Hairismylife
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 77
Seems Nameless is very happy to see Tsuji has CLOSED. But sadly he believed in wrong msg again and again. Can't he read?
Follica Annual Reports And Accounts April 2017
- Thread starter Xaser94
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 497
Hairismylife
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 77
He's done. His psycho is understandable.
You're as dumb as a rock.
When the first cell-based treatment, Intercytex, failed (for the reasons I've stated) it was OK that we didn't know (in advance) that it would fail because we didn't have enough evidence to make that call in advance. But after Intercytex failed, you clowns were rooting for cell-based Aderans, and when it failed you saps were shocked. Then you inbred freaks started rooting for Replicel while I warned you all that it would grow sh*t for hair (for the same reasons Aderans and Intercytex grew sh*t for hair) and you SFBs morons attacked me and rooted for Replicel to grow a bunch of hair. But Replicel grew sh*t for hair.
You clowns don't learn.
You're like Charlie Brown in the continuing story where Lucy moves the football just before Charlie Brown kicks it and Charlie Brown falls flat on his ***. Lucy keeps doing it over and over again. She promises Charlie Brown that she won't move the ball again and sap Charlie keeps falling for it. He repeatedly charges full steam ahead to kick the ball, Lucy moves it, and then Charlie Brown falls flat on his *** again. He falls for the same stupid stunt over and over and over again.
Now all of you tell me, who does Charlie Brown in that continuing story remind you of? Answer: YOU.
YOU are all a "collective" Charlie Brown, charging full steam ahead at the ball so that Lucy can move it at the last minute and make you fall on your collective asses again, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN, for all eternity.
You have no idea how much it pains me to watch you clowns fall for the same sh*t over and over and over again.
Last edited:
Will Follica release this new treatment worldwide or only in the US?
Please come to Europe, please come to Europe...
Please be effective, please be effective...
It's highly doubtful that Follica will come to market at all. If it does come to market it wont be significantly better than already available treatments. The only thing it will be "effective" at is separating you from your money.
Hairismylife
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 77
I see a person who has passed his prime doesn't want anything to come becasue he can't enjoy it but at the same time he thinks anti-aging treatments will come soon because he can enjoy it when he reached 50. I don't wanna spray salt in his wound, we all in the same boat but this guy deliberately spread false info such as closure of Tsuji really makes me sick.
I think that when "the cure" comes/as we get closer to it, you're going to see a lot more of these breakdowns. These forums demonstrate that a lot of men, especially older ones, are obsessed with youth (which may have passed them by) and young women and they blame their lack of success with the latter on their hairloss. Not that hairloss doesn't adversely affect dating, but you get my point.
As we see more positive outcomes from trials like RepliCel, Tsuji beginning trials next year, increasingly good science, and stuff come to market etc. more of these men are going to start coming to the realization that their hair isn't going to make 20-year-old hotties love them and it's not going to make them 25 and ready to party with minimal responsibilities again. For some men who've still kept most of their looks, are in good shape and have a good career, this may actually come true.
But for most, it will be the ultimate mid-life crisis.
Me? I just like having hair.
There have been 5 cell-based hair growth companies that I know of so far: (1) Intercytex (2) Aderans (3) Replicel (4) Shiseido (5) Tsuji.
So far two of them have shut down - Intercytex and Aderans. They shut down because shitty hair growth results. You can blame investors if you want but that's a dodge. If either Intercytex or Aderans had achieved breakthrough results investors would have thrown money at that company.
Investors walk away when results are poor. Replicel has very little money. And they would have NO money and liquidate except for the fact that they have other marketable property. That's what's saving them. Last I heard their hair studies have been on hold for some time. But they've got shiseido stuck and bamboozled so Shiseido will try clinical studies with repeat injections using varying doses. If that effort continues to produce shitty hair growth then Replicel will likely shut down its' hair growth efforts. Shiseido may proceed with their hair growth efforts using Replicel's tech because in Japan even a treatment that arrests hair loss could be profitable.
- Reaction score
- 8,249
nameless i think you are just feeling frustrated waiting for these treatments and pouring so much hope into them..Maybe take a breadth so to speak.
1. I never supported Nigam's donor doubling efforts. I supported Dr. Nigam's cell-based therapy ideas. And some of Nigam's cell-based treatment patients DID get limited regrowth.
2. Arishi is a self-aggrandizing blowhard. He's been right the overwhelming majority of times he predicted failure (on little or no evidence sometimes) only because when a treatment idea is first publicized he immediately screams that it won't work, and since almost no hair loss treatments work the statistics are on his side. You could put the names of all hair loss treatments that ever went into clinical trials onto a wall, throw a dart at that wall, and your odds of hitting a treatment that didn't pan out would be over 99%. With those kinds of odds if you predict that any treatment won't work you have a 99% chance of being right. A monkey could do it. Those of you who worship at the alter of Arishi are morons.
3. Yes I previously said a cure would come in 3 years but I thought about it further and decided I was wrong about that. Hey, I made a mistake. People make mistakes. Deal with it.
More rebuttal to follow...
Last edited:
Such a treatment will be profitable across the entire f*****g globe. You know it, I know it, they know it.
Stop spreading bullshit and pessimism just because you're mad that it's looking like you'll be dead and gone before you'll be a teenager again. Dude, I had changed my mind about you, but in the last week, you've really been going nuts.
Here is some real advice:
• If you aren't on it now, get on finasteride and minoxidil.
• If you've lost some hair, stop saving that money for future techs you now apparently believe aren't coming and spend it on a transplant.
• If you've lost significant hair, get a hairpiece and augment it with a transplant. Done right, no one will be able to tell and you'll feel better about your appearance. Any self-consciousness you'll have about it will be a small price to pay.
• Get a hobby
• Lastly, find a woman who is your age instead of dreaming of women half your age or older, Kate Beckinsale bombshells who aren't going to be into you even if you do get your hair back.
Trust me, it will do you a world of good.
I do not believe I said there are "lots" of problems still to be solved. I believe there are some problems to be solve in order to create a true cure for hair loss. But there are about 6 things that will have to happen in order to solve those few problems. There's just no way around it. The 3 biggest problems are:
1. Cells have to be cultured in order to produce enough cells to produce regrowth but cells lose hair inductivity during culture. It's a catch-22 and the problem has to be solved in order to make cell-based therapies, likr Dr. Tsuji's treatment, work.
2. The environment the cells are being injected into is unhealthy and needs to be repaired.
3. The continuing problem of androgen attacking the new hairs, which will be produced from cells that are sensitive to androgens.
And I'm confident that you know I'm right about all 3 of these issues. Almost everyone in the site knows about these 3 problem issues. It's been widely discussed at the Tsuji threads among other threads. Indeed, you discussed 2 of these issues with Dr. Gardner over at TBT a few years ago. I'm sure you recall Dr. Gardner. He used to work in Dr. Jahoda's lab. Anyway, here's what Dr. Gardner (formerly of the world-renowned Dr. Collin Jahoda's lab) said about treating the environment where you would implant the new follicles or cells:
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
The effectiveness of any treatment is going to vary case by case, but making new follicles does not fix any underlying issues that caused hair loss in the first instance. I envisage that complementary therapies will have to be used as well in the more severe cases. Beyond this I could see full scalp regeneration technologies being developed, as it would be much easier to control in the lab, but that's not something that will come after reliable follicle induction.
Here's another post where Dr. Gardner of Collin Jahoda's lab (Yes that Collin Jahoda) says that the environment (where your implanting the follicles or cells) should be made healthy as part of the treatment. In this post he refers to making the environment by saying, "cure for underlying issues".
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.png
It depends entirely in what form any cure for underlying issues comes in. It could be a single hit fix or at the other end something that requires repeated application. Since this doesn't exist yet we don't really know.
I would envisage that only a few follicles would be isolated as these would be sufficient to generate the required new follicles for the entire scalp, but again we need to wait for data from the clinical trials.
And here's a post where Dr. Gardner alludes to healing the environment (the cells or follicles would be injected into) by adding fat in some form:
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
I personally believe that the fat is important in maintaining the follicle, not initiating induction. Perhaps acting as a reservoir for cells or as you suggest some form of signalling system reinforcing the inductivity of the DP. Restoring a "normal" scalp environment is something that I think will be key in maintaining follicles after transplantation/implantation, but I don't know what methods will be used to achieve this:
- Pre-conditioning of the scalp with cellular or traditional therapies
- Co-transplant of adipogenic cells within the construct
- Or simply relying on the presence of "healthy" follicles to regenerate the fat tissue themselves
And here's where Dr Gardner again talks about how the environment the cells/follicles are being implanted into will need to be mde healthy too:
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
If we make an inductive construct it should work in any instance. But, as I've mentioned previously a balding/bald scalp has underlying issues that mean follicle maintenance will likely be poor. So, co-therapies to prime scalp for treatment and help maintain follicle survival will be required.
It will be interesting to see if restoration of follicles to balding/bald scalp improves the quality of the scalp though.
As for cost I honestly have no idea, an educated guess would be something similar to the current top end hair transplantation clinics. That's a question for when one of the groups gets closer to testing.
Here again, Dr. Gardner talks about how the environment (where the cells/follicles will be implanted) should be treated:
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
Even if the DP cells are derived and multiplied from an apparently 'resistant' area of the scalp, i.e. the back of the head?
If those follicles exist then yes they will likely fare better. However balding/bald scalp is less "healthy" (in relation to follicle support), so constructs will be being transplanted into a less healthy environment, the constructs themselves may be very viable but without proper support and interaction I would hypothesize that they wouldn't retain resistance. Hence why I think that co-therapies to prime the scalp prior to transplantation and maintain a healthy environment after will be vital. Until we can somehow address any underlying causes.
Here again, Dr. Gardner talks about having to make the entire scalp environment healthy in order for induced follicles to perform as we want them to:
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
I'm not sure. The majority of studies use epithelial cells that are very receptive to follicle induction i.e. mouse or human neonatal epithelial cells. We are attempting to use adult human only cells, but this is "healthy" tissue. As far as I know there are no groups using alopecia scalp tissue to test for inductivity. Speculating, I would assume if an inductive enough construct was created that the initial follicle would form. However, as this isn't treating the underlying causes of the various alopecias I would assume the follicle would then degrade as the previously, perhaps even at a faster rate due to the loss of fatty tissue in the scalp."
The effectiveness of any treatment is going to vary case by case, but making new follicles does not fix any underlying issues that caused hair loss in the first instance. I envisage that complementary therapies will have to be used as well in the more severe cases. Beyond this I could see full scalp regeneration technologies being developed, as it would be much easier to control in the lab, but that's not something that will come after reliable follicle induction.
Lastly, here is where Dr. Gardner specifically mentions the need to add fat cells to the mix. He uses the words "adipocytes" which means fat cells.
agardner
https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngMember
Join Date
May 2014
Posts
71
No one has presented, or published work demonstrating full retention of inductivity or gene expression. As I said above “But I don’t think 100% restoration is required in culture, it won’t hurt but a lot of the character of the DP in vivo is generated by its interactions with surrounding tissue. All we and the other groups are attempting to do is restore enough character to the DP cells to kick start this interaction with a high efficiency.”
The addition of growth factors is not desirable for clinical practice. Producing these factors to a clinical standard is very difficult and expensive, it is better to try and induce the cells to make these factors themselves.
I’m not sure what you mean about the sheath cells, do you mean are they important for hair follicle orientation?
The interaction of any constructs with the surrounding tissues is key yes, as I’ve mentioned previously implanting these constructs into skin which has underlying problems will not “cure” baldness. Co-therapies limiting the degradation of any new follicles would be required.
Multi-cell models including adipocytes (fat cells) and melanocytes (cells that provide colouration) are in the works, but I can’t talk about those at the moment https://www.baldtruthtaIk.com/images/smilies/smile.gif
Last edited:
The investors pulled the plug on Intercytex and Aderans because they produced shitty regrowth and I know that you know that. Replicel's hair loss treatment is stalled in America and Replicel is hoping that Shiseido can make something happen with the technology. These cell-based treatments can work but they need a lot more scientific work before they're ready for prime-time. I think it will be some decades before all the bugs are worked out.
By the way, below I responded to one of Joachim's ignorant delusional posts by posting some posts by Dr. Gardner's posts, which support the things I'm saying. You should read that post, and all of Dr Gardner's quotes, since Dr. Gardner was working in the lab of Dr. Collin Jahoda (Yes, that Collin Jahoda) at the time he made those statements.
For those of you who are wondering what the quotes by Dr. Garnder prove I will tell you in this post. First, let me state that those quotes by Dr. Gardner come from out of the lab of Dr. Collin Jahoda. People are telling me I'm wrong and insulting me on a personal level even though the stuff I'm saying conforms to the stuff Dr. Gardner stated. And again, when we talk about Dr. Gardners statements we are talking about information coming from Collin Jahoda's lab.
Look, I understand that you guys don't like unpleasant information but you really shouldn't attack a guy just because he states a reasonable opinion. And since the stuff coming from Collin Jahoda's lab supports the things I'm saying that means the stuff I'm saying is reasonable.
Now for the part where I tell you why Dr. Gardner's posts are relevant to the things I'm saying.
1. Look at how concerned Dr. Gardner is about the unhealthy scalp environment these follicles or cells will be injected into. He thinks the scalp environment has to be made healthy so that the newly implanted follicles or cells will survive and function well. I agree with Gardner/Jahoda about this. You guys are insulting me because I agree with Dr. Jahoda.
2. Just like I previously said, something will have to be done about fat. Joachim snickers at me for saying something will have to be done about fat BUT Collin Jahoda's lab agrees with me. Who is more likely correct - me (who is saying the same thing as Collin Jahoda) or Joachim (who's rationalizing sh*t that conforms to what he wants to believe).
3. Solving the fat problem is not going to be a snap because fat cells leave the target area shortly after being injected. They have to find a solution to that problem.
4. Also, the scalp environment is unhealthy because the scalp is sensitive to the androgens. This is one of the problems that will have to be solved and I think it will take gene editing to solve this problem. The genetics inside the cell need to be altered so that the cells aren't sensitive to androgens anymore. Now, I admit that Dr. Gardner did not say that gene editing is the only way to solve this problem, and he might have simpler ways in mind to solve this problem, but I'm right that gene editing would probably work.
5. And lastly, Dr. Gardner also talks about how the inductivity problem still needs to be worked out. They've been trying to solve the inductivity problem for over a decade. It's not a snap. It looks like this could take a significant amount of time.
Look, I understand that you guys don't like unpleasant information but you really shouldn't attack a guy just because he states a reasonable opinion. And since the stuff coming from Collin Jahoda's lab supports the things I'm saying that means the stuff I'm saying is reasonable.
Now for the part where I tell you why Dr. Gardner's posts are relevant to the things I'm saying.
1. Look at how concerned Dr. Gardner is about the unhealthy scalp environment these follicles or cells will be injected into. He thinks the scalp environment has to be made healthy so that the newly implanted follicles or cells will survive and function well. I agree with Gardner/Jahoda about this. You guys are insulting me because I agree with Dr. Jahoda.
2. Just like I previously said, something will have to be done about fat. Joachim snickers at me for saying something will have to be done about fat BUT Collin Jahoda's lab agrees with me. Who is more likely correct - me (who is saying the same thing as Collin Jahoda) or Joachim (who's rationalizing sh*t that conforms to what he wants to believe).
3. Solving the fat problem is not going to be a snap because fat cells leave the target area shortly after being injected. They have to find a solution to that problem.
4. Also, the scalp environment is unhealthy because the scalp is sensitive to the androgens. This is one of the problems that will have to be solved and I think it will take gene editing to solve this problem. The genetics inside the cell need to be altered so that the cells aren't sensitive to androgens anymore. Now, I admit that Dr. Gardner did not say that gene editing is the only way to solve this problem, and he might have simpler ways in mind to solve this problem, but I'm right that gene editing would probably work.
5. And lastly, Dr. Gardner also talks about how the inductivity problem still needs to be worked out. They've been trying to solve the inductivity problem for over a decade. It's not a snap. It looks like this could take a significant amount of time.
Last edited:
You consistently spit the truth. Thank you.
Hairismylife
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 77
Don't waste your time typing such a long BS passage to conceal your real reason behind of not wanting anything to work. You passed your prime you can't enjoy it so you better wish all the things fail. And as a Nigam advocate, you still think your so-called analysis will add value to this forum?
where did you read this ?
Project and rationalize much?
Firstly, you're the one who doesn't believe his own nonsense.
Secondly, you're mockery of Dr. Gardner shows what a doofus you are because at that time Dr. Gardner was a researcher in Jahoda's lab and Dr. Gardner was relaying to us Dr. Collin Jahoda's thinking. So when you mock Dr. Gardner you're also mocking Dr. Collin Jahoda. I scoff in your doofus face.
And you make it sound like Dr. Gardner's statements are old and no longer relevant...as if they're 20+ years old. Those statements by Gardner/Jahoda are NOT archaic. They are a couple years old. And regarding the position that fat is key to "fixing" hair loss, nothing has changed since Dr. Gardner's statements. It is still understood and accepted (by the scientists anyway) that fat is a key factor in hair loss and growth. That's why Kerastem is running its' fat replacement product through FDA clinical trials you moron. And it was YALE UNIVERSITY that advanced the idea of fat's KEY ROLE in hair loss and hair growth. Check this out:
http://newatlas.com/hair-growth-signal-source-discovery/19733/
So you're rejecting the conclusions of Dr. Collin Jahoda, and YALE UNIVERSITY, and the scientists at Kerastem. YOU. You say you know better than all of them.
And since ALL credible and respected hair loss researchers still believe that fat is a key factor in hair loss/growth that means you're rejecting the conclusions of all credible/respected hair loss researchers. 100% of them. It's you against all of them. Great!
And standing in your corner we have a know-nothing doofus who says that Jahoda, YALE UNIVERSITY, Kerastem researchers, and virtually 100 of respected/credible hair loss researchers are all wrong while you and some other broscience internet guys are right. What a total doofus you are.
Last edited:
Last I heard Tsuji plans to start trials next year but he also said that is contingent on him solving the problems I've alluded to. Of course if he doesn't solve those problems then he will announce a delay.
You see what you want to see.
What you see is an illusion that you invented so you can keep believing what you want to believe. In other words, you're seeing your own rationalizations.
Bottom line - the researchers still have to solve the same problems they've been trying to solve for over a decade. Researchers have been working on these same problems for so long because these problems are very complex and tricky. The people saying that a cure is imminent base their prediction on the notion that these problems will be solved imminently but that's fanciful & wishful thinking.
Last edited:
If Follica comes to market it will also be a lot of bother to do the treatment. But you probably won't have to worry about that because it's doubtful that it will come to market anyway. They're still trying to perfect the part where they laser your head.
Follica wants to laser you head, they aren't sure they can do that without damaging your head, and you're chomping at the bit to have them do it to you. LMAO, you want the top of your head lasered off.
Last edited:
Give me a break. I want something to work NOW. Today.
WTF do you mean I don't want anything to work? You're in-f*****g-sane.
I did indeed support Dr. Nigam's experiments with cell-based therapies. And back then I was also supporting Intercytex's cell-based therapies as well as the cell-based therapy Aderans had in clinical trials. And now I support Tsuj's cell-based experiments and Replicel's cell-based experiments. I think that cell based therapies will ultimately be the cure for hair loss. But I also think that they're not ready for prime-time, and won't be ready for prime-time for decades.
Is this post short enough for you?
Last edited: