Replicel Is On Fire Lately — Data In Feb.

[MrV88]

Very interesting... yeah, makes sense. They won't start with their phase 2 trial without shiseidos data. Would be interesting to know if shiseido really can publish the results earlier. I mean, they are not obligated to ask replicel about releasing their trial results, right?

I think Replicel is even going to use ALL the data that they can get from Shiseido and maybe let them refine, produce and push the "real" product into the market in exchange for the first step of giving Shiseido their formula and later get revenues from the sales. (Replicel had to do phase 2 for itself and share the data with Shiseido and not the other way around)

Seems like they have the problem of not making the phase 2 trial and shiseido won't wait for a small company like replicel for pushing into the market in 2018, it looks like they don't have the money/just want to use Shiseido for this.

İn the end it is the Replicel formula, but Shiseido will do the real thing and release it (my opinion) 2-3 years before Replicel, maybe they look for more partners and won't make a phase 2 for themselves?

As far as I remember Shiseido had it's own product like Replicel and they maybe combine the two products or refine their own and launch that. Who knows?

I really don't care, they just should bring my hair back in 2018 , but they say that their focus is on their device, which in my opinion is nothing compared to an anti hair loss treatment and the money they could make with it.

 

[pegasus2]

In the second link, Lee Buckler, President and CEO of RepliCel.

"In androgenic alopecia, the androgen hormone kills off one of the cell populations in the hair follicle that’s responsible for hair growth. They’re called the dermal sheath cup cells and sit at the base of the hair follicle. The androgen hormone attaches to a cell receptor on the surface of those cells. That same cell population located at the back of the head simply lacks the receptor for the androgen hormones to use in its attachment."

Are different scalp hairs depending where are they located? at sides the hair lacks the receptor for androgen hormones? I don't beleive it in healthy scal hairs, even in the sides.

I thought this was the generally accepted understanding for the last 20 years. They probably don't have zero receptors, but far less than those on the crown and the temples.

 

[Feelsbadman.jpg]

I thought this was the generally accepted understanding for the last 20 years. They probably don't have zero receptors, but far less than those on the crown and the temples.

Correct. The hairs on the back and sides are not completely immune, just highly resistant to the point that you won't live long enough for them experience Androgenetic Alopecia. There have been in vitro experiments where hair follicles taken from "immune" region are exposed to extremely high concentrations of DHT and they begin to miniaturize. This won't ever happen in vivo unless maybe some one was using extreme levels of DHT based steroids or something.

It has been said that all men, if they live long enough, will develope prostate cancer (not counting men who take finasteride/dutasteride). I would think the case for Androgenetic Alopecia in the safe zone would be similar. If our life expectancy was 200, you would probably see the horse shoe areas bald as well. Androgens are bad for all human scalp hair follicles. Even the middle aged norwood 0s, If they were to live long enough with high-normal concentrations of DHT exposure, they will probably start to bald as well given enough time (longer than our current lifespans).





So I believe replicel when they say "long lasting". I just don't believe that it will be permanent, at least not if you plan on living longer than the current expected average lifespan. And thanks to nameless, we all now know that aging is soon to be cured. Hence, why I plan to continue to take finasteride with my rch-01 treatment. Should preserve my hair for a couple millennia. May have to switch to dutasteride at that point....

 

[That Guy]

It has been said that all men, if they live long enough, will develope prostate cancer

Live long enough and you could probably experience just about any ailment.

Live long enough and you'll probably get hit by lightning.

I highly doubt the validity of the claim that "all men" will get prostate cancer specifically at a certain point.

 

[Armando Jose]

I thought this was the generally accepted understanding for the last 20 years. They probably don't have zero receptors, but far less than those on the crown and the temples.

It is time to check it. Probably all scalp hair are identical initially

 

[Feelsbadman.jpg]

I highly doubt the validity of the claim that "all men" will get prostate cancer specifically at a certain point.

Doubt all you want but the longer you live, the more time your prostate has to be exposed to carcinogenic sex hormones. At some certain point, ALL men would develop prostate cancer. That point though, is far beyond our natural lifespan so you can't observe it.

The longer you live, the more likely are to die from all causes (in fact, with an infinite lifespan, it becomes a certainty) including natural accidents. Aubrey De Grey worked it out to about an average of 1000 years before dying to natural accident if one was biologically immortal.

But prostate cancer isn't a natural accident. You are at risk for just by having sex hormones.

To translate this to your lighting example, imagine 100 people were standing in an open field during a lightning storm that never stops. They are at risk for being struck by lightning just by being there and the longer they stay, the greater the chance they are struck.. Let's say that they never leave and that there is a 1% chance that one of them will be struck and killed by lightning per year. That means that after 100 years, it is certain that at least one will have been struck and died. After 10,000 years (this is the certain point you were referring to) it is certain that they all would have been struck by lightning and killed.

Point is that this all very calculable. If you are at risk for a disease and the risk factor is never removed and the sample size (time) is large enough, you are guaranteed to get the condition/disease. Same goes for Androgenetic Alopecia. If androgens are bad for all human scalp hair follicles but some follicles are more resistant than others, then it will simply take more time for the more resistant hair follicles to succumb to the disease (assuming the risk factor, androgens are never removed).

The improbable becomes probable with a large enough sample size.

 

[Pavi]

Damn. This thing really could come out next summer. Damn.

 

[hanginginthewire]

Damn. This thing really could come out next summer. Damn.

Yeah but it doesn't seem like people in the States can realistically expect to have access to it anytime soon. : (

 

[Pavi]

Yeah but it doesn't seem like people in the States can realistically expect to have access to it anytime soon. : (

Since 2015 I began saving for something like this. I have 5k. I will fly there easily.

 

[hanginginthewire]

Since 2015 I began saving for something like this. I have 5k. I will fly there easily.

The impression I get is that money and traveling there would be the least of it. Call me a pessimist but IF there's any legitimacy to this, the logistics are going to be far more complex than just popping over and having it done. Money is like #276543567 in the list of challenges when it comes to dealing with hair loss and hair loss treatment, as I'm sure you know.

 

[H]

The impression I get is that money and traveling there would be the least of it. Call me a pessimist but IF there's any legitimacy to this, the logistics are going to be far more complex than just popping over and having it done. Money is like #276543567 in the list of challenges when it comes to dealing with hair loss and hair loss treatment, as I'm sure you know.

What are the other 276,543,566 above money?

 

[Pavi]

The impression I get is that money and traveling there would be the least of it. Call me a pessimist but IF there's any legitimacy to this, the logistics are going to be far more complex than just popping over and having it done. Money is like #276543567 in the list of challenges when it comes to dealing with hair loss and hair loss treatment, as I'm sure you know.

Like....? Lol

 

[hanginginthewire]

What are the other 276,543,566 above money?

Haha in the case of Replicel we don't know much about how it will be administered, to whom, on what basis, etc. I'll be quiet cause I'm not trying to act like I know but I really don't think it would just be a matter of hopping a red eye and whipping out your checkbook.

In the case of hair loss itself, where do I begin? Shock loss, inadequate donor, low yield, side effects, scars, unnatural results, timing, age, chasing the loss, risk, white dots, donor thinning, stretched scars, generics, counterfeits, risk of feminization, lions, tigers, bears, oh my.

It's like an undulating snake - you tackle one part of it and everything else reconfigures to attack you from another angle. I frequently and bitterly think about the fact that lack of money - the thing that frustrates most people in life - is just the opening salvo in the war of hair loss. Tackling that beast is like 1% of the overall problem. Sorry to sound melodramatic but that's how I feel.

 

[Pavi]

Haha in the case of Replicel we don't know much about how it will be administered, to whom, on what basis, etc. I'll be quiet cause I'm not trying to act like I know but I really don't think it would just be a matter of hopping a red eye and whipping out your checkbook.

In the case of hair loss itself, where do I begin? Shock loss, inadequate donor, low yield, side effects, scars, unnatural results, timing, age, chasing the loss, risk, white dots, donor thinning, stretched scars, generics, counterfeits, risk of feminization, lions, tigers, bears, oh my.

It's like an undulating snake - you tackle one part of it and everything else reconfigures to attack you from another angle. I frequently and bitterly think about the fact that lack of money - the thing that frustrates most people in life - is just the opening salvo in the war of hair loss. Tackling that beast is like 1% of the overall problem. Sorry to sound melodramatic but that's how I feel.

I'm pretty sure none of your concerns are even legit... sorry.

 

[H]

Haha in the case of Replicel we don't know much about how it will be administered, to whom, on what basis, etc. I'll be quiet cause I'm not trying to act like I know but I really don't think it would just be a matter of hopping a red eye and whipping out your checkbook.

In the case of hair loss itself, where do I begin? Shock loss, inadequate donor, low yield, side effects, scars, unnatural results, timing, age, chasing the loss, risk, white dots, donor thinning, stretched scars, generics, counterfeits, risk of feminization, lions, tigers, bears, oh my.

It's like an undulating snake - you tackle one part of it and everything else reconfigures to attack you from another angle. I frequently and bitterly think about the fact that lack of money - the thing that frustrates most people in life - is just the opening salvo in the war of hair loss. Tackling that beast is like 1% of the overall problem. Sorry to sound melodramatic but that's how I feel.

I get what your saying. I don't think we need to necessarily worry about all that stuff now though. If the risk is too high and most people get uncomfortably bad results and side effects nobody's going to do it and word will definitely spread therein that treatment will fade if it even makes it to market. I think it would bother me most if some really great treatment or cure were out there and I didn't have the cash, I'd just be that guy watching the other guys get their hair while laughing, popping bottles, and having a good time through the window crying its raining no umbrella raindrops softly hitting just skin....ya thats what would be the worst to me.

 

[hanginginthewire]

I'm pretty sure none of your concerns are even legit... sorry.

Hope you are right.

 

[GiveMeAccessToMyAccount]

I get what your saying. I don't think we need to necessarily worry about all that stuff now though. If the risk is too high and most people get uncomfortably bad results and side effects nobody's going to do it and word will definitely spread therein that treatment will fade if it even makes it to market. I think it would bother me most if some really great treatment or cure were out there and I didn't have the cash, I'd just be that guy watching the other guys get their hair while laughing, popping bottles, and having a good time through the window crying its raining no umbrella raindrops softly hitting just skin....ya thats what would be the worst to me.

You are right about not having the cash but you know what, if that was happening, guys curing their hair loss and me on the outside looking in, i'd be happy because I can do something permanent about hair loss, it's just a matter of money. There's nothing in the world right now that can make me say "Oh I just need this amount of money and my hair loss problem will be gone". I think that when such an option comes, us baldies/balding people will find a way to get the treatment, maybe not a week after it's made available, but a year, 2 years, who knows depending on your salary and expenses I guess.

 

[br1]

Haha in the case of Replicel we don't know much about how it will be administered, to whom, on what basis, etc. I'll be quiet cause I'm not trying to act like I know but I really don't think it would just be a matter of hopping a red eye and whipping out your checkbook.

In the case of hair loss itself, where do I begin? Shock loss, inadequate donor, low yield, side effects, scars, unnatural results, timing, age, chasing the loss, risk, white dots, donor thinning, stretched scars, generics, counterfeits, risk of feminization, lions, tigers, bears, oh my.

It's like an undulating snake - you tackle one part of it and everything else reconfigures to attack you from another angle. I frequently and bitterly think about the fact that lack of money - the thing that frustrates most people in life - is just the opening salvo in the war of hair loss. Tackling that beast is like 1% of the overall problem. Sorry to sound melodramatic but that's how I feel.

You're listing transplant issues. Nothing to do with RCH-01 treatment.

 

[hanginginthewire]

Yeah, I was. Maybe it was unclear, I talked about Replicel concerns in the first paragraph of my post.

 

[MrV88]

Does anyone know if Brotzu, Follica or Replicel would regrow hairs in hair transplant donor areas since they have been transplanted elsewhere and aren't present anymore?