Follica (first Time Ever Picture) - Exciting

[NewUser]

I wouldn't try plucking simply because this worked in mice, and plucking was done in a small area at a sufficiently high enough density to cause regrowth. Apparently 200 hairs were plucked causing more than double to sixfold regrowth. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...t-might-just-help-reverse-baldness-180954929/

 

[Dimitri001]

What I'm getting at is, you don't need deep wounding to induce hair follicles neogenesis. Not sure why people are needling at crazy depths.

This is a bit that's gotten past me in the flurry of information I've been taking in about balding recently - Follica is actually claiming the creation of new hair follicles??? Is that what was observed in those other microneedling studies, the non Follica studies, that did regular needling, or did they see reactivation of dormant follicles?

I can't imagine anyone knows the answer to this question, but, Pegasus enlightened me on another thread that the follicles in the areas of the head not affected by balding don't have androgen receptors and consequently don't get affected. Is it known whether these newly generated follicles have androgen receptors?

I wouldn't try plucking simply because this worked in mice, and plucking was done in a small area at a sufficiently high enough density to cause regrowth. Apparently 200 hairs were plucked causing more than double to sixfold regrowth. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...t-might-just-help-reverse-baldness-180954929/

I sure wish someone would do a human study on hair plucking.

If anyone on the forum decides to give it a shot, please do keep us abreast of developments

 

[whatevr]

I can't imagine anyone knows the answer to this question, but, Pegasus enlightened me on another thread that the follicles in the areas of the head not affected by balding don't have androgen receptors and consequently don't get affected. Is it known whether these newly generated follicles have androgen receptors?

Really good question. It depends where exactly the genetic information for the newly created hair follicles comes from.

As far as I'm aware during wounding, stem cells migrate into the area and then either differentiate into keratinocytes or hair follicles, depending on which genes are expressed in the stem cells. The logical conclusion would be that some type of cell local to the surrounding area/skin (which created the original follicles as well) carries these genetic instructions and if forced to create a hair follicle, this new follicle would probably exhibit all of the characteristics of the original hairs which were present in this area of the scalp. In other words, probably not good news in the sense that these new follicles most likely won't be DHT-resistant. Perhaps in combination with Replicel though...

 

[HairOnFire]

This is a bit that's gotten past me in the flurry of information I've been taking in about balding recently - Follica is actually claiming the creation of new hair follicles??? Is that what was observed in those other microneedling studies, the non Follica studies, that did regular needling, or did they see reactivation of dormant follicles?

Follica is claiming the creation of new hair follicles. Their claim is based on embryonic genetic markers that appear after wounding - specifically the expression of 'BerEP4'. If you look at pages 13 and 14 of the Follica Clinical Summary attachment on page 4 of this thread, you'll see the explanation. In fact, the formation of new follicles is widely discussed in this document.

 

[kiwi666]

What I'm getting at is, you don't need deep wounding to induce hair follicles neogenesis. Not sure why people are needling at crazy depths.

You’re not sure. Exactly why you are here and not working on cutting edge technologies. Like the rest of us.

 

[kiwi666]

Weekly?
This is dangerous.
Skin needs at least two weeks to heal.
You should dermaroll twice a month and massage the area daily.
People, what are you doing to yourselves?

You are incorrect.

People here and in other forums are needling daily and have been in some cases for years. The member @chen is a good example of this.

 

[kiwi666]

This is why its taken Follica more than a decade to perfect its protocol. Timing, depth, spacing, etc - anyone doing this at home is simply guessing, while Follica now knows.

EXACTLY!!!

There’s guys here with almost full heads of hair that say they need at 1mm. Some with no hair at 1mm. Some say it works. Some show pics. Some don’t. Some use min. Some don’t. Some swear by 2mm. Some 1.75mm. There is nothing controlled about what we’re doing as a community.

Except controlled awesome. f*** all the cry babies that make declarative statements claiming facts. Not one person here knows. Unless they work for Follica.

In which case... please don’t forget me!!!

I can’t wait to get something based on years of research.

 

[kiwi666]

@kiwi666 Your takeaway from the varying needling regimens on the forums should be that wounding is so powerful that virtually anything works. It really is hard to go wrong with wounding.

EXCEPT it’s not

It’s wounding + min clearly has no negative impact. And more than that for some.

That should be the takeaway for any people here that can read and use their brain to compare photos.

 

[HairOnFire]

You’re not sure. Exactly why you are here and not working on cutting edge technologies. Like the rest of us.

Huh? I am basing my statements on what Follica has presented to the public, as well as the published literature on follicular morphogenesis.

If you have a differing opinion, please state it, with data to back it up.

 

[kiwi666]

Science does make sense.
You don't!
I do have a clue, but noone knows significantly.
Its a field with scarce knowledge.
Thanks capitalism!

Again incorrect.

The nature of science is that it can evolve, and change based on new research and new science and new discoveries.

Follica have scientists working on the science, researching, testing and inventing us a better treatment.

We have you. You might as well be stating that science is fixed and you know better than them.

 

[kiwi666]

If they have with a 0.5-1mm dermaroller/needle, its OK.
Its worthless, but safe.
If they wound their corium daily, obviously they do harm, but if they use other products, its likely that the overall effect is positive.
Let me repeat!
There is no point in dermarolling daily!!

Again you do not KNOW this.

If I was a gambling man and other treatments were letting me down I’d ignore you and take more notice to the people that are needling with minoxidil and seeing results.

 

[kiwi666]

Sure, but epidermis is anywhere from 0.5 to 2-3mm thick.
Everybody's skin thickness is different.
If everybody needles at a 1mm depth, chances are not all people will get to the dermis.
Moreover, deeper damage is better. And by deeper, I mean damage to the reticular dermis/corium.
Its nice that you know where stem cells are located: the bulge, not the bulb. You've done your h/w and I do compliment you on that.

This is more intriguing and I totally agree / say the same thing about hobbiest needling at 1mm. That’s always been pretty obvious to me.

However I think your science is flawed about daily needling causing damage if you’re doing it for minoxidil absorbsion. I’m no scientist... just basing that on other members posts.

Sigh... again why Follica probably do know and are going to release something awesome.

Something awesome (by my standards) is anything that is better than or equal to existing treatments.

 

[kiwi666]

You dont know, though, whether the effect is from min or from the combo.

Yes. Exactky and it doesn’t matter. People aren’t dying here so do both. Try to save your hair

 

[HAIRGOAT]

This thread is about the data actual scientists released and they seem to be alluding to a depth of no more than 0,15mm with tight clustering of wounds unless of course they released their promising but failed data and went completely the other way to confuse us on depth.

Which leads to my hypothesis if this data is true may explain somebody's and chens results of daily light needling accidentally acquiring the goldie locks zone of quorum sensing over the course of many days with a compounded stacking low depth wounds.

 

[Dimitri001]

Really good question. It depends where exactly the genetic information for the newly created hair follicles comes from.

As far as I'm aware during wounding, stem cells migrate into the area and then either differentiate into keratinocytes or hair follicles, depending on which genes are expressed in the stem cells. The logical conclusion would be that some type of cell local to the surrounding area/skin (which created the original follicles as well) carries these genetic instructions and if forced to create a hair follicle, this new follicle would probably exhibit all of the characteristics of the original hairs which were present in this area of the scalp. In other words, probably not good news in the sense that these new follicles most likely won't be DHT-resistant. Perhaps in combination with Replicel though...

Yeah, that's the reasonable assumption.

You wonder whether there might be some problems down the line with using this treatment, beause you'd be creating new follicles which would eventually die out for the same reason the ones you had at birth did, so as you keep doing this treatment over the years, you end up with a scalp that has way more dead follicles then a normal scalp. Could you even eventually run out of realestate and what happens then?

You also wonder, is there any risk of cancer here? Because from what I understand, and I may be completely wrong here, cancer can happen when stem cells keep dividing and dividing and don't stop when they're supposed to. So, if you're just constantly inducing stem cell division... Is that like saying that you're at risk of cancer every time you have a knee scrape? Or are stem cells not involved in healing those kind of injuries, but only in generation of new follicles.

 

[vika]

You have no idea how cancer is caused.
Enough, ignorant people.
Learn, before talking science!

You know you sound like Donald Trump now? Alot of statements but not reasoning or evidence behind them

 

[vika]

This thread is about the data actual scientists released and they seem to be alluding to a depth of no more than 0,15mm with tight clustering of wounds unless of course they released their promising but failed data and went completely the other way to confuse us on depth.

Which leads to my hypothesis if this data is true may explain somebody's and chens results of daily light needling accidentally acquiring the goldie locks zone of quorum sensing over the course of many days with a compounded stacking low depth wounds.

This make sense. Some of the the people in the dermarolling thread must have triggered this quorum sensing just by the high frequency of microneedling they do.

 

[GrowPro]

This make sense. Some of the the people in the dermarolling thread must have triggered this quorum sensing just by the high frequency of microneedling they do.

I started off microneedling once every 7-9 days with 1.5mm when I began my routine, after about a month and a half and not seeing visible results (an early given) I decided to up it to 2mm and add 1mm every 3rd day and applying minoxidil about an hour after microneedling and saw great new growth, my sessions also last 20-30 minutes where I stamp using my Dr pen all over my scalp and go over the same areas in a swirl pattern, doing this seems to be similar to the “needle density” and “quorum sensing” theory and I’ve been doing this way before this latest Follica info was recently released. Also, my scalp skin does heal well, only light reddens in my temple area because the skin there seems thinner and due to the minoxidil I’ve had annoying dandruff flaking.

My issue with Follicas 85 day “results” photo after looking at the high res is that the before photo seems to have be spot lit to show the thinnes of the crown BUT the surrounding hair cloaked in darkness...UNLIKE the 85 day “after” photo where the lighting is much more spread out and you can see the native hairs surrounding the crown...this to me feels very shady of them to do...it’s obvious the guys hair is much longer in the 85 day after photo..they couldn’t afford a hair stylist to cut the subjects hair to the similar length as the before photo??...common...f*ck outta here with that bullshit...and I’ve already stated how they angled the subject in both photos that had me shaking my head.

That said, I have to wonder if these photos they released (that are supposedly from some years ago) are just to get the hype going and that when they are approved by the FDA they plan on releasing longer-term before and after photo/video results with significant progress, just to amaze us and flock to all their clinic partners.

 

[acbrantlin]

I started off microneedling once every 7-9 days with 1.5mm when I began my routine, after about a month and a half and not seeing visible results (an early given) I decided to up it to 2mm and add 1mm every 3rd day and applying minoxidil about an hour after microneedling and saw great new growth, my sessions also last 20-30 minutes where I stamp using my Dr pen all over my scalp and go over the same areas in a swirl pattern, doing this seems to be similar to the “needle density” and “quorum sensing” theory and I’ve been doing this way before this latest Follica info was recently released. Also, my scalp skin does heal well, only light reddens in my temple area because the skin there seems thinner and due to the minoxidil I’ve had annoying dandruff flaking.

My issue with Follicas 85 day “results” photo after looking at the high res is that the before photo seems to have be spot lit to show the thinnes of the crown BUT the surrounding hair cloaked in darkness...UNLIKE the 85 day “after” photo where the lighting is much more spread out and you can see the native hairs surrounding the crown...this to me feels very shady of them to do...it’s obvious the guys hair is much longer in the 85 day after photo..they couldn’t afford a hair stylist to cut the subjects hair to the similar length as the before photo??...common...f*ck outta here with that bullshit...and I’ve already stated how they angled the subject in both photos that had me shaking my head.

That said, I have to wonder if these photos they released (that are supposedly from some years ago) are just to get the hype going and that when they are approved by the FDA they plan on releasing longer-term before and after photo/video results with significant progress, just to amaze us and flock to all their clinic partners.

Unfortunately that is the same flawed logic people used for Brotzu and many other failed treatments: "They're saving all their best photos for the last minute so competitors don't steal their idea!!!"

The reality with Follica is the same with all other treatments: if it worked well, we would have known years ago. That's just the truth. If they had good regrowth pictures, we would have already seen them. "They're locked behind trial data, any leak is punished with death!!!! They're professionals! They're scientists!" It's all a big desperate joke. Follica has been trying for over 10 years. They would've had to make the decision to move forward with a product years ago. We would have seen a photo if any good ones existed, but they don't. They don't exist in this trial data coming out in 2020. They won't exist in 2025.

It's not even good to peddle. I'm sure hair doctors would rather try to sell you a laser helmet because they probably get a much bigger kickback. Your average dermatologist isn't going to order a device that wounds your scalp to keep in their office. If by miracle it even does work well, it's going to be years and years after release date for it to penetrate the market.

 

[HAIRGOAT]

Unfortunately that is the same flawed logic people used for Brotzu and many other failed treatments: "They're saving all their best photos for the last minute so competitors don't steal their idea!!!"

The reality with Follica is the same with all other treatments: if it worked well, we would have known years ago. That's just the truth. If they had good regrowth pictures, we would have already seen them. "They're locked behind trial data, any leak is punished with death!!!! They're professionals! They're scientists!" It's all a big desperate joke. Follica has been trying for over 10 years. They would've had to make the decision to move forward with a product years ago. We would have seen a photo if any good ones existed, but they don't. They don't exist in this trial data coming out in 2020. They won't exist in 2025.

It's not even good to peddle. I'm sure hair doctors would rather try to sell you a laser helmet because they probably get a much bigger kickback. Your average dermatologist isn't going to order a device that wounds your scalp to keep in their office. If by miracle it even does work well, it's going to be years and years after release date for it to penetrate the market.

you could be right but we have seen diy people make dramatic recovery's using the premise that they are working with at follica better in fact than their photo they released .Its not a case of of if it works its getting it to work in every one. I also have sneaking suspicion that they solved it years ago and have spent this whole time trying to reinvent the wheel in a patented way to make money from it to stop people with generic pens and generic min doing it them self's