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

Q&A with Dr. Paul Kemp, Intercytex - April 2008

Thanks Hairsite for the feedback.

Beside’s Kemp interview being boring and uninformative (except for the 2009 q3 thing), what to say ?

We’ll finally have to live through baldness and look like coneheads for another 5 years time, or maybe 10, or probably for ever. In the mean time, we can always masturbate on up coming treatments that are 5 years off, like ARI, ICX, Follica, or whatever break-through technology on the hype. Btw, did you hear researchers recently discovered that eating piled wood combined with a specific compound grows HAIR on mice. The treatment might reach the market no sooner than in 5 years guys, so better be ready people :slight_smile:

Regarding the interview itself : i think Kemp is basically admitting what was insinuated in his/ICX investor report : TRC is a failure (at that point). They’re not willing to abandon it because they already threw too much money out of the window and will try to get some money out of it (e.g. selling the baby to another big firm for example ), even if the product doesn’t work that much. Although i believe Kemp’s being sincere about HM and his crew is putting all their efforts to bring something good, the reality is that, 'til now, ICX-TRC has so few conclusive results that it needs another 2 year round of investigation to come to the conclusion that it’ll definitly be so-so. Results speaks for themselves, and so does the evasive way employed in every icx interview/report those last days. Additionnaly, their stock is taking a plunge and bankrupcy is always a possibility (not to say a common thing) for small biotech firms. If ever released, TRC will probably end the exact same way as Isolagen, if you ever remember of it : lack of efficiency => garbage collector.

I’m sorry if i sound fatalistic, but all of this is becoming so boring … :yes: This is a scheme repeating itself endlessly : whereas the hair loss research sounds exciting, the indutrialization process does not (at least for us who expect a cure in a reasonnable amount of time).
As someone said at the beginning of the thread : i suggest we move on … it’s too early to think of a cure. It’s PLAIN DEAD for anyone of us above 3 years old. We’ll be old and impotent before anyone thinks of a viable cure for hair loss, and we’ll be dead or in terminal cancer phase before we can actually get HM. Let’s not waste our precious time more than we already did, lurking for a whishful cure, it would be living in denial. Hair loss sucks but hey, sh*t happens in life. Sometimes it’s a bad thing for a good thing, “un mal pour un bien” as one could call it in french. Yea i know it sounds Hangin-like, but it’s still possible to fully enjoy life and be slick bald … let’s focus on dreams that arent a pain in the arse each time we think of them. Don’t cha think so ?

ps: i’m not a hangininthere worshipper or another depressed psychopath trying to convince myself that one should “get over it”. HM is over for the coming years, so … that’s all :frowning:

Yes, Benji, your points are correct.
specially this one:

» HairSite: Have you seen any of the phase II test subjects? Can you
» describe the characteristics of the new hair growth?
» Dr. Paul Kemp: We will provide data at the end of the trial. It is not
» appropriate to make information available during the trial.
» We are a public company and have legal obligations to the
» various regulatory authorities. He isn’t even going to tell you if they
» have new baby hair, or decent hair, what color, or ANYTHING, but he WOULD
» tell you the growth was “SIGNIFIGANT” and that there were “INCREASES” in
» every trialee----but wont say if it even looked “pretty good” or “dark” or
» “light”. Uh-huh[/color
]

I am confused. It looks, somehow, as if Kemp was not being allowed to tell the truth, and as a result, everything is looking worse than it really is.

Right now, it looks as if TRC is being a total failure, growing few hairs, which look horrible. So horrible results, that noone at ICX are willing to even barely talk about it. Its difficult for me to believe that this is the case.

I kinda find it funny that both ARI & Intercytex aren’t even saying within 5 years anymore. They must’ve hit a major roadblock - both of 'em. And i’m pretty sure its scalp health, what they are trying to do is increase crop yield from a barren land…they need to make the land fertile before they can use their genetically engineered seeds. Proof? Scalp prestimulation increased response to 100% in phase-II.

Thanks for the photos. Very impressive!!
I don’t know anything about Acell, but photos speak more than a thousand reports.
and these are not mice, but cats and dogs!!

» I think Acell is releasing their human grade product this year…but
» remember, they are not saying it will regrow hair…I dont think anybody
» will know till its tried…we are the ones who are hoping it will regrow
» hair (based on the many pics of tissue regrowth (along with fur regrowth)
» on the animals on their website)
»
» here are some links …
»
» http://www.acell.com/news_updates.php
»
» http://www.acell.com/vetcases/chadwick.html
»
» http://www.acell.com/vetcases/lucille.html
»
» http://www.acell.com/vetcases/twinkie.html

Goata…I have a dreary feeling that follica is going to find out the same thing. The funny thing about baldness is that the process itself makes the frontal scalp a very inhospitable place for the development of new hairs. Fully differentiated hairs can be trasplanted there…but one has less of a water layer and less of a fatty acid layer, a thinner dermis, but a thicker skin, and more collagen, and less capiallaries. That is not a formula for hirsutsim in the frontal scalp. Aderans was trying to grow hair outside the body. I wish they’d shoot up the thighs with HM and FUE them out when they are growing back to the head. It would be expensive, but I’d bet that it would work.

» » I’ve been waiting to get my hair back since before you were born.
»
» I feel you man! how old and what NW are you now?
»
» I started balding at 18 and at 26, I’ve got a shiny NW6. That’s why I am
» concerned about getting my hair back…the only hope I had was TRC in
» '08…some idiots beat that drum in '06 and got everyone excited. Its
» definitely a long way from commercialization and I don’t wanna waste my
» life anymore thinking about hairloss all the time - while people out there
» are living their lives.

My hair started thinning when I entered puberty.

By my mid twenties I was Norwood 5.

Bad transplants in the 1970’s.

I’ve been waiting for something to fix me up ever since.

Hairsite, thanks for the Q&A session.
Thanks also to dr. Kemp, BUT the answers are “supercazzolas” as we say in Italy.
That is in some cases are non-answers, in the case of the end of phase two are pejorative than the previous: q2-3 2009 instead of autumn 2008.

I think that, unfortunately for hoping bald people, the state of art, in terms of results, for ICX-TRC maybe poor.

» I see these answers are quite contradictory.
»
» He says that the TRC’s progress is “on target” (ie. 2010) but later, his
» comments point to 2013 the earliest.
»
» Dr. Kemp says he can’t comment on the characteristics of the new hair
» because this would violate regulatory authorities. This is exactly the
» same excuse Bazan argued in the past. Sorry Dr. Kemp, but you are looking
» quite bad to me. Why don’t you comment, at least, on the Phase I hair’s
» characteristics? Or why don’t you post Vavelta photos, as the product has
» already been launched?
»
» Instead of telling us that Vavelta rendered “some exceptional results” why
» don’t you post a photo, to see how exceptional they are.
»
» Why don’t you tell us the meaning of these photos you posted here on page
» 19:
» http://www.vavelta.com/vavelta/mp/story/vaveltaface/cell02.pdf
» If you can’t post TRC photos, why did you post these photos?
»
» Although I still have faith on ICX, I am certainly quite dissapointed. :frowning:

This is all just legal talk for “IT SUCKS”!

» I agree that ICX is disappointing and now does seem very far away.
» Unfortunately they seem further along than both ACell and Follica, neither
» of which has done Phase I trials on humans, let alone Phase II.

True but the science behind Follica isnt as cumbersome as ICX. Dermabrasion and a “secret majic rub on compound” shouldnt take that long to determine results.

» Yes, Benji, your points are correct.
» specially this one:
»
»
»» I am confused. It looks, somehow, as if Kemp was not being allowed to tell
» the truth, and as a result, everything is looking worse than it really is.
»

Yes-

I honestly don’t understand Kemp/ Intercytex.
Truth be told, I think we’re dealing with the right technology in the wrong hands.

  1. Intercytex is not on target; the dates in this interview don’t even correspond with their latest report. 02) They wouldn’t need to seek third party financing if they were more transparent to their stock-holders. Money would seek them. 03) They don’t need help marketing this product. This is one of those rare products that markets itself.

.

Why do general HT’s work so well in this “non fertile” area then?

» » Yes, Benji, your points are correct.
» » specially this one:
» »
» »
» »» I am confused. It looks, somehow, as if Kemp was not being allowed to
» tell
» » the truth, and as a result, everything is looking worse than it really
» is.
» »
»
»
»

Yes- I PRESUME FOLLICA WILL BE TOTALLY COMMITED TO HAIR LOSS UNLIKE INTERCYTEX,WHO I THINK HAVE RAN OUT OF MONEY AT MOMENT TO CONTINUE WITH PHASE 3.:expressionless: :frowning:

» I honestly don’t understand Kemp/ Intercytex.
» Truth be told, I think we’re dealing with the right technology in the
» wrong hands.

»
» 01) Intercytex is not on target; the dates in this interview don’t even
» correspond with their latest report. 02) They wouldn’t need to seek third
» party financing if they were more transparent to their stock-holders.
» Money would seek them. 03) They don’t need help marketing this product.
» This is one of those rare products that markets itself.
»
»
»
»
» .

I’m convicing myself about the ICX TRC technology -as Cotsarellis said- isn’t enough.
It’s not sufficient only putting staminal cells on the scalp, but also activate the growth process in some way (wnt, wound, other cells, …).

I think that the Kemp’s hope is to discover till phase II end this third variable. At thwe moment the efficacy is probably LOW and ICX is searching for increasing it.

» I honestly don’t understand Kemp/ Intercytex.
» Truth be told, I think we’re dealing with the right technology in the
» wrong hands.

»
» 01) Intercytex is not on target; the dates in this interview don’t even
» correspond with their latest report. 02) They wouldn’t need to seek third
» party financing if they were more transparent to their stock-holders.
» Money would seek them. 03) They don’t need help marketing this product.
» This is one of those rare products that markets itself.

indeed, somehow, ICX says that they are not investing money into phase III research because this is the job for a cosmetic company -like Bosley–???
this sounds quite ridiculous to me. ICX has all the knowledge necessary to conduct Phae III trials. This has nothing to do IMO with comercialization or marketing.

However, there is a possible explanation to all this: maybe ICX is planning to use Bosley clinics to conduct Phase III trials: recruit volunteers, inject, and follow up them (in the same manner as Farjo clinic was used for Phase II).

Also, Bosley would pay all the costs. This would make a lot of sense, but if this is the case, ICX is explaining the whole thing very badly.

very vague interview like the one given in september 2006

funny how paul kemp has different opinions to nick higgings when both work for same company

in report it says no phase 3 and kemp does talk about phase 3 but refuses to rule out commercialisation afetr phase 2

» in report it says no phase 3

no, the report says there will be phase III as long as there is money from other party.

and kemp does talk about phase 3 but refuses
» to rule out commercialisation afetr phase 2

yes, I wonder how it is possible commercialization after phase II, if the UK has classified TRC as medicine, and requires phase III.
Maybe they plan to launch it in Spain after phase II??? :smiley:

» yes, I wonder how it is possible commercialization after phase II, if the
» UK has classified TRC as medicine, and requires phase III.
» Maybe they plan to launch it in Spain after phase II??? :smiley:

the FAQ on their site does say that they don’t know in which country they’ll launch it first. So they definitely aren’t pursuing US/UK as top priority…probably some country with less restrictions.

Still what really bothers me is their attempts to hide phase-II results so far…this doesn’t sound good at all in terms of efficacy.

» » I honestly don’t understand Kemp/ Intercytex.
» » Truth be told, I think we’re dealing with the right technology in
» the
» » wrong hands.

» »
» » 01) Intercytex is not on target; the dates in this interview don’t even
» » correspond with their latest report. 02) They wouldn’t need to seek
» third
» » party financing if they were more transparent to their stock-holders.
» » Money would seek them. 03) They don’t need help marketing this product.
» » This is one of those rare products that markets itself.
» »
» »
» »
» »
» » .
»
» I’m convicing myself about the ICX TRC technology -as Cotsarellis said-
» isn’t enough.
» It’s not sufficient only putting staminal cells on the scalp, but also
» activate the growth process in some way (wnt, wound, other cells, …).
»
» I think that the Kemp’s hope is to discover till phase II end this third
» variable. At thwe moment the efficacy is probably LOW and ICX is searching
» for increasing it.I TOTALLY AGREE IF THEY HAD WORTHY PRODUCT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON NEWS LIKE ROBOT ANNOUNCEMENT,KEMP WANTS SOMEONE TO CARRY THE BATON ON WITH WHAT THEY HAVE GOT.AT LEAST HE HAS PRODUCED SO CALLED HAIR ON HUMAN SCALP:-|

It could take even longer than ICX. We don’t know how “clean” the science is yet. They could get to humans and have to try many different variants of “injuring” and different flavors of “magical topical” due to inconsistent results. Every hair loss treatment, without exception, has had consistency problems. Not one exception. So I see no reason to think that Follica will be any different.

Not to mention they are dealing with WNT, which is associated with cancer formation. The WNT pathway for hair is also associated with the growth of some cancers. There are many different types of WNT proteins to my understanding, but the fact is, there still is the cancer issue that must be addressed. I don’t see how any treatment that messes with WNT will get cleared by the FDA without full phase I, II, and III trials. People thinking they are just going to breeze through testing and get it to market in the next year or 2 or 3 are being way over-optimistic to me. As I see it, they are behind ICX, and ICX is too far away.

Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Terms of Use & Privacy

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.