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

The Oasis product is quite old (2001 or before)!


#1

They publish 2 clinical studies, one from 2001 and the other from 2002.
http://www.healthpoint.com/divisions/tm/prodOASISclinstudies.cfm

So this product from small intestine of pig is at least 7 years old!!!
They use a 3D scaffold you can see in the photos of the first study.
http://www.healthpoint.com/divisions/tm/Etris.pdf
in this study you also see photos of wounds closure, but wounds are very small. Nothing to do with the spectacular Acell photos.
Also, no mention of FDA trials??? After 7 years??

and if this technology is so good, then why ICX is engaging into expensive clinical trials for their skin products? In theory, the “pig technology” is much better and cheaper than cell multiplication, so why is Intercytex doing trials for their cell multiplication products?? The answer is clear: the pig products are soso, at least this one from Oasis, which is quite old.

So it seems that:
-this technology is quite old.
-Oasis is a primitive version, and uses a scaffold.
-Acell is an advanced version of this technique, and is just a a powder.


#2

Well, why would Gentifib or Leflunomide possibly work and yet they haven’t been tried for hair purposes for years? We know these drugs were being tested on humans like 10-15+ years ago, and yet we don’t start doubting that Folica’s method could possibly work, do we?

There’s no telling when science might suddenly find a new use for something they’ve had for years already.


#3

» Well, why would Gentifib or Leflunomide possibly work and yet they haven’t
» been tried for hair purposes for years? We know these drugs were being
» tested on humans like 10-15+ years ago, and yet we don’t start doubting
» that Folica’s method could possibly work, do we?
»
»
» There’s no telling when science might suddenly find a new use for
» something they’ve had for years already.

No, this is not my point. Its not a matter of finding new uses.
What I mean is that if this regenerative product is so wonderful for healing wounds, how come it has been stalled in the last 7 years, and basically noone knows it, and there are no FDA trials, not even planned…? I mean for wounds, not for hair.


#4

» » Well, why would Gentifib or Leflunomide possibly work and yet they
» haven’t
» » been tried for hair purposes for years? We know these drugs were being
» » tested on humans like 10-15+ years ago, and yet we don’t start doubting
» » that Folica’s method could possibly work, do we?
» »
» »
» » There’s no telling when science might suddenly find a new use for
» » something they’ve had for years already.
»
» No, this is not my point. Its not a matter of finding new uses.
» What I mean is that if this regenerative product is so wonderful for
» healing wounds, how come it has been stalled in the last 7 years, and
» basically noone knows it, and there are no FDA trials, not even
» planned…? I mean for wounds, not for hair.

from the video this stuff seems to be more complicated to use compared to acell, for my intent anyway, also the pics from acell are just so impressive, im from canada and i am trying to get it now, cause even if it comes out in july, this is only in the states, i am surpised oasis wasnt tried on transplant scars since its been out so long,


#5

Maybe we could try Acell and Oasis at the same time for better effect?


#6

» Well, why would Gentifib or Leflunomide possibly work and yet they haven’t
» been tried for hair purposes for years?

Because so far they worked on one guy. Only one from thousands or possibly millions.


#7

(sigh)

Yeah, and therefore Folica must logically fail, right?

My point was that sometimes a drug can be around for years before a new purpose for it gets tried.

I can keep reasoning that Acell (or Folica for that matter) might work, and you can keep poking holes in my reasoning. But the bottom line is . . . has it been tried for hair purposes yet? Unless it has been tried with all the probable necessary factors set up just right, then we really don’t know yet.