means was developed in the year…suspense…2000!
» 11 years. No more to say.

can you give us a source for that quote


#5

<<I work as an engineer and i can tell you that if i took anywhere as long as these scientists at solving a problem, my ass would be fired. I have to produce results, not sit around researching for years on end and come up with nothing.>>

Yes, that’s no doubt why no one has yet developed the breakthrough hair loss treatment that would surely rake in billions of dollars annually: because scientists are lazy and stupid.


#6

» <<I work as an engineer and i can tell you that if i took anywhere as long
» as these scientists at solving a problem, my ass would be fired. I have to
» produce results, not sit around researching for years on end and come up
» with nothing.>>
»
» Yes, that’s no doubt why no one has yet developed the breakthrough hair
» loss treatment that would surely rake in billions of dollars annually:
» because scientists are lazy and stupid.

To some degree - he’s right. To some degree …

I would NOT basically say “They are STUPID!”. But about 95% of them (if not more), they ALL have a BIG problem, like most humans in general have: They simply can’t think for themselves (combined with a big portion fear to have the balls to say somthing contrary). Science (in general) is based on trust. This is an antique and manifested rule and so far “it is basically ok” - but just basically …

Just for instance and “hair-related”:

Some different and “respected” (hair-)researchers all over the world mentioned and always CONCLUDED in their scientific papers that “HAIR is dead matter/material!”. So is there any need (for the science) to check this FACT out over and over again? 95% of the human beings living on our planet would say “NO! (the earth IS flat - no need to check it again!)”

But Mr. Galileo did it ONCE AGAIN and could finally confirm …


#7

» <<I work as an engineer and i can tell you that if i took anywhere as long
» as these scientists at solving a problem, my ass would be fired. I have to
» produce results, not sit around researching for years on end and come up
» with nothing.>>
»
» Yes, that’s no doubt why no one has yet developed the breakthrough hair
» loss treatment that would surely rake in billions of dollars annually:
» because scientists are lazy and stupid.

hehehee good one… i agree that the statement was really silly.


#8

» » » Now that we know that the stem cells are not the problem and the
» » progenitor
» » » are the problem doesn’t it seem like efforts to clone stem cells might
» » as
» » » well stop and the effort should now be on cloning these progenitor
» cells
» » » instead???
» »
» » well,
» » “We have developed a means for introducing plasmid DNA into human hair
» » follicle progenitor cells by applying a mixture of DNA and liposomes
» » topically to human skin transplanted to immunodeficient (scid) mice. The
» » long-term goals of this project are to treat disorders of the skin and
» hair
» » using this approach”
» »
» » The means was developed in the year…suspense…2000!
» » 11 years. No more to say.
»
» can you give us a source for that quote

see point #2 and reference #9


#9

» http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/dermatol/faculty/cotsarelis.html
»
» see point #2 and reference #9

Bravo, Galileo.

Cots is very, very close - but still not close enough to THE golden source. And all good things are mostly there, where you don’t expect it.


#10

» What frustrates me is that there is so much foot dragging and everything
» moves at a glacial pace. I work as an engineer and i can tell you that if i
» took anywhere as long as these scientists at solving a problem, my ass
» would be fired. I have to produce results, not sit around researching for
» years on end and come up with nothing.

Exact 10 years ago (Jan 2001),
two of the “most prominent” (well-known by media) hair researchers in this field …

… published an essay with the title “Controls of Hair Follicle Cycling”:


Full text: http://physrev.physiology.org/content/81/1/449.full

After summarizing & analyzing the knowledge-status as of 2001, 10 years ago (!), they closed the essay with the following thoughts & words:

“Chase (63) described for us the biology of hair of his day. Although the major tools of the workers of his generation limited studies to gross and light microscopic levels, they generated models and insights that have withstood the test of time. Their greatest contribution was the recognition and description of the hair cycle itself.

Chase appears to have appreciated the most important theme in modern hair biology, namely, that the follicle is a regenerative structure that utilizes the molecular and mechanistic tools of the embryo during each hair cycle over the lifetime of the individual.

Since that time until the mid 1980s, we gathered more insight into the cell biology and the structural and metabolic biochemistry of the follicle. In the mid 1980s, for reasons that are not entirely clear (perhaps the availability of a drug that actually did stimulate hair growth as well as new and revolutionary insights into developmental biology and molecular biology), considerable interest in hair biology arose and has resulted in profound new insight into hair growth. These findings include the recognition of stem cell populations in the follicle, the powerful inductive properties of the papilla, systems for studying the follicle in culture, the recognition of families of morphogenetic and mediator molecules in the developing and cycling follicle, and the integral role of the sebaceous gland. Currently, the investigative challenges in hair follicle biology involve all the major questions of modern biology: organogenesis, stem cell biology, epithelial-mesenchymal interactions, pattern formation, organ cycling, and cell differentiation.

The current generation of researchers has its work cut out for them. In fact, there is plenty of work for several generations of scientists, and the expected findings will undoubtedly impact other fields of biology and medicine. In closing, we would like to propose a challenge to workers in the field, as a sort of “hit list” for our generation of hair researchers.

  1. Our work begins with better systems to analyze and assay hair growth. Needed are in vitro systems that measure anagen induction, vellus-to-terminal switch or vice versa, the terminal-to-vellus switch (the androgen effect), and pattern formation.

  2. We need systems for generating follicles in vitro from dissociated cells.

  3. We have to know more about stem cells, both epithelial and mesenchymal, how to propagate them in culture, and how to orchestrate their differentiation to pilosebaceous structures in culture.

  4. We have to learn how to deliver genes to the stem cells of the follicle to influence hair growth.

  5. We have to identify and place in perspective all the genes important to hair follicle growth and shaft formation.

  6. We need to know more about the controls for inducing each of the phases of the cycle-anagen, catagen, telogen, and exogen and, in particular, the role of apoptosis in the cycle.

  7. We need to elucidate the dynamics of telogen and establish what is going on within this apparently “resting” structure.

  8. We need to know the controls of pigmentation and of melanocyte differention, propagation, and death as well as its relationship to the follicular growth cycle.

  9. Finally, we desperately need a central database, accessible to investigators worldwide, that will help us tabulate and integrate the huge amount of data, past and present, that we will need to understand this deceptively simple organ.

It is humbling to end this essay with many of the same questions Chase had as he closed his discussion. However, with the legacy he left us and the tools we now have on hand, there is no doubt those questions will be very different 50 years from now.

10 years later, the year is 2011, “the huge amount of data and information, past and present” has become even more in general, more complex & nontransparent and finally, are still NOT central available/recallable - besides many other “complex” hurdles in this field.

But what absolutely fascinates me is the fact that 10 years later another prominent and well-known hair-researcher (at least as co-author) publishes a scientific paper with the short message “Hair loss suffers, I have found out the reason why you have hair loss, because there is something wrong!”:
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/44478#B2

Ok, some rants aside, for myself, I have absolutely NO DOUBT that there are DIFFERENT types of “hair loss cures” are just right around the corner and WILL arrive much earlier than you might think. Furthermore, hopefully there will also soon a similar video with similar background available FOR BALDIES, like this one …


(GREAT American initiative – at least imho)