Tweet
Id love to see Replicel and HSC injected together and then 6 month results.
-
-
UK, my point is that you don't need to grow anything.... everything is already there but for some reason refuse to grow. Follicles shrink and enlarge themselves automatically due to your body's own natural growth factors.
HSC may be able to emulate what stem cells are doing, but what's the point if it will last two years or so since stem cells still refuse to work like that automaticallyComment
-
No, we can't be sure they haven't created new follicles. But whether they have or haven't it's pretty obviously not the main reason for increased hair count, because the areas tested were not missing follicles in the first place.
2020 said: "so far Histogen was only able to grow BRAND NEW FOLLICLES in VITRO... from the past two studies they still weren't able to confirm if HSC did in fact grow any new follicles."
You said: "So how do you explain the difference in hair count from baseline to 12 weeks in BOTH studies? "
Simple: revitalised follicles = longer anagen = more hairs growing at any one time = increased hair count.
Anyway, sounds like we are in agreement now that that has been clarified.
Hurry up Histogen. Give us some more results to argue about.Comment
-
Pate, when you say the areas tested were not missing follicles, does that mean the areas were not "balding" areas to begin with? Or is that to say that the follicles were merely dormant in balding areas and were revitalized?Comment
-
I did indeed question why there was a higher hair count, but I did not offer an absolute conclusion, it would be silly for me to stipulate with 100% certainty that new follicles were the reason for the higher hair count, but the hair count continued to increase right up to 12 months.
Now you can explain this by saying more follicles were simply revitalised in that period, but you can't outright deny the possibility of HSC inducing the growth of new hair follicles, can you? Yes/No?
My entire point to you & 2020 is that you MUST recognise the probability that new hair follicles were created during the two trials, especially given that the actual scientists who actually conducted the research do BELIEVE new hair follicles grew.Comment
-
Pate, I dont understand your comment about "the fear of HSC creating new follicles due to density of follicles in the scalp".
Do you have the same fear for companies like Aderans and Replicel?Comment
-
Im excited about HSC. But I must say, the results theyve made public so far are still very vague. Not that its important what we think, given their priority right now is investment.
Not long before we know more.Comment
-
you people still don't get it.... eventually you will be a NW6 right? The rest of the hair will start thinning too right? How are you planning to keep up with the CYCLING? not talking about density, I'm talking about CYCLING.
If you want some temporary hair there already are compounds that can regrow you that and that's my point - why do all this research if this is just another "boost" and not an actual reversal of a condition? Why go through all those clinical phases? I understand why Replicel and Aderans have to go but in the case of Histogen I don't. They're either wasting time or hiding something from usComment
-
not my point. If it's true that HSC results are temporary and they're not actually reversing MPB then they're wasting time and money. Temporary COSMETIC improvements don't need to go through those FDA phases I don't know why they're doing that then.
You want temporary hair? There you go:
why wait for Histogen then?Comment
Comment