follicept - what's this?

[Helix]

This is not about IGF-1 it is more about carbohydrate metabolism in hair follicles. I thought it might be useful. I am convinced that overcoming insulin resistance at hair follicle level is the key. Sorry for the large images, I couldn't find the studies in other form.

[Johnny2000]

1. Hopefully within a month or two. They've received the IGF-1 shipment and were waiting on other ingredients. If all went well, Devon and co. started their personal trials today. Papers suggested that results may be visible after 12 days, but we don't know much.

2. They want it out by the end of the year.

3. To buy from Denmark? Or to have it shipped to Denmark? At any rate, we don't know.

4. They said they don't expect a shed, but again, we won't know until they test it.

Thx mate 😉

[Arashi]

There is no article stating that IGF-1 grows tons of new follicles. IGF-1 has never been tested for that purpose or been tested the way follicept is using it, except by dr. hsu on mice that are meant to mimic bald human skin.

Ok, so all you have is that it works on mice (like pretty much everything works on mice, however not on us humans). And like Swooping posted, on humans high IGF-1 levels are usually associated with hair LOSS, not hair growth.

So if people would approach all this with: "I dont know if this works, but it will be interesting to see this", then we'd be all fine. Yet this topic is filled with people who already KNOW 99.9% sure this will work, or even GUARANTEE that growthfactors like this can grow new hair (your own words). And all that is exactly why hairloss fora are THE ideal place for people to come to, who have less than honest idea's on how to make money.

Take a step back, have some scepticsim towards all new treatments that are being presented here 3 times a year, till we see proof that's worth believing.

[serenemoon]

Ok, so all you have is that it works on mice (like pretty much everything works on mice, however not on us humans). And like Swooping posted, on humans high IGF-1 levels are usually associated with hair LOSS, not hair growth.

So if people would approach all this with: "I dont know if this works, but it will be interesting to see this", then we'd be all fine. Yet this topic is filled with people who already KNOW 99.9% sure this will work, or even GUARANTEE that growthfactors like this can grow new hair (your own words). And all that is exactly why hairloss fora are THE ideal place for people to come to, who have less than honest idea's on how to make money.

Take a step back, have some scepticsim towards all new treatments that are being presented here 3 times a year, till we see proof that's worth believing.

You are right that none of us can guarantee that this treatment can work.

In terms of high IGF-1 levels and hair loss, here you go.

"All of these studies are retrospective case-control association studies. They are looking at associations from a database of information that includes whether individuals have AGA and whether they have IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 levels. Association studies are not evidence of causation. Only prospective studies specifically designed to answer the question address causation. This is a basic principle in epidemiology. Retrospective studies are convenient to do and often provide the impetus to do prospective studies to provide evidence for causation. They are also subject to many kinds of bias, which is one of the reasons why they are not considered as definitive evidence for causation.

A good example to illustrate this principle is an outstanding retrospective association study that controls extensively for bias, which clearly demonstrates that hypoglycemia in persons with diabetes on insulin therapy is "associated" with death. Even in this landmark study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which is the basis for recommendations by every diabetes association in every country to avoid hypoglycemia, the authors were very careful to point out that it may not be hypoglycemia itself that causes death. It may be a surrogate marker for death. One way to think about this is that "A" (hypoglycemia) may be associated with but not directly be the cause of "C" (death). "A" may correlate with the actual cause of death ('B'), which is not yet known.

Thus, low IGFBP-3 and high free IGF-1 levels in blood ("A") may be found to be associated with AGA ("C"), but this is not the same as saying high IGF-1 causes AGA, since they may correlate with the actual mediator of AGA ("B"), which may not yet be clearly established.

The concentration of IGF-1 in Follicept is about the same or lower than normal free IGF-1 levels based on age (children have the highest levels because they need it for normal growth) and about the same target blood level for IGF-1 hormone replacement in children with congenital IGF-1 deficiency. The high levels in children, teens, and young adults are physiologic and are not associated with hair loss. Follicept contains a physiologic concentration of IGF-1 that it delivers across the skin to the dermal papilla where IGF-1 receptors are expressed." - Devon.

[NOhairNOlife]

I don't know if any of you have seen this video by a company called nanogen, it seems they are trying to do exactly what follicept is accomplishing. But I can't see that they(nanogen) went anywhere with it.

watch the whole thing but at around 3 minutes 40 seconds is where they show exactly what follicept is trying to accomplish:

https://youtu.be/aWK6qJFvWoM

[Arashi]

the authors were very careful to point out that it may not be hypoglycemia itself that causes death. It may be a surrogate marker for death. One way to think about this is that "A" (hypoglycemia) may be associated with but not directly be the cause of "C" (death). "A" may correlate with the actual cause of death ('B'), which is not yet known.

And then look at AGA, which is even a MUCH MUCH MUCH more complicated process that we're not even close to understanding. Yet, a single growth factor, that's been tested and tried for years would all of a sudden be the solution, because of their magical new way of delivering it ? It just seems HIGHLY unlikely that's all.

All I'm saying: take a step back, have some sceptiscim towards all these new treatments and cures, till we'll see some proof we can actually trust.

[kantian]

Ok, so all you have is that it works on mice (like pretty much everything works on mice, however not on us humans). And like Swooping posted, on humans high IGF-1 levels are usually associated with hair LOSS, not hair growth.

So if people would approach all this with: "I dont know if this works, but it will be interesting to see this", then we'd be all fine. Yet this topic is filled with people who already KNOW 99.9% sure this will work, or even GUARANTEE that growthfactors like this can grow new hair (your own words). And all that is exactly why hairloss fora are THE ideal place for people to come to, who have less than honest idea's on how to make money.

Take a step back, have some scepticsim towards all new treatments that are being presented here 3 times a year, till we see proof that's worth believing.

I agree with this completely. The most reasonable thing that has been said in this forum.

I do think we should continue doing the research and giving reasons why IGF-1 will or will not work. But some people here are too confident, and putting too much hope into something that has very little evidence so far.

[serenemoon]

And then look at AGA, which is even a MUCH MUCH MUCH more complicated process that we're not even close to understanding. Yet, a single growth factor, that's been tested and tried for years would all of a sudden be the solution, because of their magical new way of delivering it ? It just seems HIGHLY unlikely that's all.

All I'm saying: take a step back, have some sceptiscim till we'll see some proof we can actually trust.

IGF-1 may be a single growth factor, but may cause a CHAIN of other growth factors and hair friendly mechanisms to be activated, that may make a bigger impact than we think a "single growth factor" can do.

For an example, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3283847/

Shows that IGF-1 also upregulates PDGF-1 and PDGF-2 (also growth factors) and has beneficial effects on hair. So there you go, a single growth factor may be able to do a lot, but on the other hand, it may not be able to make much of a difference. We will see. And of course, I have no arguments against the fact that a healthy amount of skepticism is necessary. Even Devon has admitted that this may not work. So there you go.

[Swooping]

@Serenemoon

It's not only these studies, that is actually the worst evidence I provided. It was just to create a nuance to show that papers can contradict itself. I knew beforehand that plasma levels of IGF-1 don't have any contribution to the pathology of Androgenetic Alopecia (AGA), or don't even have impact on it. Why?

We can extrapolate real observational evidence of people with Laronn Syndrome and Acrogemaly. The former condition is characterized by a huge deficiency of IGF-1. The latter is characterized by huge elevated concentrations of IGF-1. Yet both can suffer from AGA. From the most pictures that I saw people with Laronn Syndrome have awesome hair even at an old age though.

If IGF-1 plasma levels would have an huge impact upstream in the cascade of AGA we would at least see some evidence of something occurring in one of those conditions. For instance that people with Acrogemaly would be pretty "immune" to AGA. Yet we don't see any of that happening, especially in relation to the FOXO1 hypothesis of Prometheon Pharma.

Even more important; how can plasma levels of IGF-1 even have influence on AGA? It has been confirmed for ages that the cascade of AGA starts with androgens which subsequently bind to the androgen receptors (AR) in the dermal papilla. Therefore any receptors on the dermal papilla itself don't have any influence on AGA, other than the AR. Remove the AR and no AGA can occur. It starts with AR and goes downstream. Nobody can deny this period. If we would deny this we may just as well re-write all our literature on AGA.

Now may there be some paracrine mediating action going from the dermal papilla in relation IGF-1? Surely that's true, after all the hair follicle is a mini-organ and it secretes IGF-1 itself, just like the liver does in way bigger amount. What is this paracrine action? Nobody knows, literally nobody. We don't even have biological models to measure such an action. Perhaps it secretes IGF-1 solely for the matrix cells in some fashionable complex cell to cell communication (anecdote example).

Is this paracrine mediating action of IGF-1 from the dermal papilla important in the micro-environment itself? Maybe. Who knows maybe complete ablation of it would indeed retard hair growth.

However will IGF-1 now be beneficial in relation to AGA? Most likely not. Jup it may shift the telogen/anagen ratio as telogen hair follicles itself are sensitive to environmental stimuli specifically growth factors (2014, re-defining telogen) and are easily induced into anagen.

How many growth factors, cytokines, proteins do AAPE have and Histogen do you think who are both actually even derived from real human source, not e.coli? Easily 50+. That with the fact that IGF-1 has been around for ages. Doctors have tried injecting it, it's been present in various cosmetics in the same range of 1-10PPM and still is.

Then Prometheon Pharma can only throw to me that they have a "better vehicle". That the "magic" lies in their delivery method. REALLY?

It's really almost ignorant to think that IGF-1 will do much at all, you don't even want to know how complex the pathology of AGA as has been shown by latest research papers. You think it's this easy? Let me tell you it's not.

[serenemoon]

@Swooping,

About plasma levels of IGF-1 not having an impact, this is pretty much what Devon mentioned anyway, that they don't see any proof that a clear causation effect has been established.

I reaize that you are very confident that Follicept will most likely not be beneficial. Let's see what happens. I really can't wait for these trials to start now

[cr1mson]

@Serenemoon

It's not only these studies, that is actually the worst evidence I provided. It was just to create a nuance to show that papers can contradict itself. I knew beforehand that plasma levels of IGF-1 don't have any contribution to the pathology of Androgenetic Alopecia (AGA), or don't even have impact on it. Why?

We can extrapolate real observational evidence of people with Laronn Syndrome and Acrogemaly. The former condition is characterized by a huge deficiency of IGF-1. The latter is characterized by huge elevated concentrations of IGF-1. Yet both can suffer from AGA. From the most pictures that I saw people with Laronn Syndrome have awesome hair even at an old age though.

If IGF-1 plasma levels would have an huge impact upstream in the cascade of AGA we would at least see some evidence of something occurring in one of those conditions. For instance that people with Acrogemaly would be pretty "immune" to AGA. Yet we don't see any of that happening, especially in relation to the FOXO1 hypothesis of Prometheon Pharma.

Even more important; how can plasma levels of IGF-1 even have influence on AGA? It has been confirmed for ages that the cascade of AGA starts with androgens which subsequently bind to the androgen receptors (AR) in the dermal papilla. Therefore any receptors on the dermal papilla itself don't have any influence on AGA, other than the AR. Remove the AR and no AGA can occur. It starts with AR and goes downstream. Nobody can deny this period. If we would deny this we may just as well re-write all our literature on AGA.

Now may there be some paracrine mediating action going from the dermal papilla in relation IGF-1? Surely that's true, after all the hair follicle is a mini-organ and it secretes IGF-1 itself, just like the liver does in way bigger amount. What is this paracrine action? Nobody knows, literally nobody. We don't even have biological models to measure such an action. Perhaps it secretes IGF-1 solely for the matrix cells in some fashionable complex cell to cell communication (anecdote example).

Is this paracrine mediating action of IGF-1 from the dermal papilla important in the micro-environment itself? Maybe. Who knows maybe complete ablation of it would indeed retard hair growth.

However will IGF-1 now be beneficial in relation to AGA? Most likely not. Jup it may shift the telogen/anagen ratio as telogen hair follicles itself are sensitive to environmental stimuli specifically growth factors (2014, re-defining telogen) and are easily induced into anagen.

How many growth factors, cytokines, proteins do AAPE have and Histogen do you think who are both actually even derived from real human source, not e.coli? Easily 50+. That with the fact that IGF-1 has been around for ages. Doctors have tried injecting it, it's been present in various cosmetics in the same range of 1-10PPM and still is.

Then Prometheon Pharma can only throw to me that they have a "better vehicle". That the "magic" lies in their delivery method. REALLY?

It's really almost ignorant to think that IGF-1 will do much at all, you don't even want to know how complex the pathology of AGA as has been shown by latest research papers. You think it's this easy? Let me tell you it's not.

You know what ignorance means? No one is saying this is going to work, but also just saying its not going to work 100% is ignorant. Devon is being transparent, not asking anything of us, and is motivated by the same thing we all are; the fact that we are balding. Obviously everyone knows how complex AGA is, it is evident in the last 2000 years without a cure. But when Arashi and yourself come into these threads and act like know it alls, and attack Devon personally, repeatedly calling him scammer, it just looks unbecoming. You are one of the most knowledgeable people on this forum, and I see people asking you for advice all the time. Instead of helping people, you put them down and attack them personally, multiple times questioning their IQ level. At the end of the day this is a balding forum, and it serves no purpose you trying to show that your smarter then everyone else all the time. Why don't we let Devon do his thing, and if it fails like you say it will, you can make a "I told you so" thread, and we'll all post in it apologizing. But until then, why don't you guys chill out.

[bigentries]

You know what ignorance means? No one is saying this is going to work, but also just saying its not going to work 100% is ignorant. Devon is being transparent, not asking anything of us, and is motivated by the same thing we all are; the fact that we are balding. Obviously everyone knows how complex AGA is, it is evident in the last 2000 years without a cure. But when Arashi and yourself come into these threads and act like know it alls, and attack Devon personally, repeatedly calling him scammer, it just looks unbecoming. You are one of the most knowledgeable people on this forum, and I see people asking you for advice all the time. Instead of helping people, you put them down and attack them personally, multiple times questioning their IQ level. At the end of the day this is a balding forum, and it serves no purpose you trying to show that your smarter then everyone else all the time. Why don't we let Devon do his thing, and if it fails like you say it will, you can make a "I told you so" thread, and we'll all post in it apologizing. But until then, why don't you guys chill out.

No one has apologised for pushing former scams as far as I remember. In fact former scam enablers are posting in this thread with the same naive positivity as before

[Swooping]

You know what ignorance means? No one is saying this is going to work, but also just saying its not going to work 100% is ignorant. Devon is being transparent, not asking anything of us, and is motivated by the same thing we all are; the fact that we are balding. Obviously everyone knows how complex AGA is, it is evident in the last 2000 years without a cure. But when Arashi and yourself come into these threads and act like know it alls, and attack Devon personally, repeatedly calling him scammer, it just looks unbecoming. You are one of the most knowledgeable people on this forum, and I see people asking you for advice all the time. Instead of helping people, you put them down and attack them personally, multiple times questioning their IQ level. At the end of the day this is a balding forum, and it serves no purpose you trying to show that your smarter then everyone else all the time. Why don't we let Devon do his thing, and if it fails like you say it will, you can make a "I told you so" thread, and we'll all post in it apologizing. But until then, why don't you guys chill out.

Ok, let me react on this one. First of all I still help people weekly. I get PM's on a regular basis from people. I will always argue that going bald is not the end of the world (far from it) and I'm open to (scientific) discussions from everyone. I even encourage people to engage in scientific discussions. Yes I do however get extremely fierce if people make valid points and ignorant people come in. How can that even be good man? Do we need to have a educated strong community? Or a community full of emotional guys who can't think clearly anymore and will buy every snake-oil there is? It's pretty apparent that if we had a community full of Arashi's in history we would be definitely sitting with way better treatments now, trust me.

I respect everyone, literally everyone. However what I don't really like is Prometheon Pharma, making a big hype out of all this. Just read their website man. It's nothing more than hype pur sang. Nothing more than that. Why do that when you don't have any evidence? I smell fish because of this especially in relation of such a treatment on a scientific and logical level. It just doesn't feel right.

Furthermore I never question anyone his IQ level. I think everyone is intelligent. Yes I will return the ball if you are extremely ignorant or attack me. I can still learn from some people here, and I do on a daily basis. So no I don't feel smart or smarter than anyone else, I'm not sdsurfin. Let that be clear please.

[cr1mson]

That is neither here nor there. Devon, hasn't even started selling anything, so until he does it doesn't even make sense to call this a scam. And if people want to have hope, let them. I understand your trying to be a realist, not an optimistic, but some people need hope. We all are in a shitty position with AGA, some people cope different ways. Just trying to say be fair, and chill with the accusations until something is actually for sale.

[Jagger]

It's Tuesday, I hope Devon's got some news. Interesting documents about IGF-1 being posted, though they don't really persuade me one way or the other. Cautious optimism, as always.