Puretech Health - 2017 Annual Report (2018-04-16)

[alibaba92]

2 questions here:
1. will the new regrown hair, if any, from using follica, be permanent and DHT-resistant ?
2. lets say, if we have already regrown a full head of hair using follica, do we still need micro-needling and applying the compound cause every time we disrupt the scalp, new follicle may be created, but will it be too much ?

 

[Hate da Bt]

2 questions here:
1. will the new regrown hair, if any, from using follica, be permanent and DHT-resistant ?
2. lets say, if we have already regrown a full head of hair using follica, do we still need micro-needling and applying the compound cause every time we disrupt the scalp, new follicle may be created, but will it be too much ?

What???
I thought you were reasonable...
No, the new hairs will be DHT-susceptible.
It is really stupid to believe that Follica is going to bring you back to nw1 territory.
It's just microneedling and minoxidil, ffs.

 

[kiwipilu]

What???
I thought you were reasonable...
No, the new hairs will be DHT-susceptible.
It is really stupid to believe that Follica is going to bring you back to nw1 territory.
It's just microneedling and minoxidil, ffs.

do you have a source for this. I'm serious. I don't see why hair follicle neogenesis (literally new hair follicles, so hair that have nothing to do with hairs that have already fallen) would be also prone ot dht?

 

[Hate da Bt]

do you have a source for this. I'm serious. I don't see why hair follicle neogenesis (literally new hair follicles, so hair that have nothing to do with hairs that have already fallen) would be also prone ot dht?

It's basic biology.
New hairs are generated through the activation of stem cells.
What stem cells?
Those that are left after miniaturisation is complete. These stem cells are downregulated because of their susceptibility to DHT and that is why no hairs are generated without the external intervention.
Is that clear?

 

[Kagaho]

It's basic biology.
New hairs are generated through the activation of stem cells.
What stem cells?
Those that are left after miniaturisation is complete. These stem cells are downregulated because of their susceptibility to DHT and that is why no hairs are generated without the external intervention.
Is that clear?

Even Cots recognized that antiandrogens will still be needed. Its not that big of a deal considering we should have a topical antiandrogen in a few years.

But remember wounding not only activate hfsc, it also kickstarts a massive migration of cells from other stem cell niches.

The trick is to induce them to make hair follicles with growth stims instead of skin.

 

[Hate da Bt]

Even Cots recognized that antiandrogens will still be needed. Its not that big of a deal considering we should have a topical antiandrogen in a few years.

But remember wounding not only activate hfsc, it also kickstarts a massive migration of cells from other stem cell niches.

The trick is to induce them to make hair follicles with growth stims instead of skin.

What?
What massive migration?
It's just reactivation of local stem cells.
If there was migration of cells, that would be pretty damn minor.
Reactivating stem cells and inducing them to make hf without immunizing them against DHT is pretty lame, imo.
There should be two goals in the anti-hair-loss community: long-term maintenance (without pernicious side effects) and dht-resistant hair multiplication (immunization through gene editing would be awesome, too, but there is a long, long way until then).

 

[kiwipilu]

It's basic biology.
New hairs are generated through the activation of stem cells.
What stem cells?
Those that are left after miniaturisation is complete. These stem cells are downregulated because of their susceptibility to DHT and that is why no hairs are generated without the external intervention.
Is that clear?

yo no need to take the role of the teacher.I know you need intervention (wounding+ preferably compound)I just asked if you had a paper source so I could read a little about . Thx nonetheless

Even Cots recognized that antiandrogens will still be needed. Its not that big of a deal considering we should have a topical antiandrogen in a few years.

But remember wounding not only activate hfsc, it also kickstarts a massive migration of cells from other stem cell niches.

The trick is to induce them to make hair follicles with growth stims instead of skin.

Cots is busy on his wounding/compound protocol for 10years. At this time he found the amazing compound but later he was still searching for a working compound.
I maintain without anti androgen btw so you can't generalize, it just depends on what angle you attack your hairloss and what pattern you have. Remember male pattern baldness is sh*t and complicated ; ) But Im pretty sure that my dermaroller helps in my case

 

[Kagaho]

What?
There should be two goals in the anti-hair-loss community: long-term maintenance (without pernicious side effects) and dht-resistant hair multiplication (immunization through gene editing would be awesome, too, but there is a long, long way until then).

Completely agree, thats why its really important for us that Shiseido succeeds.

It's just reactivation of local stem cells.

When you say local, i assume youre referring to the stem cells of the "damaged by DHT" hair

The key for neogenesis is the combination of the epithelial derived stem cells that are "recruited" to heal and upregulation of WNT signaling:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17507982

If there was migration of cells, that would be pretty damn minor.

That depends on the type of wounding. I think they are going deeper and a bit harder than dermarolling, dont know for sure though.

Reactivating stem cells and inducing them to make hf without immunizing them against DHT is pretty lame, imo.

We dont know what Follica is really up to. I think they will try to mitigate the androgenic activity somehow.

 

[Kagaho]

I maintain without anti androgen btw so you can't generalize, it just depends on what angle you attack your hairloss and what pattern you have. Remember male pattern baldness is sh*t and complicated ; ) But Im pretty sure that my dermaroller helps in my case

male pattern baldness is really complicated like you said but the starting point of the cascade is really well known: DHT produced inside the DP cells.

I think long term you could lose the gains, keep an eye on Breezula development.

 

[kiwipilu]

male pattern baldness is really complicated like you said but the starting point of the cascade is really well known: DHT produced inside the DP cells.

I think long term you could lose the gains, keep an eye on Breezula development.

I think there is already a big difference between typic norwood pattern and diffuse pattern(agravatign factors).
obviously If you are receiding quite agressively there is nothing you can do but to jump on the full package treatment.
https://tinyurl.com/yc2pwluh

 

[Hate da Bt]

Completely agree, thats why its really important for us that Shiseido succeeds.



When you say local, i assume youre referring to the stem cells of the "damaged by DHT" hair

The key for neogenesis is the combination of the epithelial derived stem cells that are "recruited" to heal and upregulation of WNT signaling:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17507982



That depends on the type of wounding. I think they are going deeper and a bit harder than dermarolling, dont know for sure though.



We dont know what Follica is really up to. I think they will try to mitigate the androgenic activity somehow.

C'mon, you seem reasonable, do you really believe that Follica is going to be a breakthrough???
Like for real?
Imo, it's going to work only for diffuse thinners.
Big norwoods should only hope for Tsuji's success, which is going to happen, but I don't know when.

 

[Kagaho]

C'mon, you seem reasonable, do you really believe that Follica is going to be a breakthrough???
Like for real?
Imo, it's going to work only for diffuse thinners.
Big norwoods should only hope for Tsuji's success, which is going to happen, but I don't know when.

I think Follica is better than finasteride + minoxidil for sure. I have seen good results from minoxidil + Dermarolling but im with you, hair cloning is THE ultimate therapy.

 

[That Guy]

C'mon, you seem reasonable, do you really believe that Follica is going to be a breakthrough???
Like for real?
Imo, it's going to work only for diffuse thinners.
Big norwoods should only hope for Tsuji's success, which is going to happen, but I don't know when.

You really are throwing stones from glass houses, as you're among the most unreasonable members here and you regularly dislike posts without providing any reason. Remember how like, with Shiseido, I was talking about placebo groups, explaining my reasoning and you called me a moron repeatedly, insisting such didn't pertain to that trial...only for noisette to drop in with a link that there is, in fact, a placebo group?

do you really believe that Follica is going to be a breakthrough???

Any treatment that could reliably grow a cosmetically acceptable amount of new hair without the need of a transplant is worth being called a "breakthrough".

Imo, it's going to work only for diffuse thinners.

It's an agreeable point that diffuse thinners are most likely to benefit, but they are most likely to benefit from literally any hairloss treatment.

It's less agreeable that it will "only work" for them. Unless you have a link to a study that shows that wound-neogenesis only works to grow hair on the crown, this is just speculation with nothing backing it up. As far as I can recall, I'm pretty sure most microneedling studies just rolled on the top of the head.

Lastly, you keep insisting on it being "dermarolling and minoxidil" when the facts are, we don't know what compounds they're using for sure but we do know there are at least two different ones in the regimen. Further, studies have shown that dermarolling is absolutely capable of growing a worthy amount of new hair, but the results are inconsistent and the overwhelming majority of these studies (available to the public) are very recent, and limited in their understanding as to how to maximize this effect.

This isn't something like JAK inhibitors, where the company does a trial that fails to provide any results, and then turns around and justifies it with demonstrably false scientific reason; thus, justifying doubt.

Instead, you have this Follica hate boner going in which you provide no citations and even state false information ("it's just microneedling + dermarolling), disagree that a transplant-free method of growing new hair superior to just minoxidil alone would be a breakthrough, argue it wouldn't work on the hairline with no explanation, etc.

Doesn't sound like the thinking of a "reasonable" man to me.

 

[Hate da Bt]

You really are throwing stones from glass houses, as you're among the most unreasonable members here and you regularly dislike posts without providing any reason. Remember how like, with Shiseido, I was talking about placebo groups, explaining my reasoning and you called me a moron repeatedly, insisting such didn't pertain to that trial...only for noisette to drop in with a link that there is, in fact, a placebo group?



Any treatment that could reliably grow a cosmetically acceptable amount of new hair without the need of a transplant is worth being called a "breakthrough".



It's an agreeable point that diffuse thinners are most likely to benefit, but they are most likely to benefit from literally any hairloss treatment.

It's less agreeable that it will "only work" for them. Unless you have a link to a study that shows that wound-neogenesis only works to grow hair on the crown, this is just speculation with nothing backing it up. As far as I can recall, I'm pretty sure most microneedling studies just rolled on the top of the head.

Lastly, you keep insisting on it being "dermarolling and minoxidil" when the facts are, we don't know what compounds they're using for sure but we do know there are at least two different ones in the regimen. Further, studies have shown that dermarolling is absolutely capable of growing a worthy amount of new hair, but the results are inconsistent and the overwhelming majority of these studies (available to the public) are very recent, and limited in their understanding as to how to maximize this effect.

This isn't something like JAK inhibitors, where the company does a trial that fails to provide any results, and then turns around and justifies it with demonstrably false scientific reason; thus, justifying doubt.

Instead, you have this Follica hate boner going in which you provide no citations and even state false information ("it's just microneedling + dermarolling), disagree that a transplant-free method of growing new hair superior to just minoxidil alone would be a breakthrough, argue it wouldn't work on the hairline with no explanation, etc.

Doesn't sound like the thinking of a "reasonable" man to me.

A) Yep, I was wrong about Shiseido trial's placebo group, but your claiming there was one was not based on evidence, as there was no such evidence. Fortunately, Noisette stepped in and provided it.
B) If I were replying to every single post I disagree with, I'd have accumulated a number of posts like yours. That is not healthy, is it?*
C) What is a cosmetically acceptable amount of hair, according to you?
Imo, anything less than 80 hf/cm² is subpar and not cosmetically acceptable.
D) If Follica's RAIN generates, let's say, 50 hf/cm², the only ones who would really benefit from it are the diffuse thinners, who do not thin only on the crown (!) (the whole crown thinning point makes no f-ing sense).
E) Essentially, it is just dermarolling/microneedling and minoxidil.
F) Worthy amount?
Thus far, we have been let know their procedure grows 25 terminal hairs and 75 vellus hairs. Is that a worthy amount for bald spots?
NO!
Only for diffuse thinners.
G) There aren't that many studies which show significant neogenesis, and there weren't more than 50 people in each trial.
F) I'm not really for your grumbling about JAK inhibitors.
H) Hate boner?
Not really...
I just believe it won't be a breakthrough. Nonetheless, I do wish it's released and generates as much hair (DHT-susceptible, though) as possible.

I wonder, though, what will happen when minoxidil's effect gradually wears off...

*No, it's NOT.

 

[Hate da Bt]

I have a feeling that a considerable amount of the time Follica spent researching was to develop a strong understanding of the wounding effect so that they could tailor a protocol that maximizes its benefits. The “RAIN” app mock-up suggests that timing is very important to harnessing it’s therapeutic outcome, and I would bet that Follica has spent a lot of time developing IP regarding the wounding window. Even if it’s only Minoxodil, I have a totally uneducated gut feeling that the manner and timing of wounding is more important than the compound partner; perfect is the enemy of good enough, and I hope they don’t wait to go to market until their own novel compounds are ready.

Delusion, convince yourself.

 

[That Guy]

B) If I were replying to every single post I disagree with

Nobody cares that you disagree with a post. If you have nothing of value to say to it, just skip over it. This is just simply narcissism; no one suddenly disagrees with something because they see you disliked it, and 9/10 times, you are the only person doing so. Who are you anyway? There is no reason to believe you're any more knowledgeable than anyone else here. So you being the single dislike on shitloads of posts, isn't exactly a compelling case.

G) There aren't that many studies which show significant neogenesis, and there weren't more than 50 people in each trial.

There are still studies that do show significant neogenesis, so your points are pretty much moot. It is possible to grow significant amounts of hair with it. You, nor I, have any idea what variables might be influencing this, we've done no research and are limited in studies we can cite as to why the lower-repsonders don't respond as well.

The best you can do, is cite a years-old claim that some tests from previous trials demonstrated a certain ratio of terminal to vellus. They've also stated, more recently as I'm aware, that it yields 4x the results of conventional treatments; there is not a person alive who wouldn't take that. Further, the process is repeatable, but we don't know what the outcome of that is.

In short: We know it works, but we don't know what the upper limit of the therapy actually is.

So how about, for just once, you trying being reasonable, and just wait and see what happens?

 

[Hate da Bt]

Nobody cares that you disagree with a post. If you have nothing of value to say to it, just skip over it. This is just simply narcissism; no one suddenly disagrees with something because they see you disliked it, and 9/10 times, you are the only person doing so. Who are you anyway? There is no reason to believe you're any more knowledgeable than anyone else here. So you being the single dislike on shitloads of posts, isn't exactly a compelling case.



There are still studies that do show significant neogenesis, so your points are pretty much moot. It is possible to grow significant amounts of hair with it. You, nor I, have any idea what variables might be influencing this, we've done no research and are limited in studies we can cite as to why the lower-repsonders don't respond as well.

The best you can do, is cite a years-old claim that some tests from previous trials demonstrated a certain ratio of terminal to vellus. They've also stated, more recently as I'm aware, that it yields 4x the results of conventional treatments; there is not a person alive who wouldn't take that. Further, the process is repeatable, but we don't know what the outcome of that is.

In short: We know it works, but we don't know what the upper limit of the therapy actually is.

So how about, for just once, you trying being reasonable, and just wait and see what happens?

A) What you are saying about my disliking makes no f-ing sense.
I mostly use the dislike button to express my disagreement with the arguments, the content, in general, of the disliked posts. That's it.
I couldn't care the least what you or any other think of my disliking.
B) What is significant neogenesis? Can you give me a number?
I've already told you what I think is significant neogenesis.
C) Can you provide some evidence on your claims?
I'm unaware of any study (and, yes, I've read the Dhurat study) that shows significant (over 80hf/cm²) neogenesis.
D) The 4x is a marketing bs.
I need valid numbers, trichometry stuff.
E) I never said that it didn't work.
Let me say it once again: I strongly believe it won't be a breakthrough, but I do hope it gets released.
F) Even if RAIN generates 100 hf/cm², those hairs are going to be DHT-susceptible. Plus, it is well-established that minoxidil's effect wears off with time.

I get it, because of your lack of money and because you live in Canada, which is next to the US, you've pinned all your hopes on Follica.
It ain't bad to be delusional. If that keeps you goin', just believe in Follica.
I don't and that's a problem YOU have to deal with, not me.

 

[fuDHTck]

Some people are out of touch with reality:

1) There is no way Follica is released before 2020-2021. You don't need to be a genius or an insider to know that. We are almost in 2019 and still no Phase III, which means at least (in a very optimistic scenario) a late 2020 release date.

2) The previous trials were decent but not great and it is pretty clear that Follica is far from being the top priority at PureTech Health. Like literally there is close to 0 proof that it will be a game changing. Words are useless without data.

3) I never understood why some people here are so obsessed with it. Yeah I hope it comes out but I wouldn't be too optimistic about it.

Having said that, I am ready for the dislikes from the fanboys.

 

[itsjustsimon]

Plus, it is well-established that minoxidil's effect wears off with time.

No, it does not, or provide me with a proof/studies.

 

[Hate da Bt]

No, it does not, or provide me with a proof/studies.

What about all the people who had used it and are slick bald now?