Follica - Good News!
- Thread starter bobs
- Start date
haunted-ballroom
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 5
Ok, im lost.... Ive been reading lots and lots of threads which has given me the idea we are nowhere near a cure.... So whats all this then? A cure?
Follica's method is about dermabrading the skin and then through various chemicals tell the wound to make hair, rather than new skin, to cover it up again. We don't know if it works in humans.
No offense but there's like 19 pages on this, and it's been explained about 10 times.
Anyway, back on topic:
Can you guys think of any more either "natural" or non-super-expensive EGF receptor antagonists? Even if a few have already been mentioned, I find that taking a second or third google-sweep usually results in something new. I decided to order some bulk caffeine. It's cheap, and even if it all fails miserably, I can still use it for something else. That's what makes me a little weary about the arthritis-drug.
Can't exacly put the remaining pills in your tea.
No offense but there's like 19 pages on this, and it's been explained about 10 times.
Anyway, back on topic:
Can you guys think of any more either "natural" or non-super-expensive EGF receptor antagonists? Even if a few have already been mentioned, I find that taking a second or third google-sweep usually results in something new. I decided to order some bulk caffeine. It's cheap, and even if it all fails miserably, I can still use it for something else. That's what makes me a little weary about the arthritis-drug.
Can't exacly put the remaining pills in your tea.
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
The patent explicity mentions that the egf-antagonist (be it a receptor antagonist or an antagonist of egf-formation) needs to be a non-naturally occuring chemical. A synthetic chemical in other words. Im wondering if they are worried that a natural-carbon-based molecule might be sidestepped in some way by the body and a synthetic drug will not be able to be evaded by the bodies willingness to grow new skin over the wound------------thus forcing it to form a new hair follicle as the command center for skin-revitilization and development.
The new kit patent focuses on the EGF-angle as the most important factor in the patent. Getfitnib seems to be Follica's drug of choice, and it costs about $2700 a month, so its very expensive. There are natural egf-inhibitors like apple polyphenols and quercetin and a few others that I cant recall right off the top of my head...............but Follica seems to think they wont work for whatever reason.
The most base form of the patent that I seen was a EGF-antagonist, an anti-androgen (finas or dutas) and minoxidil in conjunction with the wounding. They are basically saying hair can be made with just those three.....................the anti-histamines, anti-microbials, anti-bacterials, lithium compounds, and immunosuppressants are adjunctives.
Getfitnib (if I spelled that right) has been shown to have a side effect of terminal hair growing on someone's NOSE in the journal of investigative dermatology. Im anxious about Follica having a trial.
To be honest, its eitehr Follica or nothing for at least five years (my opinon) as HM just isn't ready and ICX will have to go through a phase three trial because the MHRA in ENgland is going to regulate it like a drug, plus a review process before any commercization even if its just over there.
The new kit patent focuses on the EGF-angle as the most important factor in the patent. Getfitnib seems to be Follica's drug of choice, and it costs about $2700 a month, so its very expensive. There are natural egf-inhibitors like apple polyphenols and quercetin and a few others that I cant recall right off the top of my head...............but Follica seems to think they wont work for whatever reason.
The most base form of the patent that I seen was a EGF-antagonist, an anti-androgen (finas or dutas) and minoxidil in conjunction with the wounding. They are basically saying hair can be made with just those three.....................the anti-histamines, anti-microbials, anti-bacterials, lithium compounds, and immunosuppressants are adjunctives.
Getfitnib (if I spelled that right) has been shown to have a side effect of terminal hair growing on someone's NOSE in the journal of investigative dermatology. Im anxious about Follica having a trial.
To be honest, its eitehr Follica or nothing for at least five years (my opinon) as HM just isn't ready and ICX will have to go through a phase three trial because the MHRA in ENgland is going to regulate it like a drug, plus a review process before any commercization even if its just over there.
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
acell hasn't been attempting to grow hair, but it would be interesting for them to try
they have a human-grade product out
Im for anything that can grow hair believe me, and hope ACELL looks into it. You'd have to wound the skin though..........just like follica and remove the stratum cornelium layer, just like follica.
they have a human-grade product out
Im for anything that can grow hair believe me, and hope ACELL looks into it. You'd have to wound the skin though..........just like follica and remove the stratum cornelium layer, just like follica.
Yes, I heard about that drug and the nose-hair. Suffice to say, the hair was ON the nose I assume 
Though we on this side seem to be unable to stop shouting at Follica to start their experiment, it's still always interesting to glimpse information about the project indirectly. Even though the reason you don't have hair on your nose isn't due to balding-like conditions on it, it's still a testament to the drug how it can force itself upon a chosen area of skin.
Here's hoping that the cost of the drug goes down quickly if and when Follica start to use it, and perhaps after it's been more established as a cancer-drug. I've heard it's very new.
What we should also note is that because the nose, as it generally has only the most microscopic of hair on it, could give us good indication that hair can grow on pretty much slick areas. The fear that I've picked up with projects like intercytex's hair-multiplication, is that it doesn't do so well unless the area already has atleast some patches of hair.
So, perhaps some slack for the slick-balded has been thrown their way?
Though we on this side seem to be unable to stop shouting at Follica to start their experiment, it's still always interesting to glimpse information about the project indirectly. Even though the reason you don't have hair on your nose isn't due to balding-like conditions on it, it's still a testament to the drug how it can force itself upon a chosen area of skin.
Here's hoping that the cost of the drug goes down quickly if and when Follica start to use it, and perhaps after it's been more established as a cancer-drug. I've heard it's very new.
What we should also note is that because the nose, as it generally has only the most microscopic of hair on it, could give us good indication that hair can grow on pretty much slick areas. The fear that I've picked up with projects like intercytex's hair-multiplication, is that it doesn't do so well unless the area already has atleast some patches of hair.
So, perhaps some slack for the slick-balded has been thrown their way?
I made a few google-searches and I found a generic version of the cancer-drug gefitinib that Follica seem to be so fond of.
The brand-name that gefitnib is in, is called "Iressa", and goes for a whooping 2200 for 30 pills. The generic version goes for half that - 1290 dollars.
Yes, yes, still the cost of a plasma-screen... but still. You don't *need* 30 pills. If you want to toy around with them and the home-made follica method works, then it's about a third of the price should you use it internally. If it works topically, then who knows.. perhaps only 3-4 pills are needed?
I doubt anyone will try it when it's so ridiclously priced - I'm still waiting for my topical caffeine, and I'm feeling so-so about my measly 13 dollar purchase.
But look on the bright side - a potential must-have used to cost 2200 dollars, and is now half of that.
Speaking of cancer-drugs; what does gefitnib have that other cancer meds don't? Are there no other lung cancer meds in pill form?
EDIT: Just found them even cheaper at "world remedium" for 650 dollars. Still expensive, but slowly coming down to sane levels. *SHOULD* this medication be the golden ticket through the method, and if Follica for some reason keep staggering on for 2-3 years, then I myself might be interested in investing in this. Though at this point it's obviously way way way too early to go out and buy 600 dollar meds on whims and gut-feelings.
Anyway, here's the link: http://www.worldremedium.com/advanced_s ... sa&x=0&y=0
Just considering options. It's all we have until Follica bloody says something.
The brand-name that gefitnib is in, is called "Iressa", and goes for a whooping 2200 for 30 pills. The generic version goes for half that - 1290 dollars.
Yes, yes, still the cost of a plasma-screen... but still. You don't *need* 30 pills. If you want to toy around with them and the home-made follica method works, then it's about a third of the price should you use it internally. If it works topically, then who knows.. perhaps only 3-4 pills are needed?
I doubt anyone will try it when it's so ridiclously priced - I'm still waiting for my topical caffeine, and I'm feeling so-so about my measly 13 dollar purchase.
But look on the bright side - a potential must-have used to cost 2200 dollars, and is now half of that.
Speaking of cancer-drugs; what does gefitnib have that other cancer meds don't? Are there no other lung cancer meds in pill form?
EDIT: Just found them even cheaper at "world remedium" for 650 dollars. Still expensive, but slowly coming down to sane levels. *SHOULD* this medication be the golden ticket through the method, and if Follica for some reason keep staggering on for 2-3 years, then I myself might be interested in investing in this. Though at this point it's obviously way way way too early to go out and buy 600 dollar meds on whims and gut-feelings.
Anyway, here's the link: http://www.worldremedium.com/advanced_s ... sa&x=0&y=0
Just considering options. It's all we have until Follica bloody says something.
Lol, thank you. I'm just a google-monkey. I'll let the rest of you sort it out.
Now if only my caffeine would arrive.. I'm eager to make another test-run with it, if nothing else than to try out a natural skin formation blocker - however weak it is.
There's not much happening in the patch that I treated with lithium, though I'm not too surprised. There's a substantial regrowth in that area with hairs that are about 1,5 cm in lenght; noticably shorter than the rest of my hair, but not short enough to correspond to the time-line of my experiment. Much of the growth is also only covering about 70% of the area, though, which if you believe in the whole stimulation thing (through needling), would point towards these hairs being old hairs forced into life again as opposed to completly new hair.
Or maybe "follica-esque" hair only grows on skin designated for scalp hair. Who knows really. It's still mind-boggling that virtually all my success with weekly or bi-weekly needling has happened on the left. It has crept all over the hairline, but stopping exacly in the middle of the peak. Odd indeed.
Judging by my overall hair-quality, I'd say that you don't need to needle more than maybe every-other-week after the first month of weekly needling. Perhaps after the ground-work of activating (for lack of a better word) the scalp, it sorta goes on by itself with minimal upkeep.
The only downside is that when you don't needle 2 times a week, your scalp becomes as sensitive to it as if it were the first time. God damn it hurt yesterday, but it's absolutely worth it. When I got my hair cut the water-sprayed hair barely changed in texture. Usually I'm left with 2 tufts of hair plastered to my skull that gives me a terrifying demonstration of what I would look like if I was a Norwood 6.
In the easy studio light it barely looked, even to me, as if I was losing hair. So even though it's just pretty much an illusion, getting thicker texture instead of greater quantity, it's still worth it for psychological reasons.
Anyway; about the meds. I hope it can be applied topically when Follica decides to sell this thing. It seems the cheapest and least invasive of ways to administer it. I've heard some people talk about trying these meds as they are prescribed, orally, but I'm hesistant, and a little uncomfortable with it.
Something about taking hardcore lung-cancer meds for late-stage treatment makes me a little squirmish, and I would like to control the amount of time it stays in my system if there are side-effects. I also may not want to have the get-hair-instead-of-skin-when-you-scrub-yourself-effect active all over my body, though that's probably not going to be an issue.
I picked up a few articles on the the cancer-drug that argued that it had killed over 200 people in Japan, but perhaps that should be taken with the perspective that this drug is given to people as a last-hope-kind-of-thing. So I'm thinking it might be like debating wheter or not it was the 5-story fall or the gun-shot that killed you, though I realize that might come off as crude.
And I guess there's some hypocracy in that I happily gulp down propecia on a daily basis, which is a cancer drug as well.
Now if only my caffeine would arrive.. I'm eager to make another test-run with it, if nothing else than to try out a natural skin formation blocker - however weak it is.
There's not much happening in the patch that I treated with lithium, though I'm not too surprised. There's a substantial regrowth in that area with hairs that are about 1,5 cm in lenght; noticably shorter than the rest of my hair, but not short enough to correspond to the time-line of my experiment. Much of the growth is also only covering about 70% of the area, though, which if you believe in the whole stimulation thing (through needling), would point towards these hairs being old hairs forced into life again as opposed to completly new hair.
Or maybe "follica-esque" hair only grows on skin designated for scalp hair. Who knows really. It's still mind-boggling that virtually all my success with weekly or bi-weekly needling has happened on the left. It has crept all over the hairline, but stopping exacly in the middle of the peak. Odd indeed.
Judging by my overall hair-quality, I'd say that you don't need to needle more than maybe every-other-week after the first month of weekly needling. Perhaps after the ground-work of activating (for lack of a better word) the scalp, it sorta goes on by itself with minimal upkeep.
The only downside is that when you don't needle 2 times a week, your scalp becomes as sensitive to it as if it were the first time. God damn it hurt yesterday, but it's absolutely worth it. When I got my hair cut the water-sprayed hair barely changed in texture. Usually I'm left with 2 tufts of hair plastered to my skull that gives me a terrifying demonstration of what I would look like if I was a Norwood 6.
In the easy studio light it barely looked, even to me, as if I was losing hair. So even though it's just pretty much an illusion, getting thicker texture instead of greater quantity, it's still worth it for psychological reasons.
Anyway; about the meds. I hope it can be applied topically when Follica decides to sell this thing. It seems the cheapest and least invasive of ways to administer it. I've heard some people talk about trying these meds as they are prescribed, orally, but I'm hesistant, and a little uncomfortable with it.
Something about taking hardcore lung-cancer meds for late-stage treatment makes me a little squirmish, and I would like to control the amount of time it stays in my system if there are side-effects. I also may not want to have the get-hair-instead-of-skin-when-you-scrub-yourself-effect active all over my body, though that's probably not going to be an issue.
I picked up a few articles on the the cancer-drug that argued that it had killed over 200 people in Japan, but perhaps that should be taken with the perspective that this drug is given to people as a last-hope-kind-of-thing. So I'm thinking it might be like debating wheter or not it was the 5-story fall or the gun-shot that killed you, though I realize that might come off as crude.
And I guess there's some hypocracy in that I happily gulp down propecia on a daily basis, which is a cancer drug as well.
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
one of the drugs, Arava, is simply an arthritis medication. TEN DAYS is as long as you'd be required to take it post-wounding, starting around day 2 after the dermabrasion. Finasteride is another drug you'd be on (and one Ive taken for 12 years), everything else is minoxidil, an anti-histamine, anti-bacterial/microbial, possibly an immunosuppressant for ten days. Thats about it.
We just need to know if it works, which is why I hope they get into trials this summer.
We just need to know if it works, which is why I hope they get into trials this summer.
m barry do you think that you will have to be on finasteride the whole time, or just during the treatment? also if you dont mind me asking have you had any side effects from it over the 12 years? follica have a patent i just dojnt understand why they start trails asap so people can get on with their lives.
ross007 said:
Hi Ross...
The reason they can’t just start trials on humans is because it all has to be approved by the government bodies first. The company has to show documented and scientific proof that their trials wont damage the human "guinee pigs" in anyway. And that process takes time and detail to go through the necessary governing bodies to get the ok.
We'll get there don’t worry...
Why would they need governmental approval to do a microderm followed by applying an already prescribed topical?? There's really nothing new here, no new drugs or procedures, it's just the combo and specific method/sequence of doing them that's being tested.
i can only assume... im sure Michael Barry or HH could tell us in more detail...
but i guess its like any business, there are health & safety laws to adhere to
If a builder is building a house he needs a surveyor from the local authorities to visit and assesses its being built in the correct fashion and the materials used are correct so it is safe to live in.
and that’s something as simple as bricklaying... imagine testing medical procedures on humans, they’ve got to be 1000 % sure they wont get sued.... look at the fiasco here in the uk a few years back where recipients where given a new drug, i think it was something as silly as testing a new drug that could cure the flu.... the men almost died some had to have fingers and toes amputated and some had heart attacks....
so you can imagine the governing bodies go through every last detail with a toothcomb (pardon the pun) to make sure its all ok for human trials....
but i guess its like any business, there are health & safety laws to adhere to
If a builder is building a house he needs a surveyor from the local authorities to visit and assesses its being built in the correct fashion and the materials used are correct so it is safe to live in.
and that’s something as simple as bricklaying... imagine testing medical procedures on humans, they’ve got to be 1000 % sure they wont get sued.... look at the fiasco here in the uk a few years back where recipients where given a new drug, i think it was something as silly as testing a new drug that could cure the flu.... the men almost died some had to have fingers and toes amputated and some had heart attacks....
so you can imagine the governing bodies go through every last detail with a toothcomb (pardon the pun) to make sure its all ok for human trials....