Something to consider about Follica and others.

[hellouser]

If they are using chemicals that are already known to be safe and don't need any further testing I don't see why they could not just do I big trial with a few hundred participants at different doses and some with more injections down the line and see what gives the results they are after, I know its abit like, throw it all and see what sticks but would that not just work,

All this is assuming they have something that works and are going to brig it to market, if they do you will see plane fulls of bald headed single men on their way to them

FDA is not so lenient, so they have to abide by their rules. Ultimately, they are the gatekeepers.

However, dosing of chemicals will be the biggest hurdle in terms of TIME;

Suppose you want to test the chemicals are different doses... well, in that case you need to take into account finding patients willing to go in for trials, have the procedure done, then wait for the follicles to develop and then for them to grow. Who knows how long it takes but I wouldn't expect anything less than a full hair growth cycle; 5 months.

So... yeah, the trials probably take a while to complete. Hair grows slow and you need to wait for it grow and go through a cycle before its 100% certain the method works.

[joely]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...two-years.html

they have been talking with major drug companies to sell their technology to. one thing to take from this is that their technology really works. looking at the patents, puretech pipeline, and news headlines, it can be said they are really close. don't know why people come here to say it is far when we have all these signs that points to a close launch. I might be wrong but i'd rather believe what is obvious instead of hoping for the worst.

I don't think that their PGD2 is going to be the cure we are all after though, plus this article was from August 2012 that's over a year and a half ago, surely if it worked that well somebody would have snapped that up and released it don't really know how long it takes for that stuff to go through especially in countries where the FDA are the World Police,

Don't get me wrong im not after n argument no one wants a cure more than old joely over here, but we know next to nothing about how well it works or when/if it will be released. Hopefully as Hellouser says Desmond may be able to speak to them at WHC next week and get something from them

[hgs1989]

That's the PGD2 by Dr. Cotsarelis, its separate form Follica's wounding method.

Cotsarelis founded follica. yes the PGD2 is not a cure. but I think it many can benefit from this discovery (if it works) because he has already said that it inhibits hair from growing longer. the wounding technique might be combined with a pgd2 antagonist to make the hair grow longer. don't know what they will have for us but it is close unless otherwise is shown by them ,any piece of news, official announcement or lack of any progress is shown by them like the years between 2008 and 2012. you don't talk to big company about a product that doesn't work.

[hellouser]

Cotsarelis founded follica. yes the PGD2 is not a cure. but I think it many can benefit from this discovery (if it works) because he has already said that it inhibits hair from growing longer.

It's not about PGD2 inhibiting from hair growing longer... its about it inhibiting from growing hair thats thick and doesnt miniaturize over time to the point of not growing at all.

PGD2 is an unknown venture. A lot of guys tried OC000XXX whatever the hell the rest of the number is, along with crush claritin and the likes in various vehicles. Some guys said it caused a shed, others said it stabilized hair loss. Regardless, of the discovery of PGD2 affecting follicles, there hasn't been any news from Dr. Cotsarelis on the matter since it was made public 2 years ago. We have nothing else to go by on the matter.

the wounding technique might be combined with a pgd2 antagonist to make the hair grow longer.

Follica has already stated it is able to create NEW follicles via wounding method. PGD2 inhibitor will be rendered useless unless you want to hang on to hair thats susceptible to miniaturizing and be on a topical treatment after a treatment from Follica. Personally, I'd just get Follica's treatment whenever I notice loss and forget about topicals.

don't know what they will have for us but it is close unless otherwise is shown by them ,any piece of news, official announcement or lack of any progress is shown by them like the years between 2008 and 2012. you don't talk to big company about a product that doesn't work.

I don't think there is a 'big company' that we knoe of that is working on a solution for a PGD2 inhibitor. All we know is that Dr. Cotsarelis made the discovery and flapped his gums about a potential product in 2 years. Take everything he says with a grain of salt because he's a known attentionwhore as he's spewed out these '2-5 years' promises before many years ago and theres still nothing on the market.

Of course, a PGD2 inhibitor this year if released would be phenomenal; HT for me and I get on the meds and I'm done right now. But... thats just me being hopeful... and we all know hope has done jackshit for all of us thus far.

[hgs1989]

It's not about PGD2 inhibiting from hair growing longer... its about it inhibiting from growing hair thats thick and doesnt miniaturize over time to the point of not growing at all.

PGD2 is an unknown venture. A lot of guys tried OC000XXX whatever the hell the rest of the number is, along with crush claritin and the likes in various vehicles. Some guys said it caused a shed, others said it stabilized hair loss. Regardless, of the discovery of PGD2 affecting follicles, there hasn't been any news from Dr. Cotsarelis on the matter since it was made public 2 years ago. We have nothing else to go by on the matter.



Follica has already stated it is able to create NEW follicles via wounding method. PGD2 inhibitor will be rendered useless unless you want to hang on to hair thats susceptible to miniaturizing and be on a topical treatment after a treatment from Follica. Personally, I'd just get Follica's treatment whenever I notice loss and forget about topicals.



I don't think there is a 'big company' that we knoe of that is working on a solution for a PGD2 inhibitor. All we know is that Dr. Cotsarelis made the discovery and flapped his gums about a potential product in 2 years. Take everything he says with a grain of salt because he's a known attentionwhore as he's spewed out these '2-5 years' promises before many years ago and theres still nothing on the market.

Of course, a PGD2 inhibitor this year if released would be phenomenal; HT for me and I get on the meds and I'm done right now. But... thats just me being hopeful... and we all know hope has done jackshit for all of us thus far.

PGD2 yes inhibit hair from being thick. this is taken from a patent by follica:
" A method for treating baldness in a human subject, wherein the method comprises: a) integumental perturbation of an area of the bald scalp of the human subject; b) administering a hair growth promoting agent, wherein, at 3 months after the integumental perturbation, the area of the scalp of the subject has at least 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, or at least 100% more vellus hair compared to immediately before the integumental perturbation."
and from the same patent
"In particular aspects, the methods of integumental perturbation are accompanied by administration of a pharmaceutical composition comprising an agent that promotes the transition of vellus hair to terminal hair"

I guess the hair that they prduced is vellus and they need PGD2 antagonist to promote transition from vellus to terminal as they did with the mice. the wounded the mice, applied pgd2 agonist to some and inhibited it in other. the mice which had pgd2 suppressed had more growth and the hair was terminal.

as for the guys who tried anti histamine drugs or others topically, follica mentioned in a patent ;I provided a link to previously; certain azthma drug as a potential topical treatment. the guys who tried have ordered it from an online provider which we don't know what is in the container(a scam maybe) . and don't compare people on a forum trying stuff to ivy league Ph.D's. no offense to anybody but clearly many of us are not with the same level as those guys.
I don't care if follica didn't come up with the treatment. the problem is why neglecting signs from Olle and other news articles that says they are close? yes, Cots mentioned a 5 years timeline before in 2007 or 2008. guess what? he is late but still close.

[hellouser]

Interesting (old) article on Follica:

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/special-reports/emerging-drug-developer-follica

That insight - using an abrasive procedure on the skin and then treating it with reformulated compounds -- was enough to get Follica launched in 2006. At the beginning of this year, PureTech helped round up $5.5 million for the start-up's Series A and an $11 million round followed earlier this month. Interwest Partners was one of the original investors and Polaris Venture Partners led the second round.

^That suggests that Cotsarelis has been sitting on a cure for at least the last 8 years and trials have been going on for nearly that long. If, as they say, the added compounds are known and safe compounds, there should be no reason for Follica to take '17 years' as other drugs take. For example, when finasteride was approved for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia back in the early 90s, it was QUICKLY approved as a hair loss treatment only 2 or 3 years later. Given that they've been at it for so many years, I cannot see it dragging on for another 10 years.

And a recent article on Follica from last year:

http://www.hairtodaytheretomorrow.com/follica-cure-for-baldness/

Bernat Olle, Follica co-founder and PureTech principal, says that the skin-perturbation procedure isn’t painful, but that the area could be numbed anyway. He adds that in both preclinical and clinical trials, “we’ve been able to consistently show that we create substantial new hair follicles in humans, and that’s something that no other approach in hair loss as far as I am aware has been able to achieve.

The new hair follicles are said to have functioned normally, cycled through the normal stages of hair growth and exhibited normal architecture, including a full complement of stem cells.”

^Thats promising. I wish we knew what they're using for generating new follicles.

[gainspotter]

Damn I hope they hurry up and get this on shelves!!

[joely]

They have stated pretty much that their method works i.e constantly growing new follicles.

The big question every one wants to know is "WHEN" can we have it

[JDW]

Cone on Follica we're all rooting for you! bring it home, give us the next positive stage news!

[JJJJrS]

^Thats promising. I wish we knew what they're using for generating new follicles.

They have stated pretty much that their method works i.e constantly growing new follicles.

The big question every one wants to know is "WHEN" can we have it

If they were consistently generating new follicles then they would share the pictures. The fact that they haven't provided any documented evidence tells me all I need to know. That doesn't mean they won't come up with something interesting in the future, but at this very moment, I doubt they have anything to get too excited about.

[Pate]

If they were consistently generating new follicles then they would share the pictures. The fact that they haven't provided any documented evidence tells me all I need to know. That doesn't mean they won't come up with something interesting in the future, but at this very moment, I doubt they have anything to get too excited about.

If this was Histogen or Replicel I would agree, but Follica is different. They have no need to provide pics because they are privately funded, and they have ALWAYS been super secretive.

So not releasing pics totally fits with Follica's way of doing things. They are not trying to promote a product or draw investors like the others.

[hellouser]

If this was Histogen or Replicel I would agree, but Follica is different. They have no need to provide pics because they are privately funded, and they have ALWAYS been super secretive.

So not releasing pics totally fits with Follica's way of doing things. They are not trying to promote a product or draw investors like the others.

This is true. Hell, they're so damn secretive we have absolutely NO idea what their protocol is like. At least with Histogen we know what they're using for injections. Follica? No information... just speculations about lithium, FGF-9 and that's pretty much it.

I'm fairly sure they're going about it like KFC and their fried chicken recipe; nobody has a clue and nobody will have a clue of how its done. Daphne Zohar (head of Puretech Ventures) even said in an interview she cant say what the chemicals are used for treatment.

[hellouser]

Another article on Follica, this one I found via Daphne Zohar's twitter account;

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/37149/title/A-Hair-Raising-Solution-/

“Very little is known about the mechanism of hair follicle neogenesis besides the Wnt family, so the discovery of Fgf9 was very important,” says Luis Garza, a dermatologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine who has previously collaborated with Cotsarelis but was not involved in this research. “There are probably a whole panoply of agents which control regeneration,” but this study demonstrates Fgf9’s potential as a baldness therapy.

The next step is to test the effects of Fgf9 on human skin in xenograft models and then in the clinic. “If results hold up in humans, we could expect a several-fold increase in new follicles beyond what we were already accomplishing,” says Olle.

And BAM, Garza's comments in regards to Follica are speculation and nothing more than that. But the rest of the stuff in the quoted content above is equally interesting.

[Thinning87]

This is a good article actually because it tells us precisely where they are. They were supposed to basically begin testing the fgf9 theory in more depth on humans and see how that fared.

It has now been 364 days since they publicly said "we have been able to consistently create new follicles". In the meantime, they patented some kind of device (and all inventions stemming from this technique) to create follicles. At the same time, we found out from Desmond that the situation might not be so great, with the need for financing of $20 million for a hair cure product. That's probably what it would take to carry on with tests on fgf9.

Just speculation on my part, but if we put together all the pieces of the puzzle I think it really makes sense.