Replicel Is On Fire Lately — Data In Feb.

[RolfLeeBuckler]

We shouldn't expect any release of RCH-01 before the dermal injector is done being manufactured. Which means nothing before mid-2020, at least in my opinion

Last time.... You have to make differnces between RepliCel and Shiseido

RepliCel said: Phase II trials of RCH-01 only After commercialization of dermal injector—> commercialization of RCH-01 probably after 2022

Shiseido already did a PHase II trial of RCH-01 under The New ASRM and is able to Launch RCH-01 much earlier in Japan -> commercialization probably in 2020 in Japan

 

[Milkonos]

The only balding people who know about this sh*t are on this forum. Also a large % of men just don’t give a f*** about losing hair. Especially not enough to pay to fly to japan, waste holiday time, and money to get this done.

Once RCH-01 will be out there, don't expect Shiseido to not advertise their product. In a few years, we will all see Shiseido's posters about RCH- 01 in the subway and lots of ads on TV. By then, our forum-knowledge about baldness will become useless

Also, I don't think there will be a waiting list or what. It doesn't take hours to clone your hair, probably 15min to inject the cells but 2months to replicate them though.

 

[Milkonos]

Last time.... You have to make differnces between RepliCel and Shiseido

RepliCel said: Phase II trials of RCH-01 only After commercialization of dermal injector—> commercialization of RCH-01 probably after 2022

Shiseido already did a PHase II trial of RCH-01 under The New ASRM and is able to Launch RCH-01 much earlier in Japan -> commercialization probably in 2020 in Japan

I get that, but I don't get why it contradicts what I've said above

#
do you have any idea how much effort goes into storage and cooling and all that sh*t of cells of thousands of people? they need the infrastructure for that

They're signing contracts with Replicel and YOFOTO for that reason actually. And there is probably more to come.
The Japanese State is backing up this research. I'm actually pretty optimistic about the logistics surrounding its commercialization. The only thing I'm worried about is when exactly it will come out. "Will it be too late for my young scalp or not ?" is the only thing that crosses my mind

On the other hand, I don't get why some are being pointlessly pessimistic. What's the point to repeat that it will cost "at least 5k at the start" even though Replicel and Shiseido keep repeating that it will be 1k ?

 

[byebyehair]

14% regrowth is actually pretty decent when you take into account that finasteride only gives you 10%. dutasteride gives on average 18% density increase and we would all agree that if dutasteride was sides free it would basically be a cure for everyone that isn't too far gone. 14% is not far away from that, it's save and they might have had even better results with multiple injections or a different protocol(quite likely actually). so it's actually pretty good, not a cure but the thing is people on this forum always get so f*****g unrealistic it's stupid. you won't be satisfied with anything until cloning because available. as long as there is hair and activity this can refill the dermal papilla and reignite it's inductive properties and restart hair growth.

so this "inject cells into the bald areas from which New hair should grow" was never a claim

This was the claim at the beginning. Look at the early videos that explain rch-01!
https://replicel.com/products/rch-01
You sure have no idea what you are talking. This is quit interesting because you seem to spend all of your time in hairlossresearch and stil you aint got no clue.

 

[byebyehair]

#
do you have any idea how much effort goes into storage and cooling and all that sh*t of cells of thousands of people? they need the infrastructure for that

which they will have by the time they release rch-01. They built a f*****g facility for that.

 

[byebyehair]

I get that, but I don't get why it contradicts what I've said above


They're signing contracts with Replicel and YOFOTO for that reason actually. And there is probably more to come.
The Japanese State is backing up this research. I'm actually pretty optimistic about the logistics surrounding its commercialization. The only thing I'm worried about is when exactly it will come out. "Will it be too late for my young scalp or not ?" is the only thing that crosses my mind

On the other hand, I don't get why some are being pointlessly pessimistic. What's the point to repeat that it will cost "at least 5k at the start" even though Replicel and Shiseido keep repeating that it will be 1k ?

the yofoto deal is about all the the other stuff replicel is making but not rch-01. Because rch-01 is allready sold to shiseido. (shiseido holds the right to comercialise rch-01 also in china).
Dont mix up things here

 

[Dalotian]

they said so but it's not realistic. if they have the date to proof it, great but they haven't even showed the maintenance for most people in the first trial

lmao wow just wow. I thought this would legit grow new hairs lmao why the f*** is this even hyped then jheeze. Hairloss os a f*****g disease

 

[RolfLeeBuckler]

I get that, but I don't get why it contradicts what I've said above

it contradicts because SHISEIDO gives a f*** of RepliCels Dermal Injector. RepliCels Dermal injector has Nothing to do with shiseidos commerzialization Strategy. They will bring it to Market When they Want And they are completely Independent of replicel

 

[Trouse]

lmao wow just wow. I thought this would legit grow new hairs lmao why the f*** is this even hyped then jheeze. Hairloss os a f*****g disease

Permanent maintenance without sexual side effects is still a big leap forward. Of course, like most things, it will come down to availability and price point.

 

[Bigoldben]

Ultimately the long term money is in maintenance rather than regrowth. Experts can tell if someone is balding from microscopic images very quickly. As soon as someone thinks they spot thinning they can have it checked. If it’s there then they have the procedure. If they’ve lost significant density at the front/ crown a small transplant makes the difference.
There’s a relatively small percentage of men who are bald/ balding who have not made peace with it and are prepared to pay thousands and thousands on full regrowth. If RCH01 works it narrows Tsuji’s prospective market significantly to a finite group of rich men/ women.

 

[That Guy]

Ultimately the long term money is in maintenance rather than regrowth.

It's actually the opposite way around.

A one-and-done solution is not something the medical industry wants. They are there to make money. To be honest, I suspect this is why Aderans bailed despite having a successful RCH-01 the first time where maintenance is concerned.

Repeat customers are what it's all about. This is what the all the "cancer cure" conspiracy guys get wrong. A cure is what they want, prevention is their enemy. They'd love a cancer cure they could charge a shitload for, but they won't stop selling you shitty "food" and encouraging sedentary lifestyles. Because a population that still gets cancer is where the money is.

An expensive, multi-treatment procedure that can fix both Androgenetic Alopecia and other types of hairloss is a lot more profitable than a one-and-done therapy to prevent baldness, which most people would probably still not get anyway.

 

[That Guy]

actually in cancer research everything is different, a lot of it is publicly funded and pharmaceuticals companies often give reimbursements if the insurance companies don't pay, it's a lot different when it's literally life and death. as it should be. the cancer conspiracy theorists are just nasty weasels and I find that really insulting to all the great researchers out there that work day in day out to find better treatments for this sh*t condition. what the cancer cure guys also don't get is that cancer has many facets and will probably never be cured because two types of cancer may need completely different approaches and methods so something like a single pill or treatment.. that doesn't work. what people also don't understand is that these companies are actually competing with each other you know... if I you are bayer and had the "cure for cancer", are you going to patent it and bring it to market or are you talking to all researchers on the globe and all other companies(which is prosperous in itself) and get them involved in the conspiracy so that no information can permeate outside? what will get YOU more money? what prevents you form a small startup discovering it and making all other competitors worthless? and thats the key point. if merck or bayer or whatever had a better treatment for hairloss, THEY want to get all the market share. of course, they MIGHT lose long term

Nothing in cancer research is different.

They don't care about you NOT getting cancer in the first place, they just want to be able to treat it when you have it. That's how they make money. There doesn't need to be any "conspiracy" for this to happen, as the governments of the world already make sure they have a steady supply of customers.

People consume absurd amounts of sugar and processed fast "food", obesity and diabetes at an all time high, WHO has actually been sued for talking bad about sugar, it's "cool" to hate exercise and just play video games for 8 hours straight because hey, "Big is beautiful too!"

If they really wanted to fight cancer, they'd take Coke, cigarettes and pizza pops off the shelf and we'd, (I'm not opposed to literally) whip fatties into shape. You can't drink unpasteurized milk because one guy got a stomach ache one time, 50 years back, but you can stuff your face-hole with pringles and smokes to your heart (failure's) content, and go shoot up at a "safe-injection" site all you want.

Where hair is concerned, every one of these companies knows there is way more profit in a treatment that has multiple applications (only Androgenetic Alopecia could be treated with RCH-01) AND would require multiple uses by a single patient. They know damn-well that a "preventative" treatment that only needs to be used once is not as profitable; it wouldn't even be as profitable as selling shampoo to just women in the long run.

 

[MeDK]

Nothing in cancer research is different.

They don't care about you NOT getting cancer in the first place, they just want to be able to treat it when you have it. That's how they make money. There doesn't need to be any "conspiracy" for this to happen, as the governments of the world already make sure they have a steady supply of customers.

People consume absurd amounts of sugar and processed fast "food", obesity and diabetes at an all time high, WHO has actually been sued for talking bad about sugar, it's "cool" to hate exercise and just play video games for 8 hours straight because hey, "Big is beautiful too!"

If they really wanted to fight cancer, they'd take Coke, cigarettes and pizza pops off the shelf and we'd, (I'm not opposed to literally) whip fatties into shape. You can't drink unpasteurized milk because one guy got a stomach ache one time, 50 years back, but you can stuff your face-hole with pringles and smokes to your heart (failure's) content, and go shoot up at a "safe-injection" site all you want.

Where hair is concerned, every one of these companies knows there is way more profit in a treatment that has multiple applications (only Androgenetic Alopecia could be treated with RCH-01) AND would require multiple uses by a single patient. They know damn-well that a "preventative" treatment that only needs to be used once is not as profitable; it wouldn't even be as profitable as selling shampoo to just women in the long run.

All those things you mention are about lifestyle.

If you want to sit and play computer all day long with pizza and sodas around you, then its your choice.

The whole thing about freedom, freedom with consequences. You can't blame others for not want to go to sports or being active, or eat healthy, start smoking or what ever there might be. Its all about making the right choices as a person. That is also why you have an ingredients label on your processed food. So you can make an informed decision about what you put into your body.

A society benefits much greater on a healthy population than a ill one.

Also companies doesn't want you to return all the time for treatments. Its not good for a company brand. They want to deliver a high quality product which as much less interference they can provide. People give up on products and routines that disrupt their everyday life. Not many people want to adopt to a product. So maybe the first 10 - 50 times people thinks oh this is fun. but in the end they stop going, and then they get bad branding.

Same thing happens here on this site. People need to do things multiple times but give up on it because it disrupts their everyday routine. And then they simply stop doing it and the words spreads out about its being bad and what not. and then the company ain't making money any more.

Simple solutions are still the best one with less treatments. People will pay more for comfort than discomfort.

 

[That Guy]

thats where you are wrong though. it not in th governments interest for people to get sick when you provide public insurance. its just ridiculous on so many levels. cancer can't be cured bc its hard, nothing else. and as I said those companies are actually not that evil, they let you participate in your trials which is way different than the trial system in hair loss research for obvious reasons and often times you get waivers if you can't pay for badly needed new research drugs after release. not the best profit strategy but hard to believe, sometimes humans do something for the greater good

All those things you mention are about lifestyle.

If you want to sit and play computer all day long with pizza and sodas around you, then its your choice.

The whole thing about freedom, freedom with consequences. You can't blame others for not want to go to sports or being active, or eat healthy, start smoking or what ever there might be. Its all about making the right choices as a person. That is also why you have an ingredients label on your processed food. So you can make an informed decision about what you put into your body.

A society benefits much greater on a healthy population than a ill one.

Also companies doesn't want you to return all the time for treatments. Its not good for a company brand. They want to deliver a high quality product which as much less interference they can provide. People give up on products and routines that disrupt their everyday life. Not many people want to adopt to a product. So maybe the first 10 - 50 times people thinks oh this is fun. but in the end they stop going, and then they get bad branding.

Same thing happens here on this site. People need to do things multiple times but give up on it because it disrupts their everyday routine. And then they simply stop doing it and the words spreads out about its being bad and what not. and then the company ain't making money any more.

Simple solutions are still the best one with less treatments. People will pay more for comfort than discomfort.

So let me get this straight:

The government cares about public health. That's why they give us the option of shooting ourselves up with heroin at SISs, smoking, clogging our arteries with burgers, etc. with no interference, but we ALL must get ourselves shot up with mystery substances so we don't make OTHER people sick or else you'll be financially and socially punished? I mean, think of the children! They care about children so much, that their parents are allowed to have the choice to let their kids live on sh*t food and video games or just abort tens of millions of them before it ever gets to that point.

The current, globalist establishment dgaf about you, your family or their health, dude. They care about $ and nothing else. Do you not see how misplaced the "choices" are?

Further, yeah, it's not in a company's interest for you to need multiple treatments.

That's why Iphones are built to last, right? That's why they keep making newer (and worse) iterations of Windows? That's why everyone still uses straight razors instead of disposable? That's why the pharmaceutical industry wants to put everything in a pill taken once daily until the end of time? That's why Aderan's shareholders voted to scrap the RCH-01 before RCH-01 despite having a working product for maintenance?

 

[Bigoldben]

It's actually the opposite way around.

A one-and-done solution is not something the medical industry wants. They are there to make money. To be honest, I suspect this is why Aderans bailed despite having a successful RCH-01 the first time where maintenance is concerned.

Repeat customers are what it's all about. This is what the all the "cancer cure" conspiracy guys get wrong. A cure is what they want, prevention is their enemy. They'd love a cancer cure they could charge a shitload for, but they won't stop selling you shitty "food" and encouraging sedentary lifestyles. Because a population that still gets cancer is where the money is.

An expensive, multi-treatment procedure that can fix both Androgenetic Alopecia and other types of hairloss is a lot more profitable than a one-and-done therapy to prevent baldness, which most people would probably still not get anyway.

If they produce a one-and-done solution then there will be enormous amounts of new customers every year and will be ultimately until they introduce gene altering and it’s a gene taken from humanity.

You say most people wouldn’t use it, but at £1000 a pop (theoretically) it is within the potential reach of anyone in employment in the western world. I don’t know a single man who is losing his mind hair and is happy about it.

 

[wc5269]

It's actually the opposite way around.

A one-and-done solution is not something the medical industry wants. They are there to make money. To be honest, I suspect this is why Aderans bailed despite having a successful RCH-01 the first time where maintenance is concerned.

Repeat customers are what it's all about. This is what the all the "cancer cure" conspiracy guys get wrong. A cure is what they want, prevention is their enemy. They'd love a cancer cure they could charge a shitload for, but they won't stop selling you shitty "food" and encouraging sedentary lifestyles. Because a population that still gets cancer is where the money is.

An expensive, multi-treatment procedure that can fix both Androgenetic Alopecia and other types of hairloss is a lot more profitable than a one-and-done therapy to prevent baldness, which most people would probably still not get anyway.

The problem with your logic is that you treat the medical community as single entity, but it's really a conglomerate of self interested people and companies, which are competing against each other to maximize their profits. Most major pharmaceutical are currently making 0 dollars on the hair loss market. If the science and technology was out there for a cure, they could very easily corner the market and make billions in a market they were otherwise making no money on. But using your logic, they're not doing that to preserve the future earnings potential of the industry (aka their competitors)? It makes no sense. Most of the leadership at these companies are 50+. This potential cure would be a cash cow for the rest of their working life, why do they care about the state of the market in 20+ years?

 

[Trouse]

The problem with your logic is that you treat the medical community as single entity, but it's really a conglomerate of self interested people and companies, which are competing against each other to maximize their profits. Most major pharmaceutical are currently making 0 dollars on the hair loss market. If the science and technology was out there for a cure, they could very easily corner the market and make billions in a market they were otherwise making no money on. But using your logic, they're not doing that to preserve the future earnings potential of the industry (aka their competitors)? It makes no sense. Most of the leadership at these companies are 50+. This potential cure would be a cash cow for the rest of their working life, why do they care about the state of the market in 20+ years?

This is what all conspiracy theorists do. They come up with scenarios in which people/governments/ countries etc with fundamentally opposing ideologies or competing interests are actually clandestinely working together to further their own self interests at the expense of the masses. I’ve made this same point on this blog half a dozen times. The notion that there wouldn’t be “enough” money in a hairless cure by a private company is so insane and devoid of critical thinking it’s laughable.

 

[BalderBaldyBald]

So let me get this straight:

The government cares about public health. That's why they give us the option of shooting ourselves up with heroin at SISs, smoking, clogging our arteries with burgers, etc. with no interference, but we ALL must get ourselves shot up with mystery substances so we don't make OTHER people sick or else you'll be financially and socially punished? I mean, think of the children! They care about children so much, that their parents are allowed to have the choice to let their kids live on sh*t food and video games or just abort tens of millions of them before it ever gets to that point.

The current, globalist establishment dgaf about you, your family or their health, dude. They care about $ and nothing else. Do you not see how misplaced the "choices" are?

Further, yeah, it's not in a company's interest for you to need multiple treatments.

That's why Iphones are built to last, right? That's why they keep making newer (and worse) iterations of Windows? That's why everyone still uses straight razors instead of disposable? That's why the pharmaceutical industry wants to put everything in a pill taken once daily until the end of time? That's why Aderan's shareholders voted to scrap the RCH-01 before RCH-01 despite having a working product for maintenance?

"France will provide access to hepatitis C treatment with direct-acting antivirals to everyone diagnosed with hepatitis C from September 2016, and will begin to provide treatment to everyone with stage 2 fibrosis immediately, health minister Marisol Touraine announced last week.

Treatment will also be made available immediately for anyone with hepatitis C waiting for a liver transplant or experiencing a recurrence of hepatitis C infection after a liver transplant, regardless of the stage of post-transplant fibrosis.

Immediate access to hepatitis C treatment will also be granted to groups at high risk of transmitting hepatitis C: prisoners, migrants, pregnant women and people who inject drugs. The French Society for Hepatology has criticised the lack of immediate access for people who acquired hepatitis C through transfusion or contaminated blood products prior to the introduction of screening in 1992."

http://www.eatg.org/news/france-to-provide-universal-access-to-hepatitis-c-treatment/

And we live in a free society, if you want to eat junk food because it's really good, get drunk and high because it feels good, and smoke cigs because you like the taste, you can....least they can do is warn us that's bad for health

 

[That Guy]

This is what all conspiracy theorists do. They come up with scenarios in which people/governments/ countries etc with fundamentally opposing ideologies or competing interests are actually clandestinely working together to further their own self interests at the expense of the masses. I’ve made this same point on this blog half a dozen times. The notion that there wouldn’t be “enough” money in a hairless cure by a private company is so insane and devoid of critical thinking it’s laughable.

"France will provide access to hepatitis C treatment with direct-acting antivirals to everyone diagnosed with hepatitis C from September 2016, and will begin to provide treatment to everyone with stage 2 fibrosis immediately, health minister Marisol Touraine announced last week.

Treatment will also be made available immediately for anyone with hepatitis C waiting for a liver transplant or experiencing a recurrence of hepatitis C infection after a liver transplant, regardless of the stage of post-transplant fibrosis.

Immediate access to hepatitis C treatment will also be granted to groups at high risk of transmitting hepatitis C: prisoners, migrants, pregnant women and people who inject drugs. The French Society for Hepatology has criticised the lack of immediate access for people who acquired hepatitis C through transfusion or contaminated blood products prior to the introduction of screening in 1992."

http://www.eatg.org/news/france-to-provide-universal-access-to-hepatitis-c-treatment/

And we live in a free society, if you want to eat junk food because it's really good, get drunk and high because it feels good, and smoke cigs because you like the taste, you can....least they can do is warn us that's bad for health

I forgot just how ridiculous people on here can be.

This is not rocket science, people; this is just basic business: You want to sell to as many customers as possible, and have their repeat business as much as possible.

First off: This treatment will first launch in markets which have advanced-age populations and negative birth rates. This means that MOST of the market, by far, are already going to be men with hairloss.

Second: It is not going to be the case that the majority of the population will receive RCH-01, no matter how much you dream about it.

But even disregarding point 2, the fact is these companies require repeat customers to survive just like everyone else. A hairloss treatment that is only really good on people with most of their hair is NOT as desirable, nor will it be as financially successful as one that can grow brand new hair, can treat multiple hair disorders, and many patients will require several treatments — just like transplants.

I guarantee you, that when this thing comes out, L'oreal will have sold more Shampoo and made more money doing so in a month, than RCH-01 will in a year.

Just like how there is no serious push to stop people from getting cancer or diabetes in the first place, there will be no serious push to prevent people from going bald; I guarantee you there will be less.

Pharmaceutical companies and the like are not interested in prevention; they make money off developing cures and treatments — that is their job.

 

[Kevin19888]

Greetings friends. When this treatment be released?