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

The Dark Side of Stem Cells: 60 Minutes Report


#1

Then there’s this…

Personally, I believe in the efficacy of stem cells for hair loss, NOT as a miracle cure, but as a regrowth inducer which may grow some hair in some people. But for full disclosure about the field in general, this information is just something to consider.

Also, note the last 3 words on this video.


#2

Three thing to consider:

  1. ALL of the patients in both AAPE studies regrew hair, not just some of them.

  2. The patients that got repeat follow-up treatments grew more hair.

  3. I’m not saying we should do stem cell treatments. I’m saying we should use the extract from the stem cells. There’s a big difference. If you inject the cells they may not get into the tight spaces where they need to end up. This may be partly why stem cell treatments are less effective than the extract from the stem cells. The stem cell extract is small particles in liquid. Injected, these small particles are small enough that they should travel obstruction free to all of the key locations needed to prompt hair growth. But the actual cells are larger than the AAPE particles in liquid, they’re shaped different, and they’re outside walls could be rigid in biological terms. If injected the cells probably don’t get to all of the key locations required to prompt hair growth whereas AAPE likely touches every place on the outside of the follicles and may even get inside the follicles.


#3

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by jarjarbinx[/postedby]
Three thing to consider:

  1. ALL of the patients in both AAPE studies regrew hair, not just some of them.

  2. The patients that got repeat follow-up treatments grew more hair.

  3. I’m not saying we should do stem cell treatments. I’m saying we should use the extract from the stem cells. There’s a big difference. If you inject the cells they may not get into the tight spaces where they need to end up. This may be partly why stem cell treatments are less effective than the extract from the stem cells. The stem cell extract is small particles in liquid. Injected, these small particles are small enough that they should travel obstruction free to all of the key locations needed to prompt hair growth. But the actual cells are larger than the AAPE particles in liquid, they’re shaped different, and they’re outside walls could be rigid in biological terms. If injected the cells probably don’t get to all of the key locations required to prompt hair growth whereas AAPE likely touches every place on the outside of the follicles and may even get inside the follicles.[/quote]

Good points, and I would tentatively say that there is some scientific merit to your third point.


#4

PRP and the platelets inside it are NOT stem cells, not even remotely. Nor is cytokine rich plasma the same as stem cells, not even remotely. But a number of US-based HT surgeons and clinics, RIGHT NOW, are erroneously touting them and implying they’re “stem cells” for marketing purposes.

This is an outright LIE. PRP is no more a stem cell than my New Balance sneakers are stem cells. Same goes for that other stuff they’re touting, “cytokine rich plasma”.

But these doctors play fast and loose with the terms. They’re taking advantage of the fact that, over the course of time, it has become standard practice among many laymen and news media reporters to confuse and blur the distinction between what is really a stem cell (according to the textbook definition) and what is not.

Usually they don’t say outright that PRP is the same as stem cells, but they imply it, by using the words “stem cells” in the same marketing materials, videos, and in close proximity to the letters “PRP”. They do everything but say “PRP is stem cells”. But the way they present it is very deceiving, and I believe a court would find it deceiving. In my opinion, this is classic deceptive false advertising.

No wonder we have people here sometimes asking us, “Should I get stem cell PRP treatment?”

As for the woman in this video, I don’t know how she got her hair back, or if they had her on any other medication simultaneously with the PRP…

http://www.mysuncoast.com/health/news/stem-cells-used-for-hair-loss-treatment-in-sarasota/article_a0de191c-da13-11e3-ba88-001a4bcf6878.html

Someone needs to investigate (Florida State Attorney General?) these false “PRP = stem cells” advertising practices.


#5

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by jarjarbinx[/postedby]
Three thing to consider:

  1. ALL of the patients in both AAPE studies regrew hair, not just some of them.

  2. The patients that got repeat follow-up treatments grew more hair.

  3. I’m not saying we should do stem cell treatments. I’m saying we should use the extract from the stem cells. There’s a big difference. If you inject the cells they may not get into the tight spaces where they need to end up. This may be partly why stem cell treatments are less effective than the extract from the stem cells. The stem cell extract is small particles in liquid. Injected, these small particles are small enough that they should travel obstruction free to all of the key locations needed to prompt hair growth. But the actual cells are larger than the AAPE particles in liquid, they’re shaped different, and they’re outside walls could be rigid in biological terms. If injected the cells probably don’t get to all of the key locations required to prompt hair growth whereas AAPE likely touches every place on the outside of the follicles and may even get inside the follicles.

[postedby]Originally Posted by roger_that[/postedby]

Good points, and I would tentatively say that there is some scientific merit to your third point.[/quote]

Point 3 of mine really nags me Roger. You see, if not for point 3 then injecting the fat cells themselves would work, as long as we injected the correct fat cells. There are different fat cells. The correct fat cells produce 100 times as much growth factor as other fat cells produce.


#6

To be specific they aren’t any old fat cells, but adipose derived stem cells, that is a special kind of stem cell that resides in your fat.

Most of the cells in adipose tissue are just plain old adipose cells, yellow cells containing a lot of fat molecules. These are not adipose derived stem cells.

In the middle of all these adipose cells, there are a relatively few adipose derived stem cells, basically floating around. They have to be specifically extracted and cultured separately in order to use them…

http://www.adistem.com/technology/adipose-derived-adult-stem-cells/


#7

In the USA we are allowed to lipo fat cells and re-inject those same cells elsewhere on the body and some of those cells that we relocate would be the correct cells. But most wouldn’t be. This is one reason why I think that the people in other countries who are having fat cell injections into their scalps will see little or no benefit. They should first separate the correct cells from the harvested material and then inject only those correct cells but I don’t think that’s what they’re doing.

Also, there still remains the issue that the size, shape, and material rigidity of the cells may make it difficult, if not impossible, for these injected cells to squeeze into the correct key locations of the follicle. I don’t know this for sure, but it is a potential obstacle. This is why we should be looking at the extract from those cells (AAPE/HARG) instead. It’s what we really want anyway. The whole point to injecting the correct cells is that those cells will then excrete the exact same AAPE into the follicles. We could just skip the middle man - the cells themselves - and inject the AAPE instead and then we don’t have to worry that the size, shape, and material rigidity of the cells might prevent them from reaching the target locations.


#8

I think they are separating out and culturing the adipose derived stem cells, and using them only, at least the people who know what they’re doing. There may be sc#mmers out there who are just injecting the whole thing with the generic fat cells.


#9

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by roger_that[/postedby]
I think they are separating out and culturing the adipose derived stem cells, and using them only, at least the people who know what they’re doing. There may be sc#mmers out there who are just injecting the whole thing with the generic fat cells.[/quote]

There is little or no chance that injecting generic fat cells are going to grow even 1 hair so they better be separating the adipose derived stem cells from the harvest. And even if they are separating and using only the adipose derived stem cells there is still the issue that injecting these cells may not get them to the correct place in/on the follicles. In nature the body somehow steers these cells to the correct places that they need to go. I’ve seen diagrams of follicles that have adipose derived stem cells snug up to certain parts of the follicles. The adipose derived fat cells probably latch on to the follicles at those points, after being steered there by the body, and then once there they feed AAPE to the follicles. But injected cells may not get to the correct locations so it’s best to simply inject the AAPE into the skin and the AAPE will disperse everywhere in and around the follicles, so it will surely go where it needs to go since it goes everywhere.


#10

It looks like Yale called the appropriate adipose cells by the name “Adipose precursor cells.” Here is what Yale purportedly said:

Horsley’s team observed that when hair dies, the layer of fat in the scalp that comprises most of the skin’s thickness shrinks. When hair growth begins, the fat layer expands in a process called adipogenesis. Researchers found that a type of stem cell involved in creation of new fat cells – adipose precursor cells – was required for hair regeneration in mice. They also found these cells produce molecules called PDGF (platelet derived growth factors), which are necessary to produce hair growth."

Also, the below abstract indicates that Yale posits that it is the signal from these cells that tell/prompt follicular stem cells to grow hair. Note where the abstract below says, “intradermal adipocyte lineage cells are necessary and sufficient to drive follicular stem cell activation” It looks to me like Yale is saying these cells, or by extension, the extract from these cells (aka AAPE), is all that is required to get follicles working properly again. (Bolding and enlarging done by me).

“In mammalian skin, multiple types of resident cells are required to create a functional tissue and support tissue homeostasis and regeneration. The cells that compose the epithelial stem cell niche for skin homeostasis and regeneration are not well defined. Here, we identify adipose precursor cells within the skin and demonstrate that their dynamic regeneration parallels the activation of skin stem cells. Functional analysis of adipocyte lineage cells in mice with defects in adipogenesis and in transplantation experiments revealed that intradermal adipocyte lineage cells are necessary and sufficient to drive follicular stem cell activation. Furthermore, we implicate PDGF expression by immature adipocyte cells in the regulation of follicular stem cell activity. These data highlight adipogenic cells as skin niche cells that positively regulate skin stem cell activity, and suggest that adipocyte lineage cells may alter epithelial stem cell function clinically.”


#11

this video is the reason why we cannot let doctors like nigam experiment on us.


#12

I think you forgot the video or are you saying that there is no video that explains why we shouldn’t let Dr. Nigam work on us?

And OK if you don’t want to let Dr. Nigam work on you then don’t. Stay bald for 10 years + instead.