We Absolutely Have To Get Hellouser To Japan

[The Baldy Man]

What did it look like? Was there uniform thinning throughout the donor and typical pattern areas? Does the loss start off at the same rate everywhere or does it progress to include thinning in the donor area? Did they have a sparse horseshoe remaining in the end or worse? Any links between retrograde and DUPA?

They both just had patchy diffuse thinning hair all over their scalp.

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

Where did he exactly say that? I'd say the only people he has no jurisdiction on are areata and maybe scarring alopecias.

Idk, maybe it was someone from Replicel who mentioned DUPA. Regardless, similar issues exist with both techniques since you need to provide healthy cells to the company to amplify.

He didn't exactly say DUPA, but here are some answers that touch upon the topic. This is why I wanted more clarification. Incredibly frustrating, but I cannot post the time-stamped video link. Something about the post formatting is screwing it up. Anyway, see 3:30 and 18:10

 

[That Guy]

Tsuji said that people with DUPA are out of luck, but sometimes DUPA people end up as Norwood 7 as well, just with a thin donor region. Can they also not gain a benefit from the treatment, even if it results in sparse hair coverage (better than nothing)?

No, he did not. The opposite, in fact.

From the interview:

"As the disease gradually progresses, follicles on the back of the head and also those on the side of the head also become miniaturized. However, even though the disease has progressed into those areas, there is still a large number of normal follicles left. Based on this, we are currently conducting a human-tissue study using dermal tissues collected from the back of Androgenetic Alopecia patients’ heads in order to verify the possible number of normal follicles which can be collected from such areas, and whether cells collected from such areas have the function needed for follicular regeneration, etc. So far, we have found out that there is a large number of normal follicles on the back of Androgenetic Alopecia patients. We believe that collecting the cells from such areas will definitely result in regeneration of normal follicles."

 

[H]

Idk, maybe it was someone from Replicel who mentioned DUPA. Regardless, similar issues exist with both techniques since you need to provide healthy cells to the company to amplify.

He didn't exactly say DUPA, but here are some answers that touch upon the topic. This is why I wanted more clarification. Incredibly frustrating, but I cannot post the time-stamped video link. Something about the post formatting is screwing it up. Anyway, see 3:30 and 18:10

Couldn't have said it better then That Guy.

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

No, he did not. The opposite, in fact.

From the interview:

"As the disease gradually progresses, follicles on the back of the head and also those on the side of the head also become miniaturized. However, even though the disease has progressed into those areas, there is still a large number of normal follicles left. Based on this, we are currently conducting a human-tissue study using dermal tissues collected from the back of Androgenetic Alopecia patients’ heads in order to verify the possible number of normal follicles which can be collected from such areas, and whether cells collected from such areas have the function needed for follicular regeneration, etc. So far, we have found out that there is a large number of normal follicles on the back of Androgenetic Alopecia patients. We believe that collecting the cells from such areas will definitely result in regeneration of normal follicles."

If you are going to just give me a transcript of the video, we should at least put the answer in the context of the question:

"Certain individuals with advanced androgenetic alopecia experience significant miniaturization of follicles and extensive loss on the sides and back of the head. This is the typical location for donor follicles for transplants with your therapy. As a result, these donor follicles may be extensively affected by Androgenetic Alopecia prior to the procedure. What can people expect form your therapy?"

The question was an inquiry about androgenetic alopecia.
The question stated that loss was extensive on the sides and back of head, but it did not say all hair or the entire scalp.
Nevertheless, the question asks about those donor follicles that have been affected by Androgenetic Alopecia.

"So far, we have found out that there is a large number of normal follicles on the back of Androgenetic Alopecia patients"

The response is that as long as there are a large number of normal follicles, things will be ok. Right, again, the outcome appears to depend on whether or not normal follicles exist. If you recall, my question was about DUPA, a markedly different phenomenon that was NOT discussed in depth in the interview. If you looked at question 3 that I linked as well, Tsuji again clearly says that the quality of the hair regenerated is akin to the quality of the cells harvested. It's not trivial that in the case of DUPA, quality cells exist because as the name of the disease implies, the hairloss is unpatterned and healthy follicles may exist nowhere.

Now how severe would the alopecia have to be before a "large number of normal follicles" is no longer present? I have no idea. Nobody here knows either. Do a large number of follicles viable for this treatment exist in the case of DUPA? I have no idea. Nobody here knows either. Hence I asked in my original question,
"More generally, what is the cut off for donor quality/region that needs to be covered to give eligibility?"

And as far as I can tell, Tsuji has not offered a solution for this case, and the treatment strategy implies that this case might not be easily treatable. I think it is appropriate to ask for clarification from Tsuji.

Couldn't have said it better then That Guy.

I disagree. I don't think my question was answered. Or that it can be answered other than by those involved in performing the research.

 

[H]

I disagree. I don't think my question was answered. Or that it can be answered other than by those involved in performing the research.

Whatever floats your boat. The only people I have seen go completely bald completely no hair at all none nothing no donor hair is alopecia universalis and that's severe areata an immune response not dht. I believe it may be hard to know which hairs are resistant but in my humble opinion if you can provide 100 healthy follicles it should be no problem as even though the hair thins its isn't completely eradicated everywhere. I don't care if you want to ask lol all I wanted to do was clarify that he did not say that.

 

[Tano1]

Why don't we just ask if Hellouser can ask that question about DUPA then?

 

[That Guy]

If you recall, my question was about DUPA, a markedly different phenomenon that was NOT discussed in depth in the interview

I was there when the questions were being developed; don't recall if you were.

This is the question about DUPA

and DUPA is not a "markedly different phenomenon". This is just a cope that people with DUPA (and diffuse thinners in general) use to make it seem like they don't have Androgenetic Alopecia, but something else that they hope can be treated.

Nope. It's Androgenetic Alopecia, just doesn't follow the usual pattern.

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

I was there when the questions were being developed; don't recall if you were.

I don't see how that is relevant. Are you trying to be arrogant?

DUPA is not a "markedly different phenomenon". This is just a cope that people with DUPA (and diffuse thinners in general) use to make it seem like they don't have Androgenetic Alopecia, but something else that they hope can be treated.
Nope. It's Androgenetic Alopecia, just doesn't follow the usual pattern.

Now you're just splitting hairs. Firstly, given that DUPA is rare compared to traditional patterned Androgenetic Alopecia, it isn't unreasonable to say it is "markedly different" than traditional Androgenetic Alopecia. You might have a different opinion, but realize that it is just that - an opinion.

Secondly, I don't care for your opinion about peoples' coping strategies.

Finally, none of what you said addresses my initial concern about how the treatment works for those without viable follicles and what the limit of damage is beyond which the situation is no longer salvageable. That's it. That was my question. I just want an answer to THAT.

To be clear, I really don't care much for discussing semantics or opinions on the matter. I just want the facts. It's frankly quite irritating to have this dialogue; I'm not really interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. I think this is a waste of your time and mine.

How about we stop trading opinions about coping strategies, whether or not DUPA is salvagable, and whether or not DUPA is sufficiently different to justify the use of the word "markedly," and I can just get my question answered by the researchers? Unless you want to provide some new evidence that Tsuji has provided pertaining to this question, I'm not really interested in answers that involve your opinion or reposting of the transcript to a video that *I* linked when asking my question - these are not helpful in addressing my concern. I also don't see what you stand to gain. I already sent my question to the list and presumably I will get an answer from the source, which is what I am seeking.

 

[That Guy]

I don't see how that is relevant. Are you trying to be arrogant?

No, I'm pointing out that this is indeed the question about DUPA

Firstly, given that DUPA is rare compared to traditional patterned Androgenetic Alopecia, it isn't unreasonable to say it is "markedly different" than traditional Androgenetic Alopecia. You might have a different opinion, but realize that it is just that - an opinion.

DUPA is the same condition; it's not a matter of opinion.

It just manifests itself in a different, more destructive way.

Finally, none of what you said addresses my initial concern about how the treatment works for those without viable follicles and what the limit of damage is beyond which the situation is no longer salvageable.

The answer to your question is that if you do not have any viable follicles, then you don't have Androgenetic Alopecia because as he explained, there are a sufficient number of viable follicles for multiplication even in these patients.

You're asking the wrong question.

The question we need an answer to is: At what stage of hairloss would a DUPA patient be considered low enough risk to perform the procedure on?

Because the hairloss is not patterned, if they were to go ahead with it on someone before they could be certain what follicles could be used, it would leave you right back where you started.

 

[hellouser]

My question wasn't about Follica. It was about Kerastem.

I was wondering if you could ask Kerastem if they're considering asking the FDA for early market release after phase 2.

I'm also wondering about Kerastem's phase 2 results.

Added.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I was there when the questions were being developed; don't recall if you were.

This is the question about DUPA

and DUPA is not a "markedly different phenomenon". This is just a cope that people with DUPA (and diffuse thinners in general) use to make it seem like they don't have Androgenetic Alopecia, but something else that they hope can be treated.

Nope. It's Androgenetic Alopecia, just doesn't follow the usual pattern.

How do you know that?

 

[H]

how the treatment works for those without viable follicles and what the limit of damage is beyond which the situation is no longer salvageable. That's it. That was my question. I just want an answer to THAT.

Im just trying to help you cuz I feel you can answer this particular question with the information already available to us. DUPA doesn't cause complete baldness it causes diffuse hair all over the head instead of just the crown, its the same mechanism as male pattern baldness just isnt favoring the crown. With that said, if DUPA doesn't cause complete baldness, some hairs do survive a lifetime, we know they can multiple a follicle by 1000 which they have already mentioned, and the human head has 100,000 to 150,000 follicles for the max density that nature provides, how many healthy hair follicles do you need left before its not salvageable anymore? As to the viable follicles obviously if you have no follicles absolutely none nowhere on your head which I haven't heard of in any type of alopecia except for areata (which I mentioned earlier and is a different mechanism that we already know needs another therapy) this would not be the therapy for you.

Actually f*** it this is a good question cuz maybe they do have a way to tell a follicles severity of susceptibility that would be super coo ask away something about a shovel.

 

[hellouser]

Small update: dropping the goal down to $5,200 (that is still a worse case scenario though).

 

[H]

I was thinking how come we've had nine of these Congresses and nothing has come of them? I mean ya it's good info im interested in what they'll say for sure but it hasn't turned into anything kinda ruins some of the hype.

 

[hellouser]

I was thinking how come we've had nine of these Congresses and nothing has come of them? I mean ya it's good info im interested in what they'll say for sure but it hasn't turned into anything kinda ruins some of the hype.

Well if North Korea keeps firing missiles over Japan.. the answer for this congress will be obvious.

 

[H]

Well if North Korea keeps firing missiles over Japan.. the answer for this congress will be obvious.

i guess it is kind of obvious Kimmy wants to take out the Hair Congress...

 

[kj6723]

i guess it is kind of obvious Kimmy wants to take out the Hair Congress...

He's putting plans in place so that he will be the world's only fullhead

 

[d3nt3dsh0v3l]

@hellouser
Will you livestream the audio on youtube? That could be like, way cool. We could all hop on the youtube chatroom and follow along as a community. Or was the audio that you uploaded from the last conference something that the conference provided you after it was over (I ask because it sounded pretty clear). If you did record it all yourself, I was thinking that a live stream would be cool is all.

Regards,
Doge

 

[hellouser]

@hellouser
Will you livestream the audio on youtube? That could be like, way cool. We could all hop on the youtube chatroom and follow along as a community. Or was the audio that you uploaded from the last conference something that the conference provided you after it was over (I ask because it sounded pretty clear). If you did record it all yourself, I was thinking that a live stream would be cool is all.

Regards,
Doge

I recorded everything with a Sony voice recorder. Each session had a few or so presentations. I split up the presentations using Fission. After that I setup a template in After Effects and modified it for each presentation and exported it to a video with the audio in it (this took a while). Then, I ran each video through Handbrake cuz my upload speeds at home are atrocious. Everything is now, as you know, on Youtube.

I'd love to livestream, but I won't have data from my cell carrier. If there's wifi at the congress and I get a good enough signal and my battery doesn't crap out from whatever device I'm using, I suppose I could do it. I'd upload it all later on anyway cuz the voice recorder's sound quality was pretty good.