It didn’t occur to me until recently how obvious the importance for pre-stimulation is for ICX TRC’s effectiveness.
Our hair follicles follow through naturally cycling phases of activity and rest. Supposedly, ICX TRC will only be effective on active hair follicles. If this assumption is correct, then the best results will come from areas where most hair follicles are active; hence the need for pre-stimulation.
This idea would tie in with their current phase two trial results. The fact that only some of the patients didn’t respond maybe because the resident hair follicles of the others were still dormant. Given the small area tested and an assumed effective growth rate of less than a %100, this would be a likely result. But after pre-stimulation of the skin, with more hair follicles active and ready to accept the new genetic material, a %100 response rate was observed (patients showing some degree of growth).
We should be comfortable in assuming a %100 response rate for the next handful of patients undergoing treatment with pre-stimulation. However, this does not mean TRC will be equally effective on each individual, of course.
So what would be a suitable stimulator?
Maybe something else…
Furthermore, I like prestimulation because this also suggests ICX-TRC will be more flexible. In the likely event you’ll need repeat visits, you wont have to space the proceedures out over several months like someone would if they wanted to remove unwanted hair using laser treatments. Instead, wait a couple weeks to give the skin a break, pre-stimulate, and treat the area again.