Histogen Update - Spencer Kobren Speaks With Dr. Craig L. Ziering

[Breaking Bald]

Indeed, but where are these pics and reports that we were promised???
Really hope this works out though! I am really struggling at the moment to cope with this atm.

[UK Boy]

I believe that Gail Naughton received quite the roasting during the ISHRS. Well, I am grateful that there is at least one company willing to bring a better solution to market. It is truly amazing that Naughton went into hairloss, considering the fact that ATS went bankrupt because they couldn't secure FDA approval for Dermagraft and TranCyte early enough; this is after they received well over 300 million in funding and was at the cutting edge of tissue engineering. I have confidence in their science, but if they do fail I will move on with my life since that is the nature of science.

I saw a video of Dr. Cole on Hairsite, he was answering questions and one was in regards to the Histogen presentation at ISHRS. Apparently he was one of the people roasting Gail and he doesn't portray her presentation in a good light at all. He says she was contradicting herself and getting angry when questioned over the contradictions. He says that at one point she said that Histogen doesn't create new follicals and at another point said it grew hair in scar tissue indicating that it did grow new follicals, seems she also couldn't really answer questions in regards to the bad quality of photos and just got angry when quizzed about them.

I think it's really weird that a professional woman like Gail would have such a hard time with a presentation, it surely isn't a new thing to her so I wonder why it appears as if it was so badly planned out - contradictions etc?

I wonder if the Dr.s like Cole are being hyper critical of this new treatment because they see the possibilities it brings about and they are starting to worry about their cut of the industry.

I don't get this whole thing with the photos though, I mean companies selling snake oil use dodgy photos an stuff but they don't go through clinical trials. Histogens going through proper trials so surely their stats and photos have to all add up and be real cos otherwise they won't get approved right? I mean can a scam product get through clinical trials and get approved? Surely if Histogen is showing good stats then those stats are what we should believe cos if they're lying about the stats they'll get caught out when the authorising body checks the stats?

Dr. Ziering kinda worries me a bit as well though. He seems to 'believe' in a lot of treatments that other people say do nothing worthwhile - laser therapy, PRP etc. He has faith in Histogen but I'm hoping the results of Histogen are going to be a lot better than these other treatments he has faith in.

I really hope Histogen succeeds and proves all the doubters wrong, really feeling down about the whole hairloss thing again and just pray that something available within the next 2-3 years.

On a side note and a bit unrelated, I feel that the American public does themselves no favours because of this culture they've adopted of sueing everyone. I feel that FDA approval is so strict and takes so long due to this favoured american habit that is sadly moving more and more into europe. I mean look at Propecia - it went through all the FDA checks etc, it's been out for 15 years and now there's all these people wanting to sue over it, they've all just jumped on the bandwagon. The FDA now getting all this shit for approving it etc. So it's not wonder they're so strict an everything when it comes to approving new treatments.

[534623]

On a side note ...

You're a damn good analyzer.
Unfortunately really rare such guys like you - especially on hair loss forums.

[Scientalk56]

Well it's kinda depressing what you've said here. Anyway we'll see in 2-3 years whether it's good or not.
but i just don't get it, why would anybody invest money in something that doesn't work? I mean if histogen is a scam or something, why would they continue doing trails and invest money in it?
histogen had been sued over hsc patent, but they won. it means something.

[Wiffle]

Well it's kinda depressing what you've said here. Anyway we'll see in 2-3 years whether it's good or not.
but i just don't get it, why would anybody invest money in something that doesn't work? I mean if histogen is a scam or something, why would they continue doing trails and invest money in it?
histogen had been sued over hsc patent, but they won. it means something.

Because it's not absolutely clear either way; that is why it's an "investment" - investments are always subject to some risk. They do their due diligence but there isn't perfect information and sometimes an investment doesn't pan out.

In other words, just because someone made a large investment does not veify that something "works." That's just the way the world is.

[Artista]

Said earlier-
"I believe that Gail Naughton received quite the roasting during the ISHRS"

Based on what? Is there video of Gail at the ISHRS presentations?
I havent seen anything

[UK Boy]

There's not a video that I have seen but as I said there was a video of Dr.Cole on hairsite where he pretty much stated how he and other doctors at the ISHRS meeting had roasted her. Also if you listen to the recent interview that Spencer did with Dr. Ziering then Dr.Ziering talks about his disappointment at the reaction of certain doctors to the presentation.

[Wiffle]

There's not a video that I have seen but as I said there was a video of Dr.Cole on hairsite where he pretty much stated how he and other doctors at the ISHRS meeting had roasted her. Also if you listen to the recent interview that Spencer did with Dr. Ziering then Dr.Ziering talks about his disappointment at the reaction of certain doctors to the presentation.

According to onlookers with the expertise to know, was the "roasting" factually-based? Was it fair? It's not hard for any professional to fluster another one with a barrage of pointed questions.

[Artista]

Thank you UK. I will research that . I just don't understand why Gail would be "roasted" or criticized . She has always been very impressive And so Has the company's research work

[Losing_It]

Said earlier-
"I believe that Gail Naughton received quite the roasting during the ISHRS"

Based on what? Is there video of Gail at the ISHRS presentations?
I havent seen anything

It was mentioned in the interview with Dr. Ziering. In my experience, the goal of delivering a conference paper is not really to provide an in-depth account of your research. For that you need an hour or days. You normally have 15 minutes with some questions and you try beforehand to think about the possible questions someone may ask you. At this stage I doubt that Histogen would have all the answers and asking questions you know you won't get the answer to is only trying to put the presenter on the spot. For example, I have written journal articles where I have requested the editors not send my work for peer review to someone I know won't be objective. Or if you do a presentation you hope that a specific person won't be there because they're always way too critical. It happens, people sometimes asked questions just to be difficult.

I apolgise if I perhaps misunderstood the interview but I am almost certain Ziering mentioned that it was a very difficult crowd.

[534623]

why would anybody invest money in something that doesn't work? I mean if histogen is a scam or something, why would they continue doing trails and invest money in it?

Because they invest other people's money?
hmmm, I would do the same as long as I get money from them. Look at Aderans - they do not feel forced to speed up, as long as they get feeded by the wig company in the background.

And if the wig company is kicking them out - pfffff... they sell the gathered knowledge to others and nobody can prove them the contrary (that they did it). I mean, didn't you noticed that the ARI guys never ever published any real "breakthrough" papers? Everything they published so far is just pseudo science.

[goingquick]

I wonder if the Dr.s like Cole are being hyper critical of this new treatment because they see the possibilities it brings about and they are starting to worry about their cut of the industry.

I don't think any of those are hypercritical questions. They seem quite fair. Gail Naughton shouldn't cry foul just cause she can't answer perfectly legitimate questions.

I don't get this whole thing with the photos though, I mean companies selling snake oil use dodgy photos an stuff but they don't go through clinical trials. Histogens going through proper trials so surely their stats and photos have to all add up and be real cos otherwise they won't get approved right? I mean can a scam product get through clinical trials and get approved? Surely if Histogen is showing good stats then those stats are what we should believe cos if they're lying about the stats they'll get caught out when the authorising body checks the stats?

The problem with the photos is that while the numbers sound impressive, the cosmetic improvement shown in the photos is very underwhelming.

Dr. Ziering kinda worries me a bit as well though. He seems to 'believe' in a lot of treatments that other people say do nothing worthwhile - laser therapy, PRP etc. He has faith in Histogen but I'm hoping the results of Histogen are going to be a lot better than these other treatments he has faith in.

I feel the same way. This is a guy who promotes Viviscal, of all things. Like Bauman, the guy is more concerned with lining his pockets than he is with actually helping hair loss sufferers.

My hope for Histogen is that despite the unimpressive photos, there's still the possibility that results could be improved by increasing the dose as well as by receiving multiple treatments.

[Pate]

My hope for Histogen is that despite the unimpressive photos, there's still the possibility that results could be improved by increasing the dose as well as by receiving multiple treatments.

Give them a chance. Let them actually treat a cosmetically significant area and wait 12 months for the hair to have a chance to come through.

Even HT hairs take up to 12 months to fully grow in. And those follicles are undamaged by DHT. To be crying fail on LONG haired subjects after 3 or 6 months is not really a fair assessment. Hair follicles take a few months to go through catagen/telogen and then only grow a centimetre a month.

[goingquick]

Give them a chance. Let them actually treat a cosmetically significant area and wait 12 months for the hair to have a chance to come through.

Even HT hairs take up to 12 months to fully grow in. And those follicles are undamaged by DHT. To be crying fail on LONG haired subjects after 3 or 6 months is not really a fair assessment. Hair follicles take a few months to go through catagen/telogen and then only grow a centimetre a month.

That's true. Perhaps it's also possible that the results would be enhanced when used with a treatment like finasteride.

[Jasari]

That's true. Perhaps it's also possible that the results would be enhanced when used with a treatment like finasteride.

I think what alot of people forget is that; sure it 'may' only partly regrow hair for those with advanced norwoods (which understandably may frustrate some) but for everyone in their teens with MPB on the horizon this will likely mean they never suffer MPB.

It might not be the best for this generation, but in the greater scheme of things that is a cure.