-
You’re so right. A great example of this point is the way these poisonous people are destroying Dr. Gho’s credibility. It’s really too bad because I personally think that Dr. Gho’s work has a lot of merit.
Originally Posted by Bronson
You'd be surprised what negative input is capable of.
-
Originally Posted by jman91
ludicrous comparison
You can not be serious. Do you actually expect me to believe that you are so stupid that you cannot see the relevance? It is obvious that you are not very bright – but come on... You can’t be that dumb.
-
Originally Posted by gmonasco
Here is exactly what he said:
"If we achieve 20% percent growth that would be a home run in terms of the comparative technologies out there.”
That ain't the same thing as saying "We expect 20% growth" or "If we don't achieve 20% growth, it'll be an abysmal failure."
That statement is itself an example of your making stuff up.
I like how you cut and paste. Here, see i can do it too...
"If this trial proves successful, and RepliCel can prove systemic efficacy and safety by as early as March 2012"
"Hall says that if RepliCel can show safety and an efficacy rate of 20 percent for humans, it would become the new standard."
“So the Phase I milestone in March is critical and we’re confident that we’re going to have hair growth. We’re not going to go forward unless we have growth. "
Anyone who can read that news release and come away thinking that efficacy was a minor issue in this trial, either needs glasses or some reading comprehension courses.
-
Originally Posted by Tracy C
[...]you are so stupid [...]It is obvious that you are not very bright [...]You can’t be that dumb.
Tracy C; try not to use insults such as these when discussing things; it typically only serves to make your argument look weaker.
Originally Posted by Tracy C
It is well past time to stop this negative BS concerning Replicel.
I agree. The results are what they are. Let's all try to take what Replicel has accomplished at face value and move from there.
The results aren't terrific, admittedly, but that just means there's room for improvement, no doubt.
-
Originally Posted by The Alchemist
"Hall says that if RepliCel can show safety and an efficacy rate of 20 percent for humans, it would become the new standard."
Study that sentence very carefully.
-
Originally Posted by Tracy C
Study that sentence very carefully.
Study my post very carefully.
"Anyone who can read that news release and come away thinking that efficacy was a minor issue in this trial, either needs glasses or some reading comprehension courses. "
-
Originally Posted by Tracy C
Study that sentence very carefully.
study this sentence very carefully
"If this trial proves successful, and RepliCel can prove systemic efficacy and safety by as early as March 2012"
-
Quoting David Hall from the Tobin Smith interview:
"clearly, if we demonstrate hairgrowth in excess of 20%, you're gonna attract alot of attention from biotech and big pharma"
3.2% is where they are at.
-
Originally Posted by The Alchemist
Study my post very carefully.
"Anyone who can read that news release and come away thinking that efficacy was a minor issue in this trial, either needs glasses or some reading comprehension courses. "
my guess is reading comprehension courses
subject.... predicate......
nobody is saying there isn't room for improvement... were just saying currently you're better off on rogaine... and probably will be for some time..... long enough a time that you probably shouldn't hope for much from replicel unless there is some DRASTIC, and i mean DRASTIC, changes over the next months/trial
and lastly, I'd like to pose what is probably the most important question for Replicel:
WHAT WENT WRONG? or, DO YOU HAVE A STRATEGY (and the data) TO DETERMINE WHAT WENT WRONG?
I mean to me, it sounds like they're just rolling dice. 1000x typical dosage? now they're going to do less? I mean what is going on? also, people keep saying maybe these hairs will eventually grow.... has replicel stated anywhere that they think this is a possibility? or is that forum speculation?-- it's bad news if the PR or the interview didn't mention this
also, has tracy answered any question yet posed? All i see is her replying with more questions-- all revolving around being "so dumb" "that dumb" "real dumb" etc.... at least follow it up with an explanation.
-
Originally Posted by jman91
Tracy C is a troll. Do not feed the trolls.
Whilst I don't always agree with Tracey, she ain't no troll. I give her credit for ringing in during the live broadcast and at least she is trying to perform some sort of service to others in terms of advice.
Nothing wrong with cautious optimism either guys. Too many people were expecting the April results to realise their dreams. It's a small step in the right direction. - let's wait and see!
Similar Threads
-
By jowie2 in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
Replies: 1
Last Post: 10-28-2011, 02:12 PM
-
By d0072 in forum Hair Loss Treatments
Replies: 4
Last Post: 02-27-2011, 10:21 PM
-
By Big D in forum Men's Hair Loss: Start Your Own Topic
Replies: 5
Last Post: 02-21-2011, 01:08 AM
-
By g k in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 10
Last Post: 10-16-2010, 07:50 AM
-
By seatown in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 1
Last Post: 05-31-2010, 04:04 PM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks