News aderans...what they think?

» In my opinion there is only one safe option: throw every available
» non-surgical treatment at your hair loss and hang on until we get real
» news.

Frankly I don’t want to poison myself with drugs which are useless and let only side-effects, better to wait until 2012 and realize if with an HT fue I can gain some years before the real release of “whatever_can_refull_my_vertex”

I want to be healthy when that day comes :stuck_out_tongue:

However many phase 2 trials are going to end late in 2011 so in the next year we will have a lot of more news (or at least info on what discuss and plan our future). Then If I’m right the phase 3 should be a “large scale test” so not to be excluded that someone of us can have before the treatment

This is just my opinion, but I think there will never be a date when it becomes clearly safe to get conventional HT work while anticipating HM to fix the donor supply issues later on.

We will not know for sure that HM is coming until it’s almost here. And as soon as that time comes, I think we will probably be saying it’s better not to get HTs at all. The work is expensive, it takes multiple sessions (read: 2-3 years) to get major coverage grown out, and it’s expensive as hell.

HTs also cause scarring in the balding area. I suspect that scarring may hurt the achievable density in those areas with HM. (No, I don’t think HT work will rule out the possibility of getting a good looking head of hair from HM. But full looking and 100% full thickness to the touch are not the same thing.)

In fact I think 10-15 years ago people would have looked at the present and said we are there already. They’d probably think it was safe enough to get a HT by the time we had seen as much HM progress as we already have right now. We’ve got one company in large scale phase#2 trials growing new terminal hairs on balded skin, and another company growing even more hair than the first company just in their preliminary testing.

» This is just my opinion, but I think there will never be a date when it
» becomes clearly safe to get conventional HT work while anticipating HM to
» fix the donor supply issues later on.
»
» We will not know for sure that HM is coming until it’s almost here. And
» as soon as that time comes, I think we will probably be saying it’s better
» not to get HTs at all. The work is expensive, it takes multiple sessions
» (read: 2-3 years) to get major coverage grown out, and it’s expensive as
» hell.
»
» HTs also cause scarring in the balding area. I suspect that scarring may
» hurt the achievable density in those areas with HM. (No, I don’t think
» HT work will rule out the possibility of getting a good looking head of
» hair from HM. But full looking and 100% full thickness to the
» touch
are not the same thing.
)
»
»
»
» In fact I think 10-15 years ago people would have looked at the present
» and said we are there already. They’d probably think it was safe enough to
» get a HT by the time we had seen as much HM progress as we already have
» right now. We’ve got one company in large scale phase#2 trials growing new
» terminal hairs on balded skin, and another company growing even more hair
» than the first company just in their preliminary testing.

just don’t forget that HM treatments probably wont be cheap either if you want to be one of the first in line… I’m sure it will take a good 4-5 years before any drastic price drops occur…

In my humble opinion, a HT will never be an acceptable solution, even though it ist only for the hairline.

I would never consider a HT because there is no relation between cost and effect for me. I would rather be bald than paying thousands of bucks for a cosmetic surgery or hm.
If there is a solution for everybody anytimes I would go for it, but I would not pay every price for “only” hair.

If you are not willing to pay thousands of dollars for cosmetic procedures to get your hair back, then why are you even reading this forum?

» If you are not willing to pay thousands of dollars for cosmetic procedures
» to get your hair back, then why are you even reading this forum?

Good Point and i can enlighten you, he is like in the german bord only trolling people.

» Good Point

/agree

but how much do you think wil cost aderans or histogen? should be cheaper than HT I guess, but how much? :stuck_out_tongue:

ps. sorry if this has been discussed before, my memory sucks lol

» » Good Point
»
» /agree
»
» but how much do you think wil cost aderans or histogen? should be cheaper
» than HT I guess, but how much? :stuck_out_tongue:
»
» ps. sorry if this has been discussed before, my memory sucks lol

@ biston : Sorry if i would give ou a concrete price tag i would be lying.

I dont know how much this treatment will actually cost, sorry for that

…I think… it’s better not to get HTs at all. The work is expensive, it takes multiple sessions (read: 2-3 years) to get major coverage grown out, and it’s expensive as hell.

» HTs also cause scarring in the balding area. I suspect that scarring may
» hurt the achievable density in those areas with HM.

Cal:

Respectfully disagree. I had work done at Hasson & Wong. Yes, expensive - 8G ten years ago for 2000 transplants, but it only took a year, and there’s no scarring whatsoever in the formerly bald spot. The points where hair follicles are implanted are punctured, but there’s no other scarring there. The DONOR area gets scarred - and, I won’t lie to you, the chunk of flesh they chop outta the back of your head is pretty substantial, and it hurts like a m#therf#cke# for about two months after each surgery, but MAN it looks 500% better, and people treat you like a different person. I’ll never regret getting that work done and heartily recommend it to anyone else.

Wish I could afford another session, but cash is a little low at present. I use Toppik in the remaining thin spot to good effect.

Even iam not a FUT Fan but thanks for your honest report

» …I think… it’s better not to get HTs at all. The work is expensive, it
» takes multiple sessions (read: 2-3 years) to get major coverage grown out,
» and it’s expensive as hell.
»
» » HTs also cause scarring in the balding area. I suspect that scarring
» may
» » hurt the achievable density in those areas with HM.
»
» Cal:
»
» Respectfully disagree. I had work done at Hasson & Wong. Yes, expensive -
» 8G ten years ago for 2000 transplants, but it only took a year, and there’s
» no scarring whatsoever in the formerly bald spot. The points where hair
» follicles are implanted are punctured, but there’s no other scarring there.
» The DONOR area gets scarred - and, I won’t lie to you, the chunk of flesh
» they chop outta the back of your head is pretty substantial, and it hurts
» like a m#therf#cke# for about two months after each surgery, but MAN it
» looks 500% better, and people treat you like a different person. I’ll never
» regret getting that work done and heartily recommend it to anyone else.
»
» Wish I could afford another session, but cash is a little low at present.
» I use Toppik in the remaining thin spot to good effect.

Histogen said it would cost 5000 USD.
I think it was posted in a pdf.
If it works, it would be a bargain.

» @ biston : Sorry if i would give ou a concrete price tag i would be
» lying.
»
» I dont know how much this treatment will actually cost, sorry for that

You know what you idiot? We cant say anything about tha price tag all the things could easily switch and the 5000 Dollars are just something to work with for some investors.

Yeah right, today you say its a bargain but when it turns out that you have to do this treatment every 10 years you will moan " Ohhhh this is tooooooooooooo expensive bla bla bla"

» Histogen said it would cost 5000 USD.
» I think it was posted in a pdf.
» If it works, it would be a bargain.
»
»
» » @ biston : Sorry if i would give ou a concrete price tag i would be
» » lying.
» »
» » I dont know how much this treatment will actually cost, sorry for that

Histogen? we are talking about Aderans, and IF histogen said something like that we have to be afraid IMHO, 'cause the manufactury is greater for aderans and this means that will cost much more

@mikienes it hurts to me to hear you say that people treat you differently :frowning: I wanna feel that sensation as soon as possible

Leeroy, your life must be really pityful.
Insults without provocation, mockery of handicapped children, etc. This is your way to evade your reality, right?

» You know what you idiot? We cant say anything about tha price tag all the
» things could easily switch and the 5000 Dollars are just something to work
» with for some investors.
»
» Yeah right, today you say its a bargain but when it turns out that you
» have to do this treatment every 10 years you will moan " Ohhhh this is
» tooooooooooooo expensive bla bla bla"
»
» » Histogen said it would cost 5000 USD.
» » I think it was posted in a pdf.
» » If it works, it would be a bargain.

» You know what you idiot? We cant say anything about tha price tag all the
» things could easily switch and the 5000 Dollars are just something to work
» with for some investors.
»
» Yeah right, today you say its a bargain but when it turns out that you
» have to do this treatment every 10 years you will moan " Ohhhh this is
» tooooooooooooo expensive bla bla bla"
»
» » Histogen said it would cost 5000 USD.
» » I think it was posted in a pdf.
» » If it works, it would be a bargain.
» »
» »
» » » @ biston : Sorry if i would give ou a concrete price tag i would be
» » » lying.
» » »
» » » I dont know how much this treatment will actually cost, sorry for that

you annoying little prick… there was nothing wrong or hostile about SpanishDudes post… why do you always have to revert to such crap… his information was ON TOPIC and relevant…

5k for a something that could potentially give you 100% of your hair back every ten years is a VERY resonable price in my mind and I would pay it in a heartbeat and with a smile on my face.

Thanks for your support, Hairman.
I think Histogen can offer his treatment at a low price because of the reduced labour costs involved.
I think 5000 usd is a reasonable price. People would gladly pay it.
Higher than that would reduce demand too much.
Once they expand licensing and manufacturing, I think price could be reduced even more. To 1000 usd, for example.

So, I think the 5k usd figure makes perfect sense for Histogen. ARI would be more expensive, I think. Biopsy, culture, many injections.

» » You know what you idiot? We cant say anything about tha price tag all
» the
» » things could easily switch and the 5000 Dollars are just something to
» work
» » with for some investors.
» »
» » Yeah right, today you say its a bargain but when it turns out that you
» » have to do this treatment every 10 years you will moan " Ohhhh this is
» » tooooooooooooo expensive bla bla bla"
» »
» » » Histogen said it would cost 5000 USD.
» » » I think it was posted in a pdf.
» » » If it works, it would be a bargain.
» » »
» » »
» » » » @ biston : Sorry if i would give ou a concrete price tag i would be
» » » » lying.
» » » »
» » » » I dont know how much this treatment will actually cost, sorry for
» that
»
» you annoying little prick… there was nothing wrong or hostile about
» SpanishDudes post… why do you always have to revert to such crap… his
» information was ON TOPIC and relevant…

The Histogen procedure does seem more elegant & simple than the ARI method.

But the ARI method probably brings more androgen-resistance than Histogen does. We really don’t know how important that factor is for preserving the new hairs (will they even last a couple of cycles? Despite whatever anyone says about it WE JUST DON’T KNOW YET.)

It may have more & less relevance depending on the patient too. Some guys have hairlines that DHT blasted away during their teens, but other guys don’t lose much hair until middle age and beyond.

Who knows? Eventually we might even end up with guys getting combinations. Use ARI hair in the most androgen sensitive areas and use the simpler & cheaper Histogen procedure on the rest.

» Thanks for your support, Hairman.
» I think Histogen can offer his treatment at a low price because of the
» reduced labour costs involved.
» I think 5000 usd is a reasonable price. People would gladly pay it.
» Higher than that would reduce demand too much.
» Once they expand licensing and manufacturing, I think price could be
» reduced even more. To 1000 usd, for example.
»
» So, I think the 5k usd figure makes perfect sense for Histogen. ARI would
» be more expensive, I think. Biopsy, culture, many injections.

i’d pay $5k in a heartbeat…what i’ve been doing since Intercytex flopped was save my money, so whenever one of these releases come out there will be no need to finance.

re. Histogen, I agree, cal, we still don’t know about DHT resistance.
The 1 yr. results are very promising, but we will see…

» The Histogen procedure does seem more elegant & simple than the ARI method.
»
»
»
» But the ARI method probably brings more androgen-resistance than Histogen
» does. We really don’t know how important that factor is for preserving the
» new hairs (will they even last a couple of cycles? Despite whatever anyone
» says about it WE JUST DON’T KNOW YET.)
»
» It may have more & less relevance depending on the patient too. Some guys
» have hairlines that DHT blasted away during their teens, but other guys
» don’t lose much hair until middle age and beyond.
»
»
»
»
» Who knows? Eventually we might even end up with guys getting
» combinations. Use ARI hair in the most androgen sensitive areas and use
» the simpler & cheaper Histogen procedure on the rest.