New ARI Patent (published December 23, 2010)

[Iron_Man]

» we shouldnt be too overly optimistic here… i wouldn’t say YES just yet…
» i’d rather go with…
»
» PERHAPS! or HOPEFULLY!

Dr. Hitzig mentioned recently “skepticism is healthy” - and I agree.

But I think you guys don’t understand (or do not want to understand) what’s going on behind the scene:

So, nothing has changed!
Yea, the “empirical” results, as Dr. Jerry Cooley as well as Dr. Gary Hitzig have said, “are very real and multiplying daily.” Without any doubts!

By the way – exactly 1 year ago, the following article appeared (on different websites thereafter):

Title: Researchers Develop First Successful Hair Cloning Technique
http://www.charlotteareanews.com/wp/2010/01/11/researchers-develop-first-successful-hair-cloning-technique/

Everything they mentioned in that article – nothing has changed!

Sure, to nationwide calm down the (partly crazy) hair loss community, a few weeks later (January 28, 2010), the following article appeared online:

Title: Hair Cloning Not Yet Recommended by Researchers Who Developed the Technique
http://www.prweb.com/releases/hair-cloning/not-recommended/prweb3461074.htm

So to speak, the content of that article is true too! Because everything is still EXPERIMENTAL! But that doesn’t mean that (in the meanwhile) the whole thingy isn’t working at all. So again, this approach (ACell is used for “cloning”) IS very real and they already can see it “multiplying DAILY”!

So all we have to do is simply waiting some more weeks/month. That’s all.

@Freddie555 – Yea, thanks. I just read that email. I will try to put together all reports about that issue I have, and will post it in the related thread, because I think this time, in combination with ACell, PRP might play an import role as well (among some other things). So I think it’s worth to report about it more specific (“what is known”).

@all - Everything I report/mention here, is related to the thread-start-post!

[hairman2]

» » we shouldnt be too overly optimistic here… i
» wouldn’t say YES just yet…
» » i’d rather go with…
» »
» » PERHAPS! or HOPEFULLY!
»
» Dr. Hitzig mentioned recently “skepticism is healthy” - and I
» agree.
»
» But I think you guys don’t understand (or do not want to understand) what’s
» going on behind the scene:
»

» So, nothing has changed!
» Yea, the “empirical” results, as Dr. Jerry Cooley as well as Dr. Gary
» Hitzig have said, “are very real and multiplying daily.” Without any
» doubts!
»
» By the way – exactly 1 year ago, the following article appeared (on
» different websites thereafter):
»
» Title: Researchers Develop First Successful Hair Cloning Technique
» http://www.charlotteareanews.com/wp/2010/01/11/researchers-develop-first-successful-hair-cloning-technique/
»
» Everything they mentioned in that article – nothing has changed!
»
» Sure, to nationwide calm down the (partly crazy) hair loss community, a few
» weeks later (January 28, 2010), the following article appeared online:
»
» Title: Hair Cloning Not Yet Recommended by Researchers Who Developed the
» Technique
» http://www.prweb.com/releases/hair-cloning/not-recommended/prweb3461074.htm
»
» So to speak, the content of that article is true too! Because everything is
» still EXPERIMENTAL! But that doesn’t mean
» that (in the meanwhile) the whole thingy isn’t working at all. So again,
» this approach (ACell is used for “cloning”) IS very real and they
» already can see it “multiplying DAILY”!
»
» So all we have to do is simply waiting some more weeks/month. That’s all.
»
» @Freddie555 – Yea, thanks. I just read that email. I will try to put
» together all reports about that issue I have, and will post it in the
» related thread, because I think this time, in combination with ACell, PRP
» might play an import role as well (among some other things). So I think
» it’s worth to report about it more specific (“what is known”).
»
» @all - Everything I report/mention here, is related to the
» thread-start-post!

@Iron Man - As you stated yourself… Hitzig and Cooley have been working on this experimental technique for quite a while now. Who is to say that this technique is going to become a viable option in the next few weeks/months? Anyway, for someone like me, who has never undergone any kind of hair restoration surgery, I would only opt for this procedure if the price was lower or comparable to that of FUE. I’m not sure we will see that happening in the following weeks/months. So I’m not getting to excited. But I hope that it works for those with deep enough pockets, who have no or little donor left to get their hair fixed up.

[Frank]

Hey, IronMan, just wanted to thank you for all you contribute to this forum. It’s good to see you this optimistic, which if it was coming from a certain set of posters here then it might not necessarily means squat. But coming from a naturally sceptical mind before something is shown quite solid, then it gives optimism to others here as well, I think. You put a lot of effort into the information you provide here, so thanks again.

[hairman2]

» Hey, IronMan, just wanted to thank you for all you contribute to this
» forum. It’s good to see you this optimistic, which if it was coming from a
» certain set of posters here then it might not necessarily means squat. But
» coming from a naturally sceptical mind before something is shown quite
» solid, then it gives optimism to others here as well, I think. You put a
» lot of effort into the information you provide here, so thanks again.

I’ll in fact second that… you really take an amazing amount of time going through posts and cutting out pictures and what not. You’ve made a lot of really good contributions to this forum… sadly much of it is overshadowed by your rants and insults…

[fastfuse]

» » Hey, IronMan, just wanted to thank you for all you contribute to this
» » forum. It’s good to see you this optimistic, which if it was coming from
» a
» » certain set of posters here then it might not necessarily means squat.
» But
» » coming from a naturally sceptical mind before something is shown quite
» » solid, then it gives optimism to others here as well, I think. You put
» a
» » lot of effort into the information you provide here, so thanks again.
»
» I’ll in fact second that… you really take an amazing amount of time going
» through posts and cutting out pictures and what not. You’ve made a lot of
» really good contributions to this forum… sadly much of it is overshadowed
» by your rants and insults…

yeah, he is an artist.and he acts like one.

[MPB]

» » Ok Iron man you say your willing to wait another 12 months. IF it DOES
» work
» » who would you go to? ARI??
»
» In 12 month, ARI is NOT done with their trails. Again, the difference:
»
» 1) If you’re a completely bald guy (or a burn victim etc), it definitely
» makes sense to wait for ARI’s approach, because there you just need
» a few hairs for the laboratory (step #1 - multipling the necessary cells,
» as discribed by Dr. Washenik in the video/link above).
»
» 2) If you simply do not want to lose ANY of your hair (besides just a few)
» from the back of your head (aka “traditional Hair Transplantaton” ), it
» makes sense too to wait for ARI’s approach, because the whole concept of
» ARI is to multiply your own hair cells, derived from just a few hairs.
»
» 3) If you just have thinning hairs, or you have lots of just miniaturized
» hair on the top of your head and/or crown, and it doesn’t bother you to
» lose a given amount of hair from the back of your head - Dr. Hitzig or Dr.
» Cole or Dr. ? is the way to go.
»
» 4) Same as pkt 3) but you want preserve your donor hairs as much as
» possible too, in this case, Dr. Gho might be in future the way to go
» - and you do not risk an occuring linear scar on the back of your head
» (FUT/Strip procedure), nor any white dots from an FUE procedure etc.
»
» So everything just depends on your need and your preference. Anyway,
» there’re options, and there will be TOPIC RELATED options! So it just
» depends on you.
»
» BTW - It simply makes no sense to stick on my lips, in case you do not
» understand what I try to explain since the start post (“basics” ) in this
» thread.

Or if your donor hair is $hit like probably 70% of us out there, I believe your only options are to wait for companies like Follica or Histogen… something that involves neogenesis in lieu of just rejuvenating old follicles with “worn out” stem cells.

[Freddie555]

» Convinced? Let’s say, I have no doubts anymore concerning the science
» behind such approaches. All it needs (from my observation) to make this
» approach (Hitzig’s approach) a little bit more “predictable” and a little
» bit more “fine tuned” - that’s all. That’s the reason why I wait some more
» month (max. 12 month).

Lets hope you are right!

[Iron_Man]

» Title: METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR INCREASING TRICHOGENIC POTENCY OF
» DERMAL CELLS
»
» WIPO - Search International and National Patent Collections
»
» Excerpt:
» ---------------------------------------------
» B. Terminal hair induction
»
» Another embodiment provides a method for inducing vellus hair to become
» terminal hair. Vellus hair is the fine, non-pigmented hair (peach fuzz)
» that covers the body of children and adults. Terminal hair is developed
» hair, which is generally longer, coarser, thicker and darker than the
» shorter and finer vellus hair. As described above there is a morphogenetic
» switch of terminal to vellus hair follicles in the manifestation of male
» pattern baldness. In one embodiment, dermal cells with increased
» trichogenic ability are injected into the skin as described above. The
» dermal cells are obtained as described above and are typically autologous
» cells. The cells are injected into or adjacent to vellus hair or vellus
» hair follicles. Multiple injections of dermal cells may be delivered to an
» area of skin containing vellus hair to induce as many vellus hair follicles
» as possible to become terminal hair follicles. It will be appreciated that
» the number of injections and volume of cells to be injected can be
» routinely developed by one of skill in the art. In another embodiment,
» dermal cells with increased trichogenic activity are injected into skin in
» an amount effective to induce formation of hair follicles and to induce
» vellus hair follicles to become terminal hair follicles.
»
» Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein
» have the same meanings as commonly understood by one of skill in the art to
» which the disclosed invention belongs. Publications cited herein and the
» materials for which they are cited are specifically incorporated by
» reference.
»
» Source:
» METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR INCREASING TRICHOGENIC POTENCY OF DERMAL CELLS - ADERANS RES INST INC
» ---------------------------------------------

[Andy]

Iron Man: Thanks for putting all the links & info together in this post. I have spent my entire evening going through them all and I have to agree that all options sound equally fascinating for various reasons, and dare I say somewhat promising - but alas I would need more proof before considering any of them for myself in future. Looking forward to the results & updates over the next 6-12 months.

[Freddie555]

if new hair follicles are generated from the implanted transected donor folicle after acell + prp, what ensures the orientation of the hair be corerct?

or does this have to be done in vitro (i.e generate the follicle on a ‘farm’ and then implant it into the head)?

if its just done in the head itself rather than in vitro (and assuming it works), hairs would be sprouting from all kinds of wierd angles. sure it may wake up cells that are already oriented in the right position that had earlier beoome dormant due to DHT’s attack. but if it creates new follicles, there’s no guarantee the hairs will be oriented the right way.

any thoughts on this Iron Man ?

[Iron_Man]

» if its just done in the head itself rather than in vitro (and assuming it
» works), hairs would be sprouting from all kinds of wierd angles. sure it
» may wake up cells that are already oriented in the right position that had
» earlier beoome dormant due to DHT’s attack. but if it creates new
» follicles, there’s no guarantee the hairs will be oriented the right way.
»
» any thoughts on this Iron Man ?

That is a damn good question. Funny that you’re asking, because I just wanted explain the issue anyway.

But to make it funnier:

You can find the answers e.g. at 3 different locations …

1. View critically all ACell and/or ARI photos within this tread (incl. the new below) and tell me what you can see concerning that issue;

2. Check out e.g. these photos …
   http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-74593.html#p74593
   (brand new ‘cloned’ hairs sprouting out of a removed old strip scar and finally “remodelled scar” - where actually no scar there is anymore), and tell me something about the angling of the brand new hairs within the “scar-area” after 8 month;

3. Check out Dr. Gho’s website …
   http://www.hasci.com/
   (menu “Science” → Research and Development à Hair multiplication) and tell me, what he is saying on his website concerning your questions;

And finally, write a nicely CONCLUSION about your questions.

[Freddie555]

» (brand new ‘cloned’ hairs sprouting out of a removed old strip scar and
» finally “remodelled scar” - where actually no scar there is anymore), and
» tell me something about the angling of the brand new hairs within the
» “scar-area” after 8 month;

but how many of those hairs in the scar tissue are transplanted and how many actually arose as a result of Acell stuff. i assume they transplanted hairs and then injected the Acell/prp stuff in there.

so are we looking at 90% transplanted hair (which would explain their correct orientation) and 10% cloned hairs (which we don’t even notice) or vice-versa.

i wish I could just see 1 hair and a farm of 50 cloned hairs growing happily in some kind of jelley mix. that would confirm to me that hair can indeed be cloned without a doubt.

[Freddie555]

» 3) Check out Dr. Gho’s website …
» http://www.hasci.com/
» (menu “Science” → Research and Development à Hair multiplication) and tell
» me, what he is saying on his website concerning your questions;

I’ve given up on Gho. The guy has not produced any evidene that I could consider worthy in 10 years of hype.

[Iron_Man]

» i wish I could just see 1 hair and a farm of 50 cloned hairs growing
» happily in some kind of jelley mix [in vitro - outside the body]. that would confirm to me that hair can
» indeed be cloned without a doubt.

Satisfied? But how to transplant them?

[Freddie555]

what is that?

hair follicles cloned from one follicle ?

the day we see its possible to farm hair is the day we have the cure.

[thomas_tank]

» if new hair follicles are generated from the implanted transected donor
» folicle after acell + prp, what ensures the orientation of the hair be
» corerct?
»
» or does this have to be done in vitro (i.e generate the follicle on a
» ‘farm’ and then implant it into the head)?
»
» if its just done in the head itself rather than in vitro (and assuming it
» works), hairs would be sprouting from all kinds of wierd angles. sure it
» may wake up cells that are already oriented in the right position that had
» earlier beoome dormant due to DHT’s attack. but if it creates new
» follicles, there’s no guarantee the hairs will be oriented the right way.
»
» i am a nw5, as a trial patient of ari, i would say that i am probably looking like at best a nw4-nw5. while the improvement has not been great. i am hoping to remain at least a nw5 for a longer period. since transplants were not done to front or center of my scalp, that is why i did not improve higher on the scale.

the transplants were placed around 5 tatoos that were in a u-shape formation just inside the framework of my existing hair.

[Freddie555]

» the transplants were placed around 5 tatoos that were in a u-shape
» formation just inside the framework of my existing hair.

would you say anything grew above and beyond what was transplanted to the U around your head. do we have anything to look forward to is what I’m asking - an honest opinion please.

[AntiNorwood]

» » if its just done in the head itself rather than in vitro (and assuming
» it
» » works), hairs would be sprouting from all kinds of wierd angles.
» sure it
» » may wake up cells that are already oriented in the right position that
» had
» » earlier beoome dormant due to DHT’s attack. but if it creates new
» » follicles, there’s no guarantee the hairs will be oriented the right
» way.
» »
» » any thoughts on this Iron Man ?
»
» That is a damn good question. Funny that you’re asking, because I just
» wanted explain the issue anyway.
»
» But to make it funnier:
»
» You can find the answers e.g. at 3 different locations …
»
» 1) View critically all ACell and/or ARI photos within this tread (incl. the
» new below) and tell me what you can see concerning that issue;
»
» 2) Check out e.g. these photos …
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-74593.html#p74593
» (brand new ‘cloned’ hairs sprouting out of a removed old strip scar and
» finally “remodelled scar” - where actually no scar there is anymore), and
» tell me something about the angling of the brand new hairs within the
» “scar-area” after 8 month;
»
» 3) Check out Dr. Gho’s website …
» http://www.hasci.com/
» (menu “Science” → Research and Development à Hair multiplication) and tell
» me, what he is saying on his website concerning your questions;
»
» And finally, write a nicely CONCLUSION about your questions.
» ------------
»

»

good thread iron_man, it was an interesting read

so this had me thinking, we have aderans culturing dermal and epherial cells out of the body to increase the count and reinject. the cells will reorganise, develop and grow a hair as “claimed”. the minimum quantity of each type of cell we do not know.

we also have autocloning with Acell which takes a small portion of epipherial cells and bathed in in Acell and promotes the rebuilding of the rest of the follicle as “claimed”. the quantity of cells required is equivalent to that which remains on the hair shaft. assume this is the minimum required.

so i was wondering has anyone attempted to remove the epipherial cells off the plucked hair(s) placed in a mix of Acell injected into a graft recipient site to potentially develop a follicle. this injection would be local to the hair site and very small as to not disppears the mixture. kind of like DIY ji-gami. if only we could get our hands on fine powdered acell

[mell]

If they could pluck 6000 hairs and scrap off the stem cells cling to the root and add them to the acell solution. It would not be that difficult to inject them back into the scalp.

[AntiNorwood]

» If they could pluck 6000 hairs and scrap off the stem cells cling to the
» root and add them to the acell solution. It would not be that difficult to
» inject them back into the scalp.

the more i think about it the harder is seems. injecting is not that difficult apart from placing the cells at the correct depth as well as creating a balanced saline suspension with cells and acell.
the harder part is getting the plucked cells out of their rigid form around the plucked hair shaft so they can go into a liquid suspension for injection.
need to find an aderans insider or do more reading