Histogen Update - Spencer Kobren Speaks With Dr. Craig L. Ziering

[Davey Jones]

and who the hell called and discovered them "stem cells" and did he have any results bringing these follicles back from these 'stem cells' in MPB affected individuals. You can piss on a rat and it's hair will grow back, it's a different game in MPB. Stem cells is a term coined by a troll named Cotsarelis.

It's only one paper and one guy saying this, there are 1000s of others, read them all.

Just trying to save your ass, research more and don't believe me or any other troll. Make your own conclusions friend.

Uhh, the term was coined at the turn of the last century in Russia, dude. It was used to describe theoretical cells (now well established to exist) that are resposible for cellulargenesis in multicellular organisms.

What in god's name are you even talking about?

[Sogeking]

Man this forum is full of overwhleming optimists and total pessimists.

The world does not work in black and white. The same is with treatments.
Replicels trials were a failure. But does that mean their treatment doesn't work? Their treatment works. They did grow new hair, it's just that their treatment is really inefficient. If I remember correctly it was just around 3%.
The percentages are ofcourse relative. It depends on how much hair the participants had before the trial started.

The same is with the trials in question.
I think that this new Histogen results are promising. I also believe to some degree they are on their way of becoming new best treatment for hair loss out there. But I still don't think it will be a very effective treatment.

Still give me what I can get. This might for example reawaken 10% or 20% of my hair but it is still better than not regrowing anything at all.

If there is a gun fight I would rather go there with a knife than bare-handed.

[Maradona]

Uhh, the term was coined at the turn of the last century in Russia, dude. It was used to describe theoretical cells (now well established to exist) that are resposible for cellulargenesis in multicellular organisms.

What in god's name are you even talking about?

Wow you assume we are talking about general stem cells in this forum!!

We are talking about progenitor cells and stem cells in the scalp. Both terms introduced by this troll cotsarellis in the world of BALDNESS.

This site is called BALD truth as in male pattern BALDness.

Yes stem cells are present in the bald scalp but this is not (at least as of 2012) enough to bring your follicles back. This so called "stem cells" and "progenitor cells", the latter also coined by this troll and there is a difference in this amount in mpb and non-mpb areas, haven't produced any good results EVEN IN THINNING AREAS. The procedure of HM and taking advantage of stem cells as many talk about here has been donde since the 90s. Results have been ALL the same.

Replicel disagreed with some of cotsarelis findings hence they put forward their trials and research. All these companies disagree with each other and Histogen also disagreed with Cotsarelis (the father of "stem cells are present in the bald scalp" paper) in other areas of research.

Histogen is NOT relying on cotsarelis findings of "stem cells" present in the scalp. It is simply using growth factors to stimulate hair growth in areas where the structures of the hair is still there.

You can't just throw "oh this should work on bald scalps according to cotsarelis findings" so "i'm good i'll let my MPB" progress after knowing what i wrote above and there is MORE.

Just go slick bald if you want, when histogen or CB come to market don't complain we didn't warned you.

[Davey Jones]

Wow you assume we are talking about general stem cells in this forum!!

We are talking about progenitor cells and stem cells in the scalp. Both terms introduced by this troll cotsarellis in the world of BALDNESS.

This site is called BALD truth as in male pattern BALDness.

Yes stem cells are present in the bald scalp but this is not (at least as of 2012) enough to bring your follicles back. This so called "stem cells" and "progenitor cells", the latter also coined by this troll and there is a difference in this amount in mpb and non-mpb areas, haven't produced any good results EVEN IN THINNING AREAS. The procedure of HM and taking advantage of stem cells as many talk about here has been donde since the 90s. Results have been ALL the same.

Replicel disagreed with some of cotsarelis findings hence they put forward their trials and research. All these companies disagree with each other and Histogen also disagreed with Cotsarelis (the father of "stem cells are present in the bald scalp" paper) in other areas of research.

Histogen is NOT relying on cotsarelis findings of "stem cells" present in the scalp. It is simply using growth factors to stimulate hair growth in areas where the structures of the hair is still there.

You can't just throw "oh this should work on bald scalps according to cotsarelis findings" so "i'm good i'll let my MPB" progress after knowing what i wrote above and there is MORE.

Just go slick bald if you want, when histogen or CB come to market don't complain we didn't warned you.

Yes, there are different kinds of stem cells with different names. The difference comes from the variety of cell types that the stem cell can differentiate into. In adults, stem cells typically are partially differentiated, but that is fine. I don't want the stem cells in my scalp to turn into liver cells anyway, I want hair follicles. Whether that is possible for the stem cells in the skin of the scalp is certainly up for debate, or more appropriately, experimental inquiry.

I'm not sure where you're getting that these aren't stem cells. That is a well accepted scientific term for a particular variety of cells. What makes you think he decided to fraudulently misuse the term?

I will agree with you that we should maintain our hair as long as possible just in case, but no one implied not to do that. May I ask who you're arguing with?

I think you need to chill outa little. You certainly are trying to bring a dose of realism to the discussion, but the aggressive argumentativeness is unnecessary. If you have reason to believe that the word stem cells is being used fraudulently (despite it being a well known fact that the skin has many stem cells in general), you should state why you think that.

And if you just think these stem cells wouldn't have the capacity to differentiate into the cells necessary for hair structures, state the reasoning for that.

Most importantly, if you have some insight into the Histogen process that explains why stem cells are uninvolved regardless, why not explain further how it actually works? I am curious myself.

But why not do so without the d*ckishness. We're all p*ssed about hairloss, man. We're your equally unwilling team mates, not your enemy.

[2020]

All these clinical trials have always been on moderate-early stage pattern baldness. Not a single one has shown or done results on slick bald areas, except aderans who's struggling to get anything else other than microscopic hair.

startup company A grows +10% hair on a bald scalp.
startup company B grows +80% more hair on a hairy scalp.

which one do you think looks more impressive and which one do you think will have an easier time getting more money from the investors?

[BoSox]

we need a new interview, a lot of important questions.

[Maradona]

Yes, there are different kinds of stem cells with different names. The difference comes from the variety of cell types that the stem cell can differentiate into. In adults, stem cells typically are partially differentiated, but that is fine. I don't want the stem cells in my scalp to turn into liver cells anyway, I want hair follicles. Whether that is possible for the stem cells in the skin of the scalp is certainly up for debate, or more appropriately, experimental inquiry.

I'm not sure where you're getting that these aren't stem cells. That is a well accepted scientific term for a particular variety of cells. What makes you think he decided to fraudulently misuse the term?

I will agree with you that we should maintain our hair as long as possible just in case, but no one implied not to do that. May I ask who you're arguing with?

I think you need to chill outa little. You certainly are trying to bring a dose of realism to the discussion, but the aggressive argumentativeness is unnecessary. If you have reason to believe that the word stem cells is being used fraudulently (despite it being a well known fact that the skin has many stem cells in general), you should state why you think that.

And if you just think these stem cells wouldn't have the capacity to differentiate into the cells necessary for hair structures, state the reasoning for that.

Most importantly, if you have some insight into the Histogen process that explains why stem cells are uninvolved regardless, why not explain further how it actually works? I am curious myself.

But why not do so without the d*ckishness. We're all p*ssed about hairloss, man. We're your equally unwilling team mates, not your enemy.

what dickness? did i ever insult you? no you just did. In fact, I am trying to help you and I am wasting time helping someone which i don't know. I just saw your post about being confident about "any treatment should work because I still got my stem cells", and I pictured you crying in 5 or 6 years so I told you to research by yourself so that you don't regret it.


You're talking about biology 101, we all know that here. We've been obssesed with baldness for a long time, we are not scientist but we do know more than your average joe . The world of baldness is quite different, it doesn't work as you would expect in your textbooks.

There is simply very few people working on a cure relative to other problems. Most doctors don't know much either, even the ones who work on hair regeneration. You have doctor cole, the leader doctor in HT industry working on hair regeneration after Gho i believe, who was talking down on HISTOGEN like you wouldn't imagine even saying they are SNAKE OIL pictures.

If you want a broken down explanation on histogen either read or wait. I am having finals exams tomorrow and the following week but still i'm taking my time here to save your hair lol...then you call me a dick.

[TrueGround]

Maradona,

I just started frequenting this forum (but have been monitoring others for years) since all the buzz about the "big" future treatments has been become recently heavy. Since getting caught up, I've begun to scan through older posts as well. Every bit of "contribution" I've seen from you so far has been blatantly negative. Call it being realistic, call it whatever you want. But if you want to carry on the way you have been here, you might as well go start your own forum where all the chronic Negative Nancy's around here can all hang out and enjoy perceiving the glass as half empty - if that's what makes you guys feel good or is apparently the preferred means to vent. Not trying to hate on you here or anything, it's just gotten to the point that I can't keep reading a particular individual consistently shell out negativity (intentioned or not) and not say something. It gets insanely old, insanely fast.

Obviously everybody needs to maintain a realistic mindset and set of expectations, in regards to these future treatments. But at the same time, let people f*cking relish in good news if they want to! Nobody can deny that these are truly exciting times in the realm of hair loss treatment.

For instance:

1. I don't think anybody can justify calling Replicel "dead in the water" at this point. Who knows what optimal dosing and allowing more proliferation time will yield. Not to mention, what kind of DHT "shielding" effect the treatment might have on existing terminal hairs. Hell, I really hate referring to mice studies, but they grew hair in freaking foot pads! Replicel's treatment needs A LOT more fine tuning before we can draw conclusions.

2. Histogen = nothing but fantastic news so far, especially compared to pre-existing hair loss treatments. It could very well demonstrate significant efficacy on "slick" bald scalps, or it may not - nobody can say yet.

3. We're now currently aware of a seemingly paramount factor in hair loss, PGD2 up-regulation. If that's the case, an expectation of a highly effective topical or internal treatment coming to market in the near future seems very plausible to me!

Combine all of the aforementioned treatments (if sensible) with a hair transplant, and ANYBODY with ANY degree of hair loss could be able to achieve drastically significant cosmetic results!

Lastly, I don't think anybody here (including 2020) ever recommended not giving a shit any more, dropping your current regimen and letting all your damn hair go because Histogen is the answer..

It's only common sense for all of us to get more serious than ever about maintaining/regrowing as much hair as possible, via whichever means the individual deems effective and safe. The first of these future treatments to become available will (obviously?) be more effective, not to mention, less expensive with more hair before application of the given treatment!

Phew!

[2020]

we need a new interview, a lot of important questions.

like what?

[Maradona]

startup company A grows +10% hair on a bald scalp.
startup company B grows +80% more hair on a hairy scalp.

which one do you think looks more impressive and which one do you think will have an easier time getting more money from the investors?

Both are impressive but unfortunately B will get all the money. That isn't much improvement in 10% if that's all they can get and most investors know that hardcore research will be required to go beyond that and even that will take a long time, they want money FAAAAAAAAAST.

80% in thinning areas is a cure at least for them, so what millions of bald people will miss it but it will be a preventive measure .I'm sure i will miss it but at the end these companies don't care(MPB is not cancer).

At the end it's all about money.

[Maradona]

Maradona,

I just started frequenting this forum (but have been monitoring others for years) since all the buzz about the "big" future treatments has been become recently heavy. Since getting caught up, I've begun to scan through older posts as well. Every bit of "contribution" I've seen from you so far has been blatantly negative. Call it being realistic, call it whatever you want. But if you want to carry on the way you have been here, you might as well go start your own forum where all the chronic Negative Nancy's around here can all hang out and enjoy perceiving the glass as half empty - if that's what makes you guys feel good or is apparently the preferred means to vent. Not trying to hate on you here or anything, it's just gotten to the point that I can't keep reading a particular individual consistently shell out negativity (intentioned or not) and not say something. It gets insanely old, insanely fast.

Obviously everybody needs to maintain a realistic mindset and set of expectations, in regards to these future treatments. But at the same time, let people f*cking relish in good news if they want to! Nobody can deny that these are truly exciting times in the realm of hair loss treatment.

For instance:

1. I don't think anybody can justify calling Replicel "dead in the water" at this point. Who knows what optimal dosing and allowing more proliferation time will yield. Not to mention, what kind of DHT "shielding" effect the treatment might have on existing terminal hairs. Hell, I really hate referring to mice studies, but they grew hair in freaking foot pads! Replicel's treatment needs A LOT more fine tuning before we can draw conclusions.

2. Histogen = nothing but fantastic news so far, especially compared to pre-existing hair loss treatments. It could very well demonstrate significant efficacy on "slick" bald scalps, or it may not - nobody can say yet.

3. We're now currently aware of a seemingly paramount factor in hair loss, PGD2 up-regulation. If that's the case, an expectation of a highly effective topical or internal treatment coming to market in the near future seems very plausible to me!

Combine all of the aforementioned treatments (if sensible) with a hair transplant, and ANYBODY with ANY degree of hair loss could be able to achieve drastically significant cosmetic results!

Lastly, I don't think anybody here (including 2020) ever recommended not giving a shit any more, dropping your current regimen and letting all your damn hair go because Histogen is the answer..

It's only common sense for all of us to get more serious than ever about maintaining/regrowing as much hair as possible, via whichever means the individual deems effective and safe. The first of these future treatments to become available will (obviously?) be more effective, not to mention, less expensive with more hair before application of the given treatment!

Phew!

Hey man i'm being positive. i am just saying that from my experience and in time you will realize too, these treatments are all for early-moderate stage pattern baldness.

Replicel is not dead, it's dead to me because I will have slick bald areas if it ever comes to market. These guys also lied to me, I asked them where they injected the stuff they told me the slick bald temples and they did it in crown thinning areas and did not get even better than minoxidil. Replicel will benefit women and diffuse thinners in some way i am certainly sure of that, making their min hair DHT resistant.

I'll be back tomorrow.

[yeahyeahyeah]

Hey man i'm being positive. i am just saying that from my experience and in time you will realize too, these treatments are all for early-moderate stage pattern baldness.

Replicel is not dead, it's dead to me because I will have slick bald areas if it ever comes to market. These guys also lied to me, I asked them where they injected the stuff they told me the slick bald temples and they did it in crown thinning areas and did not get even better than minoxidil. Replicel will benefit women and diffuse thinners in some way i am certainly sure of that, making their min hair DHT resistant.

I'll be back tomorrow.

You are a NW2 and are in your mid twenties.
Has it ever occured to you that you may just be developing a mature hairline?

Which yes, is hairloss, but stays stable for decades before thinning/receeding further.
By which point you should be able to take advantage of future treatments.

Honestly, I feel sorry for guys with aggressive loss in their teens if anything.

[2020]

I'm sure it will work for bald spots it's just that it would probably take a lot more injections to get the desired density.... It worked for women, why wouldn't it work for men?
If hair from a follicle is not visible, doesn't mean that the follicle is dead. In my opinion, follicles never really die.
You have MILLIONS of follicles all over your body so just because they're not producing hair at this moment, doesn't mean that it won't later in your life.... What makes you think hair follicles are any different?

[yeahyeahyeah]

I'm sure it will work for bald spots it's just that it would probably take a lot more injections to get the desired density.... It worked for women, why wouldn't it work for men?
If hair from a follicle is not visible, doesn't mean that the follicle is dead. In my opinion, follicles never really die.
You have MILLIONS of follicles all over your body so just because they're not producing hair at this moment, doesn't mean that it won't later in your life.... What makes you think hair follicles are any different?

2020 the honest truth is NOBODY KNOWS.

I'm sure histogen has thought about this shit. If they are smart enough to grow hair, then why doubt their expertise?

People are getting dramatic on here, because they are desperate.

[25 going on 65]

I'm sure it will work for bald spots it's just that it would probably take a lot more injections to get the desired density.... It worked for women, why wouldn't it work for men?

I don't think they've shown that it works on slick bald areas for anyone, man or woman.
I'm not saying it can't work, just that they haven't shown us they can do it yet.