The link below if a patent developed by Bruce A. Morgan et al. It is a method of inducing hair growth by gentle wounding combined with topical lithium chloride. Note the similarity to the procedure outlined in my previous post. I should add that Bruce A. Morgan is no lightweight – he’s a dermatology prof at Harvard Medical School and has done extensive work on WNT signaling and cancer (as well as hair/skin growth).
» The link below if a patent developed by Bruce A. Morgan et al. It is a
» method of inducing hair growth by gentle wounding combined with topical
» lithium chloride. Note the similarity to the procedure outlined in my
» previous post. I should add that Bruce A. Morgan is no lightweight – he’s
» a dermatology prof at Harvard Medical School and has done extensive work on
» WNT signaling and cancer (as well as hair/skin growth).
»
» Here’s the link:
» http://www.pharmcast.com/Patents100/Yr2005/Aug2005/080205/6924141_Hair080205.htm
And what good is a patent if this is something that, theoretically, anyone can do using these common compounds in a home lab?
In any event, patents for medical procedures, although they can still be obtained, can no longer be enforced in the USA. If a doctor uses a patented medical procedure on a patient, without being given the right to do so by the patent owner, the patent owner will NOT prevail in an infringement lawsuit against the doctor.
See this link:
“Medical procedures, such as methods for performing surgery, are generally patentable. However, no remedy is available if the patent is infringed by a medical practitioner who is infringing in order to perform a medical activity.”
It wasn’t always this way. This law was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1998. The reason for the law is to make medical procedures available to all doctors to use on their patients. It’s a way of democratizing health care.
(Note that patents on drugs can still be enforced, and are enforced all the time. This is an indication of the power of Big Pharma.)
Now, how does this affect Intercytex and Aderans, you might ask? Their HM procedures are certainly “medical procedures” and would fall under this law, right? Doesn’t this mean that ANY doctor will be able to use their procedures, once the procedures are approved by the FDA?
Maybe and maybe not. Probably not, because Intercytex and Aderans will hold many more rights, beyond mere patents of their HM procedures. They will have patent rights to different types of MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, such as specialized syringes and injection and delivery methodologies (see the different links posted here recently by some of our forum members.) Patents on medical equipment can still be enforced.
They may also have defensible patent rights to certain cell culture media and other culturing techniques, which are not medical procedures in and of themselves. Intercytex will also hold defensible patent rights to its so-called “robotic” back-end culturing and handling technology. Aderans may be able to enforce patents on its scaffolds and its mysterious “proprietary step” in cell culturing, which arguably are not medical procedures. And all these things may be deemed integral and inseparable parts of any procedure approved by the FDA, the MHRA, or whatever regulatory body is doing the approving.
More than that, there may be certain rights associated with the FDA-approved procedures deriving from the granting of approval to specific companies’ procedures. In other words, unless a practitioner can prove to the FDA that he/she is using the EXACT SAME PROCEDURE that Intercytex or Aderans have received approval for by the FDA, they may be treading on shaky legal territory. And unless the independent doctors have full knowledge of these procedures, they can’t bet the farm that their guesses will be right.
However, I would think that at some point, all the details of such FDA-approved HM procedures would have to enter the public domain, and might no longer be considered confidential proprietary information or trade secrets. Why? In order for the FDA to justify granting approval to these procedures, they may have to disclose to the world exactly what they’re granting approval to.
In any event, even for lawyers, this is very uncertain territory, and no doubt will be fought and argued over ad infinitum by these companies, independent HT surgeons, and their attorneys in the coming years.
BB,
If you try this and its effective, I hope you share with us how you did it. That patent appears to be “no joke”.
If you think about it, the new hairs created (if you were off finasteride) would have been created with full DHT uptake, perhaps this will make them immune to DHT's effects? I personally, would stay on finas while doing something like this (if I seen pictures of a few guys who did it with success), but do wonder as you do that since the full adult compliment of androgenic stimuli would be in action when the new hairs formed, if they would somehow be able to deal with it whereas hairs formed in fetal development have hardly any androgenic stimuli at all, and later become sensitive to it in adulthood.
If you go to regrowth.com there are several people there who are (after a few weeks) reporting new terminal hair growth using the basic procedure that I have outlined (or at least similar procedures). Most advocate using lancets for wounding, since the dermaroller does not penetrate the skin deep enough to influence anything but absorption of topicals (I’m still skeptical about the type of wounding needed for WNT activation, actually).
As for myself, I’ve been applying lithium plus DMSO on my scalp for a few weeks. Lithium has reduced greasiness substantially – a good sign. I plan on buying some lancets soon – well, I’m going to wait for the Intercytex report and then think about the lancing, lol.
I am frankly unconcerned about this procedure and DHT sensitivity. All the evidence – from experiments on mice to anecdotes from humans – indicates that these hairs grow de novo, bypassing previous genetic manipulations (in mice) and DHT sensitivity (in the case of men with MPB and scars on the head). What is different, however, is that in humans (at least from anecdotes) the hairs almost always appear much darker than the original hair – NOT the white hairs we observe in mice in the Follica study. Any ideas on why this might be so?
I’m tired of losing my hair, lol!
Best,
BB
» Interesting stuff BB.
»
»
»
» BB,
» If you try this and its effective, I hope you share with us how you did
» it. That patent appears to be “no joke”.
»
»
»
» If you think about it, the new hairs created (if you were off
» finasteride) would have been created with full DHT uptake, perhaps this
» will make them immune to DHT’s effects? I personally, would stay on finas
» while doing something like this (if I seen pictures of a few guys who did
» it with success), but do wonder as you do that since the full adult
» compliment of androgenic stimuli would be in action when the new hairs
» formed, if they would somehow be able to deal with it whereas hairs formed
» in fetal development have hardly any androgenic stimuli at all, and later
» become sensitive to it in adulthood.
»
»
» It IS interesting research nonetheless…
Needle wounds, if youve watched Joetronic’s Hairtransplant TV dissertaion on them, should produce bigger wounds than any other type of incision because they should be perfectly round…
What depth would be necessary in millimeters in the dermis?
Where would one obtain lithium chloride?
It is interesting to note that in the fifties noveau hair growth was seen in head wounds, but was written off by the medical establishment at the time…
All it would take for this to “take off” is for a guy who is bald upstairs to do it, and have some regrowth. I was impressed that one guy claims to have dark terminal hairs where none were, but ‘somebody’ ought to take some before and afters. This is something “we” can do at home. …And if that happened, you can bet you ass that the entire medical establishment would be frothing-at-the-mouth against it. Only time well tell if the experiments on the mice can translante to humans or not. It would seem (yet again) that it would only take one guy who was bald upstairs to settle the issue once and for all…
As far as wounding depth, that’s one issue. Most of the guys at regrowth.com are definitely penetrating into the dermis, although I don’t know how deep. But the issue of wounding is not just depth but also the size of the wound. Keep in mind we want regeneration over repair, but repair dominates in smaller wounds. BUT… perhaps the lithium topical plus small but deep wounding with needling is sufficient for WNT activation and thus de novo hair growth
One baldy… hmm… I’m tempted! (Though I actually have a bit too much hair on top – not on the hairline, where I wouldn’t try needling – but up on top).
Best,
BB
» Needle wounds, if youve watched Joetronic’s Hairtransplant TV dissertaion
» on them, should produce bigger wounds than any other type of incision
» because they should be perfectly round…
»
» What depth would be necessary in millimeters in the dermis?
»
»
»
» Where would one obtain lithium chloride?
»
»
»
»
» It is interesting to note that in the fifties noveau hair growth was seen
» in head wounds, but was written off by the medical establishment at the
» time…
»
»
»
»
» All it would take for this to “take off” is for a guy who is bald upstairs
» to do it, and have some regrowth. I was impressed that one guy claims to
» have dark terminal hairs where none were, but ‘somebody’ ought to take
» some before and afters. This is something “we” can do at home.
» …And if that happened, you can bet you ass that the
» entire medical establishment would be frothing-at-the-mouth against it.
» Only time well tell if the experiments on the mice can translante to
» humans or not. It would seem (yet again) that it would only take one guy
» who was bald upstairs to settle the issue once and for all…
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.
