Follica Annual Reports And Accounts April 2017

[nameless]

Is it prudent to say that Follica commercialisation is just a matter of time now? 2018 possible with the current process? First half or second half? The wounding neogenesis theory is very legit in my opinion.

They might put something on the market but it won't accomplish anything other than to transfer money from your bank account over to Cots's bank account.

People have been trying to cure hair loss for thousands of years and they can't do it. The technology does not exist yet. A cure for hair loss if far far into the future.

 

[Baldybald1]

Nameless I think you are having a bad day/ mood

 

[br1]

People died from diarrhea during thousands of years, never gonna find a cure for that.

 

[Min0]

All of this is fine and dandy except there is no way that Follica is going to grow hair beyond what can already be grown. People have been trying to grow hair for thousands of years and they've made very little progress. You guys should face it that science will not cure hair loss in your lifetime.

Dead hair is dead. The idea of getting hair to come back to life is like getting a corpse to rise up from its' coffin and come back to life. It is not going to happen. After people have tried to regrow lost hair for thousands of years it's unrealistic, insane even, for you guys to think that it will be possible in your lifetimes to regrow hair.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/peo...ore-hearing-lost-organ-horrific-accident.html

 

[nameless]

People died from diarrhea during thousands of years, never gonna find a cure for that.

Hair loss is way more complicated to cure than diarrhea.

 

[nameless]

Yes.

Say somebody gives you a goose, and the next day it lays a golden egg. Your first question won't be "How many ounces & karats is that egg's gold?" Your first question will be "Can this goose keep laying more golden eggs repeatedly?!?"

The first question to ask is if the goose can grow hair because magic geese is your best chance to bring dead hair back to life during your lifetime.

 

[nameless]

Zero, I'd say

There's really no chance of hair growth for at least 25 - 100 years.

Hair loss is not one simple problem. It's a multi-layered problem.

1. One problem is that the fat layer base under the follicle has thinned. This fat layer is important because it sends necessary growth factors to the follicles. The only way to solve this problem is to add fat to the appropriate place. But if they do this the fat will soon leave the target area. In order to solve the fat layer problem the fat has to stay in the target area PERMANENTLY.

2. And there's also talk that the shrinkage of the collagen area is also playing a role in hair loss so they will also have to find a permanent solution to this problem as well.

3. Then there is the issue of inductivity. They have been trying to find a solution to this problem for quite some time and they still haven't got it licked. They may never solve this problem.

4. Then there is the issue that the follicles will be grown from your cells - which have a genetic vulnerability to androgen. So they will have to do gene editing to remove the genetic vulnerability to androgen from your cells. It could take 5 - 10 years to advance genetic editing far enough to accomplish this.

5. But first they have to locate that genetic vulnerability to androgens. They don't know where the genetic vulnerability to androgens is situated exactly inside the cells. It could be more than one gene, and they might not be located next to each other, or even near each other. Finding the genetic vulnerability genes in your cells could easily take 5 years or so.

6. And removing the defective genetics of the androgen sensitivity won't completely solve that problem. They will also have to replace the defective genetics with something...healthy genes that are impervious to androgens. Then they'll have to edit those genes (that are impervious to androgen) INTO some hair cells of the person they edited the bad genes out of. And they will have to edit those good genes in at the right spot (in the cells) with technology that has no chance of causing an immune response from the host when billions of edited copies of the cells are implanted into the host. Since hair loss is a genetic condition regulatory agencies are unlikely to allow even the slightest possibility of an immune response. The risk factor for an immune response would probably have to be down to ZERO in order to get regulatory clearance once gene editing is involved.

It will easily be 25 years before they can do all 6 of these things. And when they accomplish these 6 things they might find there are additional hurdles. I think we're 25 - 100 years away from a cure for hair loss. And there is the very real possibility that they may NEVER be able to cure hair loss.

 

[NorwoodGuardian]

Follica is neogenesis not reviving dead follicles you moron. How many times you wanna repeat "thousands of years"? What is your purpose of continually posting 4 to 5 posts to talk about your thousands of years theory. And why do you come here if you are so desparate?
Nobody has ever used smartphones since stone age and nobody used nuclear weapons in wars in the past thousands of years and then why this happens now? Your reasoning and logic is poor. Don't act like you are top scientist and know much, your bro science is negligible in front of Tsuji, Follica and many other top scientists working in this field. STFU pls.

 

[Royaume]

There's really no chance of hair growth for at least 25 - 50 years.

Hair loss is not one simple problem. It's a multi-layered problem.

1. One problem is that the fat layer base under the follicle has thinned. This fat layer is important because it sends necessary growth factors to the follicles. The only way to solve this problem is to add fat to the appropriate place. But if they do this the fat will soon leave the target area. In order to solve the fat layer problem the fat has to stay in the target area PERMANENTLY.

2. And there's also talk that the shrinkage of the collagen area is also playing a role in hair loss so they will also have to find a permanent solution to this problem as well.

3. Then there is the issue of inductivity. They have been trying to find a solution to this problem for quite some time and they still haven't got it licked. They may never solve this problem.

4. Then there is the issue that the follicles will be grown from your cells - which have a genetic vulnerability to androgen. So they will have to do gene editing to remove the genetic vulnerability androgen. It could take 5 - 10 years to advance genetic editing far enough to accomplish this.

5. But first they have to locate that genetic vulnerability to androgens. They don't know where the genetic vulnerability to androgens is situated on the genome and finding it could take 5 years or so.

6. And removing the defective genetics of the androgen sensitivity won't completely solve that problem. They will also have to replace the defective genetics with something...healthy genes that are impervious to androgens. Then they'll have to edit those genes (that are impervious to androgen) INTO some hair cells of the person they edited the bad genes out of. And they will have to edit those good genes in at the right spot (in the cells) with technology that has no chance of causing an immune response from the host when billions of edited copies of the cells are implanted into the host.

It will easily be 25 years before they can do all of 6 of these things. And when they accomplish these 6 things they might find there are additional hurdles. I think we're 25 - 100 years away from a cure for hair loss.

Thank you for your detailed explanation. If I had that knowledge or I were so convinced I would immediately leave this forum? why spending time if I am so damn sure that there wont be a cure?

Makes sense? Oh yes!

 

[nameless]

Thank you for your detailed explanation. If I had that knowledge or I were so convinced I would immediately leave this forum? why spending time if I am so damn sure that there wont be a cure?

Makes sense? Oh yes!

You said that if you had that knowledge you would leave, and now you have that knowledge, so go.

Makes sense? Oh yes!

 

[pegasus2]

Follica is neogenesis not reviving dead follicles you moron. How many times you wanna repeat "thousands of years"? What is your purpose of continually posting 4 to 5 posts to talk about your thousands of years theory. And why do you come here if you are so desparate?
Nobody has ever used smartphones since stone age and nobody used nuclear weapons in wars in the past thousands of years and then why this happens now? Your reasoning and logic is poor. Don't act like you are top scientist and know much, your bro science is negligible in front of Tsuji, Follica and many other top scientists working in this field. STFU pls.

Lol They still don't get that they're being trolled.

 

[nameless]

Follica is neogenesis not reviving dead follicles you moron. How many times you wanna repeat "thousands of years"? What is your purpose of continually posting 4 to 5 posts to talk about your thousands of years theory. And why do you come here if you are so desparate?
Nobody has ever used smartphones since stone age and nobody used nuclear weapons in wars in the past thousands of years and then why this happens now? Your reasoning and logic is poor. Don't act like you are top scientist and know much, your bro science is negligible in front of Tsuji, Follica and many other top scientists working in this field. STFU pls.

*STFU SFBs.

*Tsuji utilizes the patient's cells so when push comes to shove it's just another cell-based treatment. This means Tsuji will have all of the problems I've cited just like all other cell based treatments have so far. Aderans, Intercytex and now Replicel were all sh*t for growing new hair. All 3 of those cell-based companies failed miserably for the same reason - the 6 reasons I posted above. And like I said, Tsuji's treatment is also cell-based so it will have the same result.

* And it will take 25 to solve the 6 problems I cited. And when they finally solve those 6 problems they might find additional problems. A cure for hair loss is at least 25 years away, and maybe as far as 100 years away.

* I didn't even bother detailing why Follica won't work because Follica is even worse off than the cell-based therapies.

* Even Follica isn't sure they can bring their treatment to market because they're unsure they can laser the scalp properly without damaging the skin.

* Keep in mind that they can't just permanently set the laser at the same specific settings for all of us because all of our skin is different thickness and there are slight variations on the inside of each of our skin. There aren't a cookie-cutter settings that will work for all of us. So right off the bat it's highly doubtful that Follica will be able to solve their laser setting issues.

* Calibrations for each individual person would be a nightmare, if it's even doable.

*They would have to do major investigation of each patient's skin (inside and out) before they could do the laser part of the treatment. And they may need to do follow-up laser treatments and since skin changes they would have to do those major investigations into the patient's skin (inside and out) for each follow-up laser treatment.

*There are other big problems with Follica but I think that the laser setting issue alone will likely KILL Follica so there's no reason to go into anymore detail than the laser settings to figure out that Follica is sunk.

 

[Hairismylife]

Lol!!!
You know all and Tsuji doesn't know?
Make sense?
Shiseido invested billions of dollars to R&D and other infrastructure solely for Replicel and they even don't have the knowledge you have before making the billions investment decision. Oh yes, your the God of hair loss. Tsuji and Shiseido must be very regret of not consulting you before starting their work.

For Tsuji, I think you'd better to have @Swoop to explain to you.

 

[Royaume]

Oh come on... He is the one who believed the april fool prank of the sudden cure which grows like 2m plastic hair as a side effect.

Don't take him serious. He is just upset as we all are because of this fkcing hair loss but we will have a solution. Stay optimistc!

 

[nameless]

Lol!!!
You know all and Tsuji doesn't know?
Make sense?
Shiseido invested billions of dollars to R&D and other infrastructure solely for Replicel and they even don't have the knowledge you have before making the billions investment decision. Oh yes, your the God of hair loss. Tsuji and Shiseido must be very regret of not consulting you before starting their work.

For Tsuji, I think you'd better to have @Swoop to explain to you.

* I read that Tsuji's lab is now CLOSED.

* Tsuji uses the patient's cells as the basis for the treatment. There's just no way around the fact that all cell-based hair loss treatments will have the problems I have alluded to. It will take at least 25 years to solve those problems.

* Aderans and Intecytex both grew sh*t for hair because of these problems I alluded to. Replicel grew sh*t for hair because of these problems I alluded to. Three cell-based companies down, one to go. The next cell-based company stepping up to the plate to strike-out is Tsuji.

* Yea I know Shiseido invested a lot of money. Aderans and Intercytex also invested lots of money. They're gone. Replicel grew sh*t for hair just like Aderans and Intercytex. They're all cell based treatments that died for the reasons I already posted.

 

[Hairismylife]

Oh come on... He is the one who believed the april fool prank of the sudden cure which grows like 2m plastic hair as a side effect.

Don't take him serious. He is just upset as we all are because of this fkcing hair loss but we will have a solution. Stay optimistc!

If you have told me earlier I would not have replied to him so seriously lol.

 

[nameless]

Oh come on... He is the one who believed the april fool prank of the sudden cure which grows like 2m plastic hair as a side effect.

Don't take him serious. He is just upset as we all are because of this fkcing hair loss but we will have a solution. Stay optimistc!

* WTF does falling for an April Fool's joke have to do with this? Not a damn thing.

*Are you saying there is no inductivity problem with cell based therapies?

*Are you aware that both Aderans and Intecytex failed for the exact reasons I've said - inductivity? Are you aware that Replicel also didn't solve the inductivity problem and they also grew sh*t for hair?

*Are you aware that YALE UNIVERSITY says that a reduction of signals from fat play a key role in hair loss? In order to get more fat signals to the follicles you will need more fat below the follicles. Hence, you will have to thicken the fat layer in order to make hair grow again. But you can't just inject fat because it won't stay in the target area.

*And then there's the issue that even once you solve the inductivity problem and make new follicles those follicles will be formed from your own cells, which are sensitive to the androgens, so your new follicles will be vulnerable to androgens. We all know this. You will need gene-editing to solve this problem.

*These kinds of problems will take decades to solve. 25 years is the minimum amount of time it will take to solve these problems. And you better hope other problems don't show up after these problems are solved or else it could take longer than 25 years to cure hair loss

 

[PRM]

nameless,

you sound very pessimistic. Don´t you have hopes for any treatment? At least any new technology that could stop the male pattern baldness process? I thought you were excited about replicel´s treatment.

 

[nameless]

nameless,

you sound very pessimistic. Don´t you have hopes for any treatment? At least any new technology that could stop the male pattern baldness process? I thought you were excited about replicel´s treatment.

I was excited about replicel's treatment arresting hair loss but not about Replicel's ability to grow new hairs.

 

[PRM]

I was excited about replicel's treatment arresting hair loss but not about Replicel's ability to grow new hairs.

Thanks for the answer. Well, if replicel and histogen could stop hair loss progression, then it´s great. You will only need one or two hair transplants to get coverage, considering you still have native hairs. In my case, i am a NW3 still using finasteride and minoxidil, since 1997. I hope i can substitute them for Replicel´s treatment in a few years.

Anyway, i´m curious to know your actual regimen and which treatment you believe is closer to reach the market.

Thanks again!