Follica - Good News!

[first]

Yeah the % is impressive BUT what do they mean with regrowth? If it's 70-ish % increase in hair that is vellous and never goes anywhere, then I don't think it matters per se, though I guess that increase is more of a bonus, seeing that the WnT-signalling and the EGFR-inhibition is what really brings on results.

As a complete "what-if" - wouldn't it be marvellous if the acid created vellous hair, that when coupled with WnT and EGFR brought on a substanstial growth? WnT and EGFR alone grows hair.. the question is if the acid is different than mechanical dermabrasion, or laser-dermabrasion, in terms of growing hair on its own. I guess further studies might give some clues.

In case of alopecia areata, out of the 69 sites, 66 were treated with 2 and 28 with 3 applications of phenol respectively on those areas where the hair growth was not observed.

In cases of alopecia areata, small light-coloured vellus hairs were seen on the phenol painted areas after the initial peeling, crusting and re-epithelialisation (10-15 days). The vellus hair gradually started growing in size and became thicker in diameter and darker in colour. Out of 69 sites, 3 developed excellent (60-80%) regrowth of hair, 30 developed good (40-60%) and 36 sites had poor (40 or less percentage) growth. Those sites which responded only upto 60% were treated for a second time with phenol after 4 weeks. Only partially responsive or areas which had not responded were painted with the solution. Out of such 66 sites, 38 sites showd 60-80% regrowth. However 28 had to be treated for the third time. Of these, 9 showed excellent, 5 showed poor and 9 did not show any hairgrowth. Remaining 5 sites had initial hair growth but had lost the hair after 3-4 months.

So it seems the hair at least better than vellus type hair and it stays for an undefined time after the treatment is finished. They gave some theories as to why the results were so good.

# (1) During wound repair process, several growth factors are released which could be Stimulating the affected follicle.
# (2) Various cytokines are released during wound healing which might neutralise the peribulbar lymphocytic infiltrates causing regrowth of hair through immunomodulation.
# (3) Most of the follicles in AA are in the telogen phase and thus lie high in the dermis. It is possible that phenol may be passing through the follicular opening and directly stimulating the germinal centre.

These are just theories however. Still, even though I've had good results with other treatments, it makes me very curious to try it.

 

[Orin]

I'm just surprised nobody has discovered this before. Even before adding WnT-proteins and EGFR-inhibitors, you could apparently get pretty good results. If this is what just "stimulation" alone does, then you can imagine what actually increasing signaling would do. Perhaps tip the quote "excellent" results to the majority as opposed to the minority?

Yes, I'm quite interested in it as well.. The question of dosages is one of importance, as well as time of exposure. The cited total time-frame, 15 days, is pretty spot-on to what Follica cited in their patent, which would lead one to believe that this is the kind of mild dermabrasion they're talking about - ie, not invasive dermabrasion.

What's the span of the ages involved? I'm guessing that younger people would get significantly better results. I have to confess this all sounds very interesting.. is phenol easily aquired? It's highly possible, considering the results of that study (and if it is legitimate), that it and lithium and perhaps some other component (caffeine might be one), is as close of an aping of Follica that one can get at home. In any case, it shouldn't be very expensive. Again, very good find.

EDIT: Perhaps in their theories, they argued from the belief that hairs cannot be created, which if I understand it correctly, is something that was largely pioneered with Follica (ignoring those reports from 60's, of course). Was there any data on hair growing where no hair had previously grown? While awakening resting hair is all good and well, creating new ones is the real triumph.

 

[first]

I'm just surprised nobody has discovered this before. Even before adding WnT-proteins and EGFR-inhibitors, you could apparently get pretty good results. If this is what just "stimulation" alone does, then you can imagine what actually increasing signaling would do. Perhaps tip the quote "excellent" results to the majority as opposed to the minority?

Actually, the majority had "excellent" results.

3% had excellent results after the first application.
59% had excellent results after the second application.
72% had excellent results after the third application.

Hence it is likely that several treatments will be much more effective. The good news is that this kind of dermabrasion is definately not bad for hair, which was a worry I had before (I have a feeling sandpapering your scalp may be harmful in itself), if anything it has proven to be very positive. If you on top of that add the WnT-proteins and EGFR-inhibitors as well as minoxidil and possibly topical finasteride there is no telling on how successful it might be. Will have to look a bit more into how easy it is to obtain, as I do not want to make it myself, the solution must be fairly pure and concentrated or it could have possible harmful effects.

 

[harold]

As a complete "what-if" - wouldn't it be marvellous if the acid created vellous hair, that when coupled with WnT and EGFR brought on a substanstial growth?

That should happen if Follica is correct. And this is probably the first study that shows they are - at least in alopecia areata.

WnT and EGFR alone grows hair.. the question is if the acid is different than mechanical dermabrasion, or laser-dermabrasion, in terms of growing hair on its own. I guess further studies might give some clues.

There is no reason to belive there is a difference. The key is to just damage the skin enough to put it into a recovery stage where stem cells are activated that can be pushed to become hair cells. It doesn't really matter if that is done by dermabrasion or chemical peel.
Since your hair is as you say pretty much white why not just try something like citric acid? I can get it at the supermarket and by making a strong enough solution have something that will sting the skin if left on long enough. Of course this might bleach the hair but this might not bother you as much as others. (Though bleached hair is damaged hair.)
That alopecia areata study is good stuff as for showing what wounding can do even before wnt/egfr/whatever.
hh

 

[Orin]

If there's anything these studies have taught me, is that to not assume things

In any case, I think acid is probably the way to go. Not only does it not seem to hurt the hair, but it's probably easier to get an even dermabrasion. I've gotten the sandpapering down pretty good by experimenting on my legs and arms and such, but that's only small patches, and it's fairly easy to get too deep or not deep enough, and even easier to not get an even field.

Thank you for the tip on citric acid, but as you said, it bleaches the hair and thus damages it. There is still a big difference between my hair-color and a heavily bleached one; both in texture and shine. I'd also like to design this for a larger number of people and not just myself; it safe-guards from potential disaster and gives a better statistical representation. Most men would not want to bleach their hair in the process of getting hair, especially when it apparently, on average, takes 3 tries to get good results. You'd all look like old ravers.

Besides, this phenol already seems like a pretty good candiate for use. The only problem is concentration and actually getting it. I googled some last night and from the looks of it, it's definately not easy to order it online. It's not like DMSO.. Perhaps because phenol has such a narrow range of uses.

EDIT: The silver bullet in all this speculation, would be a study on scalp dermabrasion on patients with alopecia totalis, though I doubt there is any. Most likely we'll see one when Follica comes further along.

EDIT2: I found a place that sells 88% phenol, liquid. I believe this is the same concentration used in the experiments. "First" may correct me on that though. Don't know if you can buy it from them for personal use, as opposed to through an institution.

http://www.sciencestuff.com/prod/Chem-Rgnts/C2222

I'm thinking, because the acid is used on the scalp, which will be covered by hair, and is usually (in most people) already skin that is markedly lighter than other areas of your body, that the phenol *should* be ok for most people to use -save for perhaps people with very dark skin. In any case, needling, made by yourself or with a needle roller, is apparently used to treat discoluration. I suppose if you are very dark skinned and need 3-4 treatments with phenol (and lithium), that you could - atleast in theory - ease the discoloration over time by needling.
I believe I saw a picture on one of the sites that sell needle rollers. It was of a white person, and the discoloration was red, but the results vere nontheless very impressive. I think after only a couple of weeks the whole red area had been removed. Don't remember what the redness was due to, though, but probably something similar to deep acne, for which the needler (at the correct lenght) is also very sucessful at treating.

This is an american site, and I've only googled for like half an hour. If you dig deep enough you can find all manners of crap being sold on the net, and I haven't even been swimming at the deep end (chinese retailers) yet. I'd doubt it's illegal to purchase it; as far as I know (from wikipedia) it's only used to create aspirin, in case you live in a country like my mine, whose customs is notoriously strict and effective. One of the many reasons I stopped taking dutasteride was that I went through 5 tries from 2 different pharmacies trying to get the stuff into my country, and all 5 tries failed. Luckily I got my money back, but the sites I bought from removed my country off their list last time I checked. So generic medicine is pretty much a no-go.. hopefully phenol is not on any list.

I guess I have to check amphetamine recipes to see if phenol is used

On another note; I checked out some more dermabrasion information pages. The impression I get is that phenol is a deep skin dermabrasion acid, but that certain "micro-dermabrasions" are more invasive, like sandpapering. So perhaps phenol in right dosage, and exposed over a certain time-frame, is really the optimal way to lightly damage the skin. I'm leaning more and more in favor of it, and well I should. We not only have (atleast one) studies to back it up, but it is aggravatingly tedious to mechanically dermabrade your scalp without damaging existing hair, and while trying to maintain a leveled damage-field.

 

[goata007]

orin,

http://www.skincarecompany.net/chemical-peel.htm

There is a lot of info on that page about various chemical peels and which skin layers they effect. I would strongly advise that you stay away from phenol peels. The best option is to start with salycylic acid (that's what I plan to do), and if thats not deep enough move to a TCA peel or better off get it done from a professional, obviously they may give you a hard time for trying to get it on temples but usually $$ takes care of stuff like that.

 

[Orin]

Yeah I read some of that too. I also read some patients needed to be lightly sedated while doing it, and that you can only do it once. Don't know what they mean with that - certainly you're not limited to one phenol-peel a life-time. That'd be silly.

I'm mostly thinking out loud, and of course, will never just pour acid on my head without being fully informed. I'm just concerned about damage.. it needs to be, atleast what Follica hints at, a degree that takes about 2 weeks to recover. You basically need second-degree burns. Apparently someone on another forum spoke of some odd hairgrowth he had gotten from a severe sunburn, so I guess it kinda makes sense. You very rarely get anything more than second-degree burns from the sun, though it would be terribly inconvenient as a dermabrasion option.

I'm open to anything that works of course. Mostly it's about having an acid that peels deep enough to activate growth factors, while not damaging your existing hair. I agree that phenol might be a little too severe, and that I probably need to read up some more on these acids.

As a side-note, the cost for a phenol peel is 1200 dollars. Yikes! That's a lot of money for something that costs 70 bucks a liter, and that basically can be performed by a monkey.

EDIT: This all reminds me when I was 18, and put pure vinegar on my face a few times every month. I got the tip from an acne-forum, and it worked surprisingly well. Of course, the forum being mostly teens and tweens, nobody really realized the mechanism of what was going on. My parents were alittle worried as my face got beamingly red for a few hours afterwards.

Unfortunately, it's probably not enough to fully damage the skin. Shame though, it's so cheap and pretty elegant of a solution. I'm sure there's some hairloss-remedy that oozes praise over vinegar for the entirely wrong reasons - as an "all-natural healer and nutrition provider", as opposed to the destroyer of skin layers that it is

EDIT2: Just googled a couple of old timey hairloss mumbo jumbo "cures". Quite alot of the sites tell of "vinegar + useless extra ingredient for effect" poured on your head, and left there for a couple of hours. Apparently it stabilizes the scalp. "Ok".

Still don't think it's enough for the effect we want it, but it's always interesting watch these folk methods get substantiated in some way. Obviously they are far from a cure, and not even much of a viable treatment, but the general mechanism is solid enough to probably have caused some otherwise unexplainable hair-growth in the occasional user.

Perhaps, as opposed to going hardcore with phenol, you could let the medium peel acids sit for a good extra 20 minutes, and perhaps do the treatment more frequently. Even with phenol, you needed (on average) 3 treatments to get "excellent" results. Still, there is the question of reaching the right depth. Merely exfoliating dead skin cells ain't enough.

 

[Orin]

I poured over the experiment "First" posted (well, read it a couple of times rather), and a few things stick out to me.

1) Obviously, it's alopecia areata, and used on patients from 6-44. No way to know, if any, suffered from male pattern baldness, which if they did and this treatment was still sucessful, means that hair can grow from dermabrasion even if the individual is sensitive to DHT and whatnot. 80% regrowth sounds absolutely incredible from a male pattern baldness-standpoint, but steroid-injections can in alopecia areata patients produce results that go from completly bald areas to what appears 100% regrowth. It's something to keep in mind in all this.. though one should also remember that they did not increase WnT-signaling nor used EGFR-inhibitors. So the jury can't really decide anything either way.

2) Phenol is here described contradictory to everything I've read about it. It is described as a medium peel, and that the administration of it needed neither profesional experise, nor anaesthesia.

The first one is a problem that there might be no solution to be found within the document, but the second might shine some light on other acid peels (granted, again, if this works at a similar scale with male pattern baldness-patients). Seems there's a bit of a semantic problem with phenol, and my argumentation hinges on the fact that the people who did this study knows about this.

"Phenol peels" seem to be a combination of phenol AND croton oil, which (from what I've read so far) is what makes phenol such a deep dermabrasion acid. Phenol by itself is very irritating, but apparently (again, what I've read) not very deep. If the people in this study know about this, then it would explain why they could put 88% phenol on patients three times in a row spaced out over a couple of months.
The phenol peels I've read, while effective, apparently commonly makes the skin loose the ability to tan, and can indeed only be done once. Phenol peels are essentially what makes actors get that eerily smooth, egg-shell white vampire complexion. The results on wrinkles are pretty impressive, but actually not anything I haven't seen needling being able to do.

So I can't really know for sure what they *actually* mean.. .though it most likely seems to point to them using a medium peel. It's good news as darker skinned people can use them. It's ambivalent news, as the study (as it involves us) is mostly about alopecia areata, which, as I said, works differently from male pattern baldness - both functionally, and the means of battling it.

Still, it doesn't invalidate the study in regards to the cross-over it might have with Follica. Down towards the end it is made pretty clear that it is not phenol itself (which was tested in lower concentration) that did the trick, but rather the wounding mechanism.

Here's hoping they're actually talking about a medium peel, so there's no need to use phenol, which is pretty toxic, and is absorbed systemically; patients are told to drink lots of water 2 hours after the peel to pee it out. Also, only half, to 1 ml is to be used during each treatment to keep the absorbation to a minimum. Heart-rate is also monitored - I'm guessing because it's one of the symptoms of over-dose.

Sooo... perhaps no to phenol then.

 

[harold]

phenol is mentioned in the new follica patent as one of the possible types of chemical peels.
I'm really not sure caffeine is much of a egfr inhibitor though. At least not from what I have seen. EGCG seems to be a pretty good one though.
Does anyone have any refs for caffeine being an inhibitor? The ones I have refer to it sometimes interfering with some downstream effects in some cell types.
hh

 

[first]

If I were to try it I would still go with phenol, as that won't in itself damage your hair follicle (if anything, it should have a positive reaction). As for other acids, we don't know. Some stuff may sound great in theory but once tried it has the opposite effect, such as liquorice root (possibly).

I'd do a small scale test somewhere on hidden skin (where a small amount of hair grow) using the proper growth-enhancers, such as below the armpit to see how the body reacts to it and if it would induce hair growth there. If that works fine, I'd try it on a 0.5x0.5 cm area on my scalp where there is no hair. If that worked and it actually gave birth to new terminal hair (which would be major news to everyone here, as it would possibly be the cure) then I'd do it to restore my original hair line.

 

[harold]

If I were to try it I would still go with phenol, as that won't in itself damage your hair follicle (if anything, it should have a positive reaction). As for other acids, we don't know. Some stuff may sound great in theory but once tried it has the opposite effect, such as liquorice root (possibly).

Well I think anything not too exotic shouldnt have a negative effect on hair follicles. Though I am pretty sure most will have a negative effect on hair in the same sense that bleach does - damage the cuticle strip away melanin. For guys with short hair or buzzcuts this is prob not a concern.

I'd do a small scale test somewhere on hidden skin (where a small amount of hair grow) using the proper growth-enhancers, such as below the armpit to see how the body reacts to it and if it would induce hair growth there. If that works fine, I'd try it on a 0.5x0.5 cm area on my scalp where there is no hair. If that worked and it actually gave birth to new terminal hair (which would be major news to everyone here, as it would possibly be the cure) then I'd do it to restore my original hair line.

....I cant help but wonder if it would be possible to Follicle up some hair on the palm of your hand and if so how "hard" it would be to do so. I suspect it would take a bit of chemical manipulation to convince a stem cell that it should become a hair cell there. Maybe more than with the drugs follica actually plans to use. But it should be doable.
hh

 

[jakeb]

I'm really curious about the potato carboxypeptidase inhibitor mentioned earlier. Anyone know how you might get some of this? Does it need to be isolated or can we just start making potato juice?

 

[Orin]

Discussions seem to have fizzled out after my incoherent to-and-fro about phenol. But I agree; the problem isn't *really* about dermabrasion. You can do it mechanically on parts of your head that has hair, if you bring a lot of patience to the table.

More discussion please(from people who know more than me), about natural EGFR-inhibitors - and synthetics too of course. Seems like the one thing that's missing from really doing this in any other way than as a proof of concept.

 

[jakeb]

About phenol, I'd be surprised if you can do a true phenol peel safely at home. These are serious, serious peels.

You can do a TCA peel however, which is one step back on the scale, yet will still remove a lot of the epidermis.

Gylcolic peels and the like are way too weak to do much... they just smooth the epidermis.

 

[harold]

Posted this in the EGF thread but nobdy seems to have noticed.
Gist of it is that EGCG seems to be a really quite potent EGFR inhibitor relative to synthetic compounds even.
hh

Mol Nutr Food Res.
2005 Apr;49(4):317-28.
Inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor in apple juice extract.

Effects of test compounds on the protein tyrosine kinase
activity of the EGFR was determined using an enzymelinked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) adapted to a 96-well
plate format. The specific EGFR inhibitor tyrphostin
AG1478 was used as a positive control, showing an IC50-
value in this test system of 2.4 l 0.1 lM [8, 9].
EC, a constituent of the apple juice extract, exhibited only
marginal inhibitory properties in this test system. In order
to characterize structural elements crucial for the target
interaction, a series of related catechins were included into
the testing. Of the catechins tested, Cat showed the lowest
inhibitory properties versus the protein tyrosine kinase
(PTK) activity of the EGFR (11% inhibition at 300 lM concentration),
comparable to that of the stereoisomer EC
(24% inhibition at 300 lM). EGC showed a concentrationdependent
inhibition of the PTK activity at concentrations
F 100 lM, achieving inhibition of 50% of the enzyme activity
only at about 300 lM (Table 2). In contrast, PB1 and
PB2 were found to be more effective, without significant
differences between the two epimers. EGCG and ECG
exhibited by far the highest PTK-inhibitory properties,
representing highly potent inhibitors (Fig. 3A, Table 2).
Within the class of catechins the potency for the inhibition
of the PTK activity of the EGFR can be summarized as
EGCG A ECG AA PB2 L PB1 AA EGC A EC L Cat (Fig.
3A, Table 2). The dihydrochalcon glycoside phloridzin
showed only weak inhibitory properties in this test system
(IC50 = 267 l 50 lM), whereas the respective aglycon phloretin
was clearly more potent (IC50 = 43.4 l 5.1 lM)
(Fig. 3B).


No time to post in other threads now....
note that the EGFR inhibitor used by Cotsarelis et al in the last patent was tyrphostin AG1478 which has an IC50 of 2.4 micromoles vs EGCG which has an IC50 of 0.2 micromoles.
hh

 

[first]

Well, if you just want to try if it works that is very simple. Sandpaper a small area on your skin you care little about but has some hair until it feels like it is just about to bleed (though I am quite positive the treatment will be more effective the larger the area is), apply green tea extract twice per day for two weeks (or until the skin is healed), see what happens after a month.

 

[first]

Well, if you just want to try if it works that is very simple. Sandpaper a small area on your skin you care little about but has some hair until it feels like it is just about to bleed (though I am quite positive the treatment will be more effective the larger the area is), apply green tea extract twice per day for two weeks (or until the skin is healed), see what happens after a month.

Nevermind, I'll live up to my name and try it first myself as I have some green tea extract readily at hand, I'll mix it with some ethanol, use a thin file (easier to sterilize than sandpaper) somewhere on my body. I'll see about buying a file that is suitable today.

Unfortunately my webcam isn't much to cheer about, especially as hair takes forever to grow, but we'll see.

Uncertain if I should actually use ethanol as a carrier though, as it may interfere with the process, anyone with a better suggestion?

 

[jakeb]

I thinking of trying a TCA peel ("In another embodiment, the chemical is trichloracetic acid.") followed by potato juice ("In another embodiment, the EGF or EGFR antagonist is a carboxypeptidase inhibitor from potato (PCI) protein or a homologue").

On the off chance it actually does anything, it could be called the Mr. Potato Head technique.

 

[jakeb]

A question that may have been covered... now, rereading the patent, am I right to say that the egfr inhibitor is supposed to be injected on days 11-15?

If so, my version of "injecting" will be using my .75mm dermaroller before applying the potato stuff.

Oh man, I just reread that last sentence and I realized I have completely lost my mind. I'm injecting potatoes into my head. :shock:

 

[masculineyourheart]

hahaha

You go jakeb! We're all cheerin' for ya.