michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
hell, you can dermabrate with sandpaper, but its wise to see what the results of follica's trials are first--------it may not work in actual people.
Follica - Good News!
- Thread starter bobs
- Start date
Question for Michael Barry:
Is it possible that the three day wait between dermabrasion and applying their concoction... is in fact because the skin won't be flaking away until around day 3 (at which point the skin underneath is revealed). It's pretty harsh to remove the top layer of skin instantly. I notice there is this product for instance called Dermasponge: http://www.gorgeousskin.co.uk/. I tried this out before for acne scars, and noted that the three day point seems to be when the old skin starts flaking away.
On another note, I recently have received laser surgery for acne scars over a large area of my back (aside comment: the result is great by the way). I am wondering why this surgery has not resulted in the formation of any new hair follicles? Does that sound logical given the follica method/claims?
Is it possible that the three day wait between dermabrasion and applying their concoction... is in fact because the skin won't be flaking away until around day 3 (at which point the skin underneath is revealed). It's pretty harsh to remove the top layer of skin instantly. I notice there is this product for instance called Dermasponge: http://www.gorgeousskin.co.uk/. I tried this out before for acne scars, and noted that the three day point seems to be when the old skin starts flaking away.
On another note, I recently have received laser surgery for acne scars over a large area of my back (aside comment: the result is great by the way). I am wondering why this surgery has not resulted in the formation of any new hair follicles? Does that sound logical given the follica method/claims?
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
jambri,
follica is planning on removing the epilithial layer of skin. For the next 3 to 5 days, the skin will "re-epilthialize" on its own. Follica intends to have someone on a drug that blocks epidermal growth factor so the body's epilithial cells are encouraged to make new hair follicles instead of more skin. The hair follicle is the "command center" in skin renewal. Areas of your body without hair follicles age the fastest. Have you ever noticed older women who pluck their moustaches a great deal have badly aged upper mouths............thats probably from constantly plucking and finally destroying the follicles that are there (you can kill a hair follicle by constantly plucking it for many years if done correctly---Ive seen some hair transplant patients with "pluggy" implants who plucked them to thin them out over many years wind up with "plugs" that contain only 2-3 hairs when they used to have 8-10 in them---easing the harshness of their appearance). Ive seen a couple of these older women who plucked the hairs on their upper mouths have such "wrinkled" skin above their mouths that it made it look like that they had a goddam a**h** right in the middle of their face. It really does shrivel that skin up without any hair there.
You sleep on your back, and that will screw the process up. Follica mentions in their patent for no bandages to be used, no ointments or any healing or anti-infective to be used on the abraded skin. It has to "heal" "open-air" just like a rabbits back would if bitten badly by a badger in the wild...................skin has to rebuild itself naturally.
We should know by the end of the summer if they get their human trials started like they have intimated they will do. It will either work in human beings, or it wont. I dont see there being tons of trials with this. The only thing that might be able to add would be a couple of weeks of an immuno suppressant. Everything else seems to be the same as the human skin/SCID mouse model.
follica is planning on removing the epilithial layer of skin. For the next 3 to 5 days, the skin will "re-epilthialize" on its own. Follica intends to have someone on a drug that blocks epidermal growth factor so the body's epilithial cells are encouraged to make new hair follicles instead of more skin. The hair follicle is the "command center" in skin renewal. Areas of your body without hair follicles age the fastest. Have you ever noticed older women who pluck their moustaches a great deal have badly aged upper mouths............thats probably from constantly plucking and finally destroying the follicles that are there (you can kill a hair follicle by constantly plucking it for many years if done correctly---Ive seen some hair transplant patients with "pluggy" implants who plucked them to thin them out over many years wind up with "plugs" that contain only 2-3 hairs when they used to have 8-10 in them---easing the harshness of their appearance). Ive seen a couple of these older women who plucked the hairs on their upper mouths have such "wrinkled" skin above their mouths that it made it look like that they had a goddam a**h** right in the middle of their face. It really does shrivel that skin up without any hair there.
You sleep on your back, and that will screw the process up. Follica mentions in their patent for no bandages to be used, no ointments or any healing or anti-infective to be used on the abraded skin. It has to "heal" "open-air" just like a rabbits back would if bitten badly by a badger in the wild...................skin has to rebuild itself naturally.
We should know by the end of the summer if they get their human trials started like they have intimated they will do. It will either work in human beings, or it wont. I dont see there being tons of trials with this. The only thing that might be able to add would be a couple of weeks of an immuno suppressant. Everything else seems to be the same as the human skin/SCID mouse model.
What if you're only getting this procedure done in the temples? Can I sleep on my back then??? I sure hope so, I can only sleep on my back, unless heavily sedated with drugs and/or alcohol, but that might screw up the healing process so not sure if that's even an option. Man, always something!!
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
of course! you arent trying to grow hair on your back. He was wondering why hair didn't grow on his back due to an acne scar treatment back there that removed a layer of skin........two different things
They have to test this and see if it even works in human beings. I wouldn't allow myself to get too excited until they have done so just yet.
About Hair Follicle and dermabrasion...
I have read in other forum someone quoting a hair restoration surgeon that a dermabrasion cannot destroy a Hair Follicle. Well I suposse that they are talking about a procedure that did not go much below the epidermis.
In the patent they use a microscope to see that mice skin doesnt have any Hair Follicle. What I do not understand is if this no follicle mice are result of the abrasion procedure or are genetically hairless mice or something.
I think this could give us a view about the correct abrasion technique.
I have read in other forum someone quoting a hair restoration surgeon that a dermabrasion cannot destroy a Hair Follicle. Well I suposse that they are talking about a procedure that did not go much below the epidermis.
In the patent they use a microscope to see that mice skin doesnt have any Hair Follicle. What I do not understand is if this no follicle mice are result of the abrasion procedure or are genetically hairless mice or something.
I think this could give us a view about the correct abrasion technique.
Michael, I don't think your explanation fully covers the reasons why I have no hairs on my back. I didn't sleep on my back (sure, at times during the night I probably did roll on to my back), but if follica's discovery is something that works in humans, I would seriously expect to see at least a few hairs there. I can't imagine that the subtle differences between my back treatment and the type of treatment proposed by follica... to me it seems a thick head of hair would be pretty unlikely.
Unless, the pre-existence of hair follicles in a location has a dramatic impact. (I have never had hairs on my back, although of course, I have had hairs on my head)
Unless, the pre-existence of hair follicles in a location has a dramatic impact. (I have never had hairs on my back, although of course, I have had hairs on my head)
jambri said:
IMH (and speculative :dunno: )Opinion
1.- You need to go deeper than stetic peelings
2.- You cannot cover your wound (shirt covers your wound) and contact with them
3.- Usually in peelings they give you chemicals to acelerate the skin recovery, but to make hair you need to slow the dermis formation
4.- Your wound needs to be bigger than 1,5cm in mice... so probably a little bigger in a human.
michael barry
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 12
any hair "made" de noveau by follica is going to have the characteristics of the hair that would natually be in that area. You are not going to have long dark hairs growing out of your back even if they did a procedure to make hair grow there and it worked. The new hairs would probably look just like the vellus hairs growing on your back now.
That is "another concern" about Follica.................what if it works in bald areas.........and makes more vellus hair of the type that already exists there. We will simply not know these things until they actually test it on a human being. Then we will know. Period.
I do, however, think that they %should% be able to make more hair back in the donor area, and that should give a man more transplantable hair via FUE surgery. IF it can just do THAT, it will be a big aid to men.
That is "another concern" about Follica.................what if it works in bald areas.........and makes more vellus hair of the type that already exists there. We will simply not know these things until they actually test it on a human being. Then we will know. Period.
I do, however, think that they %should% be able to make more hair back in the donor area, and that should give a man more transplantable hair via FUE surgery. IF it can just do THAT, it will be a big aid to men.
MEANSTREET
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
libertine is a ragin homo. he rages against gayboys asses
As I've stated before, I did a pretty considerable mechanical dermabrasion in the crease of my temple, marking a new, inch wide temple-angle. A fill-in basically. I waited 4 days then treated the area morning and evening with lithium (orotate) in a solution at near 10%, but probably closer to 9&, for 10 days.
So If any of you is just curious about the what-ifs, I will update the progress when it supposedly will bring forth results during the sixth week. It's much too early to say anything right now, and I am very conseratively minded to the results. If it works then awesome, if not, then you have to consider that I:
1) used orotate, not lithium chloride
2) mixed the solution in alcohol, as orotate doesnt solve in water. Alcohol may have a negative impact on the mumbo-jumbo condition needed for new hairs to spring forth.
3) I used no skin-cell blocker/inhibitor.
In order to potentially maximize, or perhaps get any results at all, I think both a skin-cell inhibitor and a hair-growth promoter is needed. In those conditions the hair-cell formation is strongly favored... who knows, perhaps it's not as easy as a 50/50 condition as to what grows where. Perhaps skin-formation has such a leveling power that spontaneously creating hair where it "shouldn't" is a real rarity. We have all bruised ourself. Ask yourself what was most likelt to happen; new skin being formed, or new hair.
That it *can* happen is of course another thing entirely.
In short, if I get any results worth talking about with only a hair-cell formation booster mixed in some janky gin, then I'd consider it a significant boost to Follicas ambition. The only available skin-cell prohibitor I've seen is that apple-poly spray from japan that's being sold from an unbelievably unprofessional-looking site. My Visa ain't going there for sure. So for now we might potentially be missing a key ingredient.
Last night I tried a new way of needling, in which I made the insertion about half as deep, but really concentrated on quantity, only stopping when I was absolutely sure there was nothing left to penetrate. I did it on the side of the head that doesn't seem to grow any new hair, and in two days I will start using the same mixture of lithium on that side.
Who knows, if it works on that side, then not only is it an additional evidence of the lithium/alcohol route, but it shows that you can dermabrade with needle-points as opposed to scraping skin, and you bypass having to shave your head. In theory-land, such a method would be great if it worked, as dermabrading your scalp while preserving existing hair is mad time-consuming and finicky.
Don't get your hopes up though, I do this basically because I have the time and I can stay at home for several days if need be. Work-from-home people make the best guinnea pigs
So If any of you is just curious about the what-ifs, I will update the progress when it supposedly will bring forth results during the sixth week. It's much too early to say anything right now, and I am very conseratively minded to the results. If it works then awesome, if not, then you have to consider that I:
1) used orotate, not lithium chloride
2) mixed the solution in alcohol, as orotate doesnt solve in water. Alcohol may have a negative impact on the mumbo-jumbo condition needed for new hairs to spring forth.
3) I used no skin-cell blocker/inhibitor.
In order to potentially maximize, or perhaps get any results at all, I think both a skin-cell inhibitor and a hair-growth promoter is needed. In those conditions the hair-cell formation is strongly favored... who knows, perhaps it's not as easy as a 50/50 condition as to what grows where. Perhaps skin-formation has such a leveling power that spontaneously creating hair where it "shouldn't" is a real rarity. We have all bruised ourself. Ask yourself what was most likelt to happen; new skin being formed, or new hair.
That it *can* happen is of course another thing entirely.
In short, if I get any results worth talking about with only a hair-cell formation booster mixed in some janky gin, then I'd consider it a significant boost to Follicas ambition. The only available skin-cell prohibitor I've seen is that apple-poly spray from japan that's being sold from an unbelievably unprofessional-looking site. My Visa ain't going there for sure. So for now we might potentially be missing a key ingredient.
Last night I tried a new way of needling, in which I made the insertion about half as deep, but really concentrated on quantity, only stopping when I was absolutely sure there was nothing left to penetrate. I did it on the side of the head that doesn't seem to grow any new hair, and in two days I will start using the same mixture of lithium on that side.
Who knows, if it works on that side, then not only is it an additional evidence of the lithium/alcohol route, but it shows that you can dermabrade with needle-points as opposed to scraping skin, and you bypass having to shave your head. In theory-land, such a method would be great if it worked, as dermabrading your scalp while preserving existing hair is mad time-consuming and finicky.
Don't get your hopes up though, I do this basically because I have the time and I can stay at home for several days if need be. Work-from-home people make the best guinnea pigs
harold
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 11
Orin said:
The problem if any would no be with you using orotate vs lithium chloride or alcohol as a solvent but the fact that IIRC lithium orotate as a very limited solubility in alcohol. I now this was true of lthium carbonate from which I tried to make lithium chloride. I am pretty sure it is true of the orotate from as well. Whereas LiCl has very high solubility in both water and alcohol. Lithium carbonnate could get a max concentration of about 1% before it would fall out of solution. If the same is true of the orotate form then you would not have a 10% solution. Though it could be wrong. At any rate the important thing is getting the lithium ion into the skin - not what form it is in. However solubility is a consideration.
hh
Of course.
My calculations are just monkey-calculations, as in gross estimates. I basically mixed until I started to see salt on the bottom of the glass container. I saw no particles in the actual liquid, which had taken on a smokey grey color. I guess that's as good as it can get, seeing how I can't get lithium chloride anyway. I consider my frankenstein-experiment just that, and the very base-line of what Follica is trying.
I added a healthy dosage twice daily and let it stay rather than wash it out.. there are still so many questions left though, like how much can actually penetrate the, albeit delicate, skin unaided. I'm also wondering how the skin-inhibitor will work.. I've seen some places that carry apple-poly *pills* and it is.. possible I guess, that internal usage at some dosage (hopefully a healthy one) is equal to, or better than, applying it on your skin as an expensive and fancy liquid. It's unfortunate (for us) that Follica is so vague on this, though they naturally have their reasons to be so.
I've also been thinking that even *if* this specifically, as opposed to my needling, grows hair, then it will probably take atleast a couple of months for the new hair to fully mature and thereby verify the correct method. If the needled hair is of any comparison that is. Sure, it (needle-grown hair) is absolutely not whispy by any means, but I'd say they are about half the density of the hair in the back of my head.
Just an eye-measure though, but on the other hand - that's what ultimately counts.
Still irritates me that I'm stuck with what seems to be the most problematic of lithium forms, save for perhaps the scary therapeutic one. Atleast it came well-grounded-up in easy-to-open clear tablets for easy mixing.
PS: I just wanted to add, that alcohol may in fact be a factor, as the patent stresses that the wound is to be healed naturally as much as possible. No touching, no healing ointment or anti-bacterial. Therefor using alcohol *may* be problematic, though all we can do at this point is just pure guess-work unless someone can find experiments that are analog to Follicas and that deal with such premisses.
PS2: Science is infuriatingly slow. I'm reinforcing the choice I took of art over science.
My calculations are just monkey-calculations, as in gross estimates. I basically mixed until I started to see salt on the bottom of the glass container. I saw no particles in the actual liquid, which had taken on a smokey grey color. I guess that's as good as it can get, seeing how I can't get lithium chloride anyway. I consider my frankenstein-experiment just that, and the very base-line of what Follica is trying.
I added a healthy dosage twice daily and let it stay rather than wash it out.. there are still so many questions left though, like how much can actually penetrate the, albeit delicate, skin unaided. I'm also wondering how the skin-inhibitor will work.. I've seen some places that carry apple-poly *pills* and it is.. possible I guess, that internal usage at some dosage (hopefully a healthy one) is equal to, or better than, applying it on your skin as an expensive and fancy liquid. It's unfortunate (for us) that Follica is so vague on this, though they naturally have their reasons to be so.
I've also been thinking that even *if* this specifically, as opposed to my needling, grows hair, then it will probably take atleast a couple of months for the new hair to fully mature and thereby verify the correct method. If the needled hair is of any comparison that is. Sure, it (needle-grown hair) is absolutely not whispy by any means, but I'd say they are about half the density of the hair in the back of my head.
Just an eye-measure though, but on the other hand - that's what ultimately counts.
Still irritates me that I'm stuck with what seems to be the most problematic of lithium forms, save for perhaps the scary therapeutic one. Atleast it came well-grounded-up in easy-to-open clear tablets for easy mixing.
PS: I just wanted to add, that alcohol may in fact be a factor, as the patent stresses that the wound is to be healed naturally as much as possible. No touching, no healing ointment or anti-bacterial. Therefor using alcohol *may* be problematic, though all we can do at this point is just pure guess-work unless someone can find experiments that are analog to Follicas and that deal with such premisses.
PS2: Science is infuriatingly slow. I'm reinforcing the choice I took of art over science.
Could work, though I don't have any DMSO or similar, and quite franky don't feel comfortable nor knowledgable enough to play around with that. I'm looking for the path of least resistance; mixing together two existing products might be it. Who knows if the active ingredient that I want, skin-inhibition, is active in ground up pill form.
These pills seem to be taken for dietary means, and a myriad of other more vague reasons. Inhibiting skin-formation is probably not high up on the list, and as such the documentation for it might not be there.
Don't mean to be a nay-sayer, just thinking about what is realistic and fruitful (no pun intended) to do.
These pills seem to be taken for dietary means, and a myriad of other more vague reasons. Inhibiting skin-formation is probably not high up on the list, and as such the documentation for it might not be there.
Don't mean to be a nay-sayer, just thinking about what is realistic and fruitful (no pun intended) to do.
jakeb
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
So I've been looking into this... and it seems that the key thing we're missing is the epidermal growth factor inhibitors. The ones listed in the patent are all fairly new, expensive and hard to get a hold of (they're cancer drugs). But looking around for natural EGFR inhibitors, I found genistein, which is a soy isoflavone available at most health food stores.
Might be worth a go.
Might be worth a go.
jakeb
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Also, very interestingly... our old friend topical caffeine seems to inhibit EGF as well.
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/c ... /64/9/3344
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/c ... /64/9/3344
Interesting, and useful, seeing how caffeine is relatively easy to aquire. Good find
I wonder how effective it is at inhibition, and at what dosage. How is caffeine's solubility? Could go for a good mix with water and lithium chloride for an easy two-for-one application solution. I've heard caffeine absorbs fairly easy through the skin too, though that may be miss-information.
Still, anything that tips the wound-area in favor of hair-growth is pretty awesome. Follica doesn't mention trying caffeine do they? I suppose not, them having the heavy artillery at hand. Cheers.
I wonder how effective it is at inhibition, and at what dosage. How is caffeine's solubility? Could go for a good mix with water and lithium chloride for an easy two-for-one application solution. I've heard caffeine absorbs fairly easy through the skin too, though that may be miss-information.
Still, anything that tips the wound-area in favor of hair-growth is pretty awesome. Follica doesn't mention trying caffeine do they? I suppose not, them having the heavy artillery at hand. Cheers.