Since the first issue you raised involves my concerns about the depth of Follica's laser I'll start with that issue. I assumed that depth may be a problem with the laser but it may be the actual burning from the laser that's the problem, or perhaps there's something else about using the laser that's potentially dangerous. I assume the issue is depth. In any case, there's something about the laser that could result in damage to the skin and even cause scarring. Follica itself says so. If you don't believe me check out this information from Follica:
https://www.hairlosstalk.com/news/new-research/follica-presents-at-the-aad-2017-annual-meeting/
The key quote are here in italics:
"The procedure still involves a dermatologist visit where careful “wounding” of the scalp will occur likely with a medical device, in the areas you wish to treat. They are working to ensure that the device does not create scar tissue or incur any permanent damage, as this would of course nullify the entire treatment. He would not confirm whether existing hair would be damaged but said that they are trying to find the best modality so this could be avoided. He did state that multiple office treatments may be required, but he could not commit nor confirm this, and they are hoping it won’t be a lifetime process but again no confirmation on that either."
Their own statements show that they're still unsure this can be done safely. I highlighted one statement (above) to demonstrate that Follica understands that safety issues may prevent this treatment from coming to market at all. One of the quotes states that patients might need multiple office visits with the doctor so the treatment could involve multiple clinic wounding sessions, which means more chances for problems.
I understand that some people doing derma-rolling get "random" hair growth but Follica does not want to achieve "random" hair growth. Follica wants to achieve good and uniform hair growth that's aesthetically pleasing. I'm assuming that in order to achieve this they have to laser deeper (or do something) that's potentially risky or else they wouldn't state that scarring and/or permanent damage to the skin is a potential risk.
Bottom line: it looks like they want to burn the skin in such a way that it will create uniform hair growth where they apply their laser and something about doing this involves some potential risks. Until they resolve these risk issues I'm going to assume they can't resolve them because it seems like a problem that just can't be solved today. Some problems are just scientifically impossible to solve today. For example, science can't turn north into south no matter what you do.
Perhaps 20 years from now there will be a way to get the desired effects of burning skin (as needed for Follica's treatment to work) without getting the undesired effects of burning the skin in that manner, but I don't think there's a way to accomplish both of those things today. Hence, I'm highly skeptical that Follica will be able to achieve its' objectives in the near future. I think I have a valid point. And the bottom line is that Follica itself says they're concerned about this issue and that this issue could prevent their treatment from entering the marketplace.
And I assume that there's something about Follica's treatment that's different from dermabrasion or else they would just use dermabrasion since doctors already know how to do dermabrasion. Follica themselves say they still have to work out the details of their wounding process so doesn't that mean it can't be dermabrasion since the details of dermabrasion are already worked out?
And keep in mind that *if* the risk is associated with getting the laser to the required depth to prompt good hair growth without doing serious harm to the skin that will complicate matters because the depth of each individual's skin is different, including different depths for each layer of the skin. What if the laser has to hit an exact layer without going past it? There may be the tinniest depth window that must be reached in order to accomplish what they're trying to do, and that window may be at a different depth for each individual. If it gets this complicated I don't think the science is there yet to accomplish this.
And then there are the issues that some people are saying that it's nothing more than minoxidil and wounding. And there are issues of whether or not their treatment can be patented and if it cant be patented they might not release it. And there's also the issue that they might not release it if it can easily be made into DIY.
I feel very pessimistic about Follica. I'm not saying it's a certainty that it's junk. I'm just saying that I don't feel positive about it.
