» » » 3.2% increase in terminal hairs? Oh boy.
» »
» » That indicates new growth though or revived follicles
»
» Or it could mean it woke up early a few of the follicles in the normal and
» periodic resting stage, which would have awakened on their own in another
» month or two anyway.
Yup. In fact, they themselves report that the placebo treated areas yielded an over 5% increase in 37% of the cases. Surely the placebo doesn’t generate new follicles and neither does it revive the old ones?
» Yup. In fact, they themselves report that the placebo treated areas yielded
» an over 5% increase in 37% of the cases. Surely the placebo doesn’t
» generate new follicles and neither does it revive the old ones?
Yes that concerned me too.
Also,
(Note that 3 patients were removed from this analysis because their injection products were shipped outside of the temperature range stated in the protocol).
» » » 3.2% increase in terminal hairs? Oh boy.
» »
» » That indicates new growth though or revived follicles
»
» Or it could mean it woke up early a few of the follicles in the normal and
» periodic resting stage, which would have awakened on their own in another
» month or two anyway.
Exactly Ahab. If they injected the stuff into “hairy” areas - you can get such results WITH or WITHOUT injecting any stuff after 6 month. Furthermore, I noticed from my own analysis with the gc-photos (the patient who got HST), that the (regrown) hairs and whole hairy area, from DAY to DAY always -of course- appear DIFFERENT. This means, just with 1 baseline photo and just with 1 after six month (macro)photo - there is ALWAYS a difference - with a treatment or without a treatment - and especially for an electronic tool like the TrichoScan device.
At least one thing is for sure - they couldn’t reproduce their mouse results from 2003 - THAT’S for sure. Humans are NOT mice!
» » » » 3.2% increase in terminal hairs? Oh boy.
» » »
» » » That indicates new growth though or revived follicles
» »
» » Or it could mean it woke up early a few of the follicles in the normal
» and
» » periodic resting stage, which would have awakened on their own in
» another
» » month or two anyway.
»
» Exactly Ahab. If they injected the stuff into “hairy” areas - you can get
» such results WITH or WITHOUT injecting any stuff after 6 month.
» Furthermore, I noticed from my own analysis with the gc-photos (the patient
» who got HST), that the (regrown) hairs and whole hairy area, from DAY to
» DAY always -of course- appear DIFFERENT. This means, just with 1 baseline
» photo and just with 1 after six month (macro)photo - there is ALWAYS a
» difference - with a treatment or without a treatment - and especially for
» an electronic tool like the TrichoScan device.
»
» At least one thing is for sure - they couldn’t reproduce their mouse
» results from 2003 - THAT’S for sure. Humans are NOT mice!
EXACTLY WE HAVE TO SEE PHOTOS, and stats, how many doses? what number? did they injected into hairy areas?or bald? and why they didn injected on bald areas to see the diference without trichoscan? many questions this is very confusing and disappointing i hope to see more at the meeting of the European Hair Research Society
» >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
» Relative to measurements taken prior to injection (baseline), the total
» hair density (the total number of hairs in a given area per cm2) at sites
» injected with autologous DSCC increased 6.1%. Vellus hair
» (small/intermediate sized-hair: approximately 10-40um thick) density and
» terminal hair (thick hair) density increased by 12.5% and 3.2%,
» respectively.
» <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
In other words:
VELLUS hairs increased by 12.5% (what is bullcrap anyhow)
TERMINAL hairs increased by 3.2% (what is big BS anyhow)
This means, IF you have in a given area 100 terminal hairs … +3.2% = 3 terminal hairs more in this area - best case, of course.
» In other words:
» VELLUS hairs increased by 12.5% (what is bullcrap anyhow)
» TERMINAL hairs increased by 3.2% (what is big BS anyhow)
»
» Just for the record.
» In other words:
» THIS WAS A SAFETY TRIAL
»
» Just for the record.
No, they ALWAYS clearly mentioned in interviews etc, that this phase I trail was ALSO designed to measure EFFECTIVENESS and therefore injected the stuff accordingly!
EQ: The company’s first-in-man, Phase I/IIa clinical trial was started in December 2010, and the last patient was injected in August 2011. What’s next for RepliCel in this trial, and what are you hoping to see in the results?
Hoffmann: Phase I trials are about safety, so a successful trial is, of course, about safety. Most people on the outside are not interested in safety; they’re interested in hair growth. For the regulators, the first thing we must prove is that it’s safe. A successful trial will prove that it’s completely safe, with no adverse effects like ganuloma or tumor formations. A very successful trial would mean we see more hair growth at the levels we would expect to see in a patient treated with Rogaine®. So, a range of 10 percent to 15 percent more hairs per centimeter square is what we would define as very successful. If we see even more hairs than what is expected from finasteride (Propecia®) treatments, then we’d be very, very happy. So first of all, it’s a safety treatment. But secondary, we are also looking for hair density and more parameters linked to efficacy.
» » In other words:
» » THIS WAS A SAFETY TRIAL
» »
» » Just for the record.
»
» No, they ALWAYS clearly mentioned in interviews etc, that this phase I
» trail was ALSO designed to measure EFFECTIVENESS and therefore injected the
» stuff accordingly!
No, nobody’s going to test EFFECTIVENESS on something as varying as hairloss on a mere 19 subjects. PI’s generally understood by most to be a safety trial. Most people except you that is.
» » >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
» » Relative to measurements taken prior to injection (baseline), the total
» » hair density (the total number of hairs in a given area per cm2) at
» sites
» » injected with autologous DSCC increased 6.1%. Vellus
» hair
» » (small/intermediate sized-hair: approximately 10-40um thick) density and
» » terminal hair (thick hair) density increased
» by 12.5% and 3.2%,
» » respectively.
» » <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
»
» In other words:
» VELLUS hairs increased by 12.5% (what is bullcrap anyhow)
» TERMINAL hairs increased by 3.2% (what is big BS anyhow)
»
» This means, IF you have in a given area 100 terminal hairs … +3.2% = 3
» terminal hairs more in this area - best case, of course.
»
» Just for the record.
» » >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
» » Relative to measurements taken prior to injection (baseline), the total
» » hair density (the total number of hairs in a given area per cm2) at
» sites
» » injected with autologous DSCC increased 6.1%. Vellus
» hair
» » (small/intermediate sized-hair: approximately 10-40um thick) density and
» » terminal hair (thick hair) density increased
» by 12.5% and 3.2%,
» » respectively.
» » <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
»
» In other words:
» VELLUS hairs increased by 12.5% (what is bullcrap anyhow)
» TERMINAL hairs increased by 3.2% (what is big BS anyhow)
»
» This means, IF you have in a given area 100 terminal hairs … +3.2% = 3
» terminal hairs more in this area - best case, of course.
»
» Just for the record.
… and not even the more advanced ARI guys are able to show us -in comparison- a normal photo (=the truth) with nicely hair growth on a normal person’s head!
» Jesus, if RepliCel did their analysis anything like the way ARI did, then
» RepliCel’s results are downright scary bad.
Could you please be so kind and report us what the Replicel guys reported concerning the PLACEBO sites (results), I mean what happened in the placebo sites?
» » Jesus, if RepliCel did their analysis anything like the way ARI did,
» then
» » RepliCel’s results are downright scary bad.
»
» Could you please be so kind and report us what the Replicel guys reported
» concerning the PLACEBO sites (results), I mean what happened in the
» placebo sites?
They reported 37% success in the placebo area. The whole situation is really a disaster.
» » » 3.2% increase in terminal hairs? Oh boy.
» »
» » That indicates new growth though or revived follicles
»
» Or it could mean it woke up early a few of the follicles in the normal and
» periodic resting stage, which would have awakened on their own in another
» month or two anyway.
» » Could you please be so kind and report us what the Replicel guys
» reported
» » concerning the PLACEBO sites (results), I mean what happened in
» the
» » placebo sites?
»
» They reported 37% success in the placebo area. The whole situation is
» really a disaster.
It seems these scientists from India are totally right also!
Check out the photos plus notes below the abstract!
To me appears that it happend actually nothing after six month - zero, zilch, nada effect. At least any effect of the injected stuff is extremely hard to prove, detect, discover, measure at all. But again, one thing is for sure: there is practically no clear evidence that something happend at all after six month from the injected stuff concerning effectiveness.
Guys forget abt replicel, it will work on day in the future, we all gonna be too old…focus on HST, its here NOW, with hst every bald man can have 10 000 grafts transplanted, that shd be enough for nw6s.All you need is $$$ and time.
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.
