Histogen - fake images?

[crafter]

They did perform two different clinical trials, they completed one pilot study with 24 patients and the most recent phase I/II clinical trial with 56 patients.

You guys really need to stop looking for failure.

but they're the same photos so it must be from the same trial?

I hope someone can contact them.

[JJJJrS]

Whether you like Iron_Man or not, he did a good job exposing these pictures long ago.

If you look at the second picture (S1016) and actually do a hair count, you'll notice that there's hardly any difference at all between the before and after. Nothing even close to the numbers they have listed beside the picture. If anyone doesn't believe this, then try counting the hairs for yourself.

The hair pattern/direction for the first picture (S2018) doesn't even seem to match either.

It's disappointing that Histogen continues to use the same controversial pictures. I personally would not get my hopes up with them until they show us something conclusive, which they haven't been able to do up to this point.

[hellouser]

Thread title is misleading.

The photos are not fake. However, the photos ARE the same. My main problem with the pictures is the fact that they did not SCALE the images, but rather resized and stretched them. The photos are definitely one and the same, I just had a look through photoshop (took the bottom photo, cut it out, placed overtop the top photo and resized until it fit).

Photos should never be tampered like that.

Those numbers however probably reflect updated results. Still good in my opinion.

[rdawg]

It's disappointing that Histogen continues to use the same controversial pictures. I personally would not get my hopes up with them until they show us something conclusive, which they haven't been able to do up to this point.

[Desmond84]

Look at those pictures



Same Subject (s1016) same period of time (12 weeks) different hair count and terminal count numbers??????????????

LOL....well this is awkward!

[Arashi]

Yeah this sure looks fishy. If all 3 variables were higher it could be explained by the fact that one was measured as 3 months and the other for example at 3 months and 10 days. However hair count and terminal hairs are higher in the second, while thickness is actually lower in that second one. That makes no sense. Either they made a mistake, which would be extremely embarrassing the least, making mistakes with such an important case, or they're blatantly lying.

Good find !

[Kiwi]

you're so stupid Sciencetalk, it's embarassing. First you opened a thread calling everyone else idiot because you couldn't understand the difference between the average of a set of data points and a single data points; now you open a thread to tell us that a 1% variation in the data might be the indication of them cheating with their figures.

Obviously, they may have done further analysis and corrected that number as it there is a margin of error when using a computer to count hairs.

One thing is a 30% difference, another is a 1% difference.

I'm with you man. Histogen are raising MILLIONS of dollars. Are invited to talk at prestigious events. And they are doing deals.

Wow. And nobody noticed they were just faking. The investors obviously didn't think due dillagance was necessary. The pharma company they just did a deal with don't actuàlly employ scientists they hire wombals and put them in lab coats and do whatever the wombals tell them to do.

Anyway it must be a mistake. Good on the new guy for spotting it but jumping to conclusions like this does make the new guy stupid.

Just say'n...

[greatjob!]

With all of the jumping to conclusions going on around here I'm starting to think this guy runs tbt:

[ihavebeenchosenithasbegun]

Man, it's impressively crazy how we're stuck with just fin. Damn, sucks being chained up by R&D. Gods knows when this will end. Of all the places you lose hair naturally, it had to be up there!!!

[DesperateOne]

Man, it's impressively crazy how we're stuck with just fin. Damn, sucks being chained up by R&D. Gods knows when this will end. Of all the places you lose hair naturally, it had to be up there!!!

Lol I know, imagine it was only in the pubic area. female pattern baldness would affect woman in a Brazilian wax pattern haha, every girl would want that disease. Us for us, we wouldn't need to trim it. But of course, that would be none sense to actually get a gene to help us.

[Kiwi]

Lol I know, imagine it was only in the pubic area. female pattern baldness would affect woman in a Brazilian wax pattern haha, every girl would want that disease. Us for us, we wouldn't need to trim it. But of course, that would be none sense to actually get a gene to help us.

lol - I err like a bit of hair down there myself :P

[MackJames]

lol - I err like a bit of hair down there myself :P

Ditto

[Scientalk56]

.........

.........