follicept - what's this?

[follicept]

Thanks! We are looking into EMA as well- assuming we are treated the same as ny FDA (which is usually more stringent anyway) we will proceed with sales in Europe.

[Sogeking]

Thanks! We are looking into EMA as well- assuming we are treated the same as ny FDA (which is usually more stringent anyway) we will proceed with sales in Europe.

Thanks. Word of advice: members here can be rather aggressive. Plenty of respected hair loss researchers came and went because of it. My suggestion: go dark 'till you have the results.
Then be prepared .

[Swooping]

THAT is why we are different. www.PrometheonPharma.com core technology is the transdermal delivery of large peptides. That is what is unique here. We have done insulin at 6kDa, IGF-1 at 7.5kDa, and hGH at 22k Da. We don't know the upper limit yet- vaccines, gene therapy, chemotherapeutics? This application for hair regrowth is what surprised us during studying insulin, and then further surprised by the way the FDA will handle it. I assure you, we have a handle on transdermal delivery. And systemic delivery has been the challenge with IGF-1- enough to get to the follicles, and you get side effects. Little enough to avoid side effects, and you don't get growth. Our transdermal technology allows these large molecules across the skin right where they are delivered. So yes, some will get systemic, which has been shown to be safe at the 1-10ppm range we are using, but also since it is local, it will get right to the follicles. Make sense? Again, more info on the underlying technology at www.box.com/ppncts. Feel free to explore. If you have any questions, let me know.

Thing is you don't want transdermal delivery at all. A miniaturized hair follicle bulb lies around 2mm~, a fully terminal hair follicle around 4mm~ depth. You want precise delivery of IGF-1 to the hair follicle bulb, specifically the DP. Meaning these nano-formulations of IGF-1, dermarolling + igf-1 and injections + igf-1 already handle this problem, to deliver adequate active IGF-1 to the place where it matters. Your formulation won't be better at all. Simple as that. So no it doesn't make sense.

The delivery isn't a problem, the problem is that IGF-1 just isn't magical and will never be.

[diffuseloser]

Thank you for this information. Personally, I'm excited and you do seem very genuine. Looking forward to seeing what develops from this. Thanks again.

[follicept]

Thanks. Word of advice: members here can be rather aggressive. Plenty of respected hair loss researchers came and went because of it. My suggestion: go dark 'till you have the results.
Then be prepared .

I'm learning that! Haha thanks. Will keep you all updated.

[follicept]

Thank you for this information. Personally, I'm excited and you do seem very genuine. Looking forward to seeing what develops from this. Thanks again.

Thanks! We are too, and will keep you all posted.

[sdsurfin]

Thanks. Word of advice: members here can be rather aggressive. Plenty of respected hair loss researchers came and went because of it. My suggestion: go dark 'till you have the results.
Then be prepared .

Also a lot if knuckleheads and pseudo scientists on here. That guy swooping is also trying to claim he knows more about pgd2 theory than upenn and kythera and that they are also just wasting people's' time, even though highly respected researchers are pursuing it. My advice for follicept is stay off these forums, but try to use spencer kobren for marketing once you have proven data. I also recommend you hire a hair specialist to take close up photography of before and after, I find that even with an iPhone on flash you can easily see miniaturized hair close up.

And swooping: it's "systemic"

[follicept]

Thing is you don't want transdermal delivery at all. A miniaturized hair follicle bulb lies around 2mm~, a fully terminal hair follicle around 4mm~ depth. You want precise delivery of IGF-1 to the hair follicle bulb, specifically the DP. Meaning these nano-formulations of IGF-1, dermarolling + igf-1 and injections + igf-1 already handle this problem, to deliver adequate active IGF-1 to the place where it matters. Your formulation won't be better at all. Simple as that. So no it doesn't make sense.

The delivery method was never a problem, the problem is that IGF-1 just isn't magical and will never be.

Fair enough. I am on the business side. I will leave the science to our science team. Agree to disagree, I suppose. Check back in several weeks for results. We'll either prove you wrong, or admit we are- including publishing negative results. Either way, we are doing this the right way, and hope to have a solution for everyone.

[follicept]

Also a lot if knuckleheads and pseudo scientists on here. That guy swooping is also trying to claim he knows more about pgd2 theory than upenn and kythera and that they are also just wasting people's' time, even though highly respected researchers are pursuing it. My advice for follicept is stay off these forums, but try to use spencer kobren for marketing once you have proven data. I also recommend you hire a hair specialist to take close up photography of before and after, I find that even with an iPhone on flash you can easily see miniaturized hair close up.

And swooping: it's "systemic"

Thanks for the tips! Yeah, like I just mentioned to him, I will leave the science to scientists, and do my part to get the word out there and build the business side of a strong product for those who need it. Time will tell. We are working on the study design now, and definitely need to get consistent picture taking, thanks for the advice. Though, with this, it should be a pretty darn clear all-or-nothing response.

[Swooping]

Fair enough. I am on the business side. I will leave the science to our science team. Agree to disagree, I suppose. Check back in several weeks for results. We'll either prove you wrong, or admit we are- including publishing negative results. Either way, we are doing this the right way, and hope to have a solution for everyone.

Yeah sure. Mission impossible I'm telling you right away. Luckily many people already laugh at this. By the way I'm going to buy muscletech their products now cause they outperform testosterone injections in lean mass . Has been proven in trials.

After that I'm going to buy keratene retard because that is equal to finasteride in clinical trials http://www.alopezie-webshop.de/shops...atene-reta.pdf.


After all this clinical trial has been done in cooperation with a university in brussel. I think everyone should lay off the finasteride. Haha.. Well at least I do think you are smart though, if you know what I mean. I'll give you that.

[follicept]

Yeah sure. Mission impossible I'm telling you right away. Luckily many people already laugh at this. By the way I'm going to buy muscletech their products now cause they outperform testosterone injections in lean mass . Has been proven in trials.

After that I'm going to buy keratene retard because that is equal to finasteride in clinical trials http://www.alopezie-webshop.de/shops...atene-reta.pdf.


After all this clinical trial has been done in cooperation with a university in brussel. I think everyone should lay off the finasteride. Haha.. Well at least I do think you are smart though. I'll give you that.

Well thanks for all the time you have taken. Means a lot that we mean so much to you. Hope to give you a product that works very soon, or a public apology with negative results published. Either way, you win. Why not root for the underdog?

[Swooping]

Also a lot if knuckleheads and pseudo scientists on here. That guy swooping is also trying to claim he knows more about pgd2 theory than upenn and kythera and that they are also just wasting people's' time, even though highly respected researchers are pursuing it. My advice for follicept is stay off these forums, but try to use spencer kobren for marketing once you have proven data. I also recommend you hire a hair specialist to take close up photography of before and after, I find that even with an iPhone on flash you can easily see miniaturized hair close up.

And swooping: it's "systemic"

I never claimed to know more than these scientists dumbass. At least I always provide legitimate evidence based on facts whereas you do nothing but think with your lowish IQ which equals to a baboon.

[unbalding]

Fair enough. I am on the business side. I will leave the science to our science team. Agree to disagree, I suppose. Check back in several weeks for results. We'll either prove you wrong, or admit we are- including publishing negative results. Either way, we are doing this the right way, and hope to have a solution for everyone.

I'm curious what gave your group the idea to try IGF-1 with your transdermal delivery method to regrow hair?

[EXprettyboy]

Why do people who are bothered by hair loss, go on a 'cutting edge' treatment forum online, wait for news on the latest treatments....

....and then whenever news does come of potential future treatments, with experts who have devoted themselves to developing them being willing to communicate openly with us,

They take the opportunity to shit on it...?

If you don't have any faith in new treatments, why are you here?
If you do, then this is an awesome situation. The kind of situation I presume most on here are waiting for.

Maybe it's the modest ego trip one gets from playing the armchair scientist for an anonymous crowd.

[Swooping]

Well thanks for all the time you have taken. Means a lot that we mean so much to you. Hope to give you a product that works very soon, or a public apology with negative results published. Either way, you win. Why not root for the underdog?

There won't be any negative results, even if the outcome is negative. We both know that. Anyway, I do appreciate you came here. Thanks.