Replicel

[neversaynever]

Id love to see Replicel and HSC injected together and then 6 month results.

100000% agree.

[neversaynever]

UK, my point is that you don't need to grow anything.... everything is already there but for some reason refuse to grow. Follicles shrink and enlarge themselves automatically due to your body's own natural growth factors.

HSC may be able to emulate what stem cells are doing, but what's the point if it will last two years or so since stem cells still refuse to work like that automatically

Ill take two years of hair, please!

[UK_]

Pate, I dont understand your comment about "the fear of HSC creating new follicles due to density of follicles in the scalp".

Do you have the same fear for companies like Aderans and Replicel?

[UK_]

No, we can't be sure they haven't created new follicles. But whether they have or haven't it's pretty obviously not the main reason for increased hair count, because the areas tested were not missing follicles in the first place.

2020 said: "so far Histogen was only able to grow BRAND NEW FOLLICLES in VITRO... from the past two studies they still weren't able to confirm if HSC did in fact grow any new follicles."

You said: "So how do you explain the difference in hair count from baseline to 12 weeks in BOTH studies? "

Simple: revitalised follicles = longer anagen = more hairs growing at any one time = increased hair count.

Anyway, sounds like we are in agreement now that that has been clarified.

Hurry up Histogen. Give us some more results to argue about.

I did indeed question why there was a higher hair count, but I did not offer an absolute conclusion, it would be silly for me to stipulate with 100% certainty that new follicles were the reason for the higher hair count, but the hair count continued to increase right up to 12 months.

Now you can explain this by saying more follicles were simply revitalised in that period, but you can't outright deny the possibility of HSC inducing the growth of new hair follicles, can you? Yes/No?

My entire point to you & 2020 is that you MUST recognise the probability that new hair follicles were created during the two trials, especially given that the actual scientists who actually conducted the research do BELIEVE new hair follicles grew.

[Kiwi]

Pate, when you say the areas tested were not missing follicles, does that mean the areas were not "balding" areas to begin with? Or is that to say that the follicles were merely dormant in balding areas and were revitalized?

Pâté doesn't work for Histogen and isn't a scientist. And therefore has no ****ing clue what the truth is.

[Conpecia]

Pate, when you say the areas tested were not missing follicles, does that mean the areas were not "balding" areas to begin with? Or is that to say that the follicles were merely dormant in balding areas and were revitalized?

[Pate]

Im not saying they did say they outright created new follicles - Gail Naughton stated she BELIEVED HSC was creating new follicles from stem cells already in the scalp. Dr Ziering also stated he believed HSC may be reactivating the dormant hair follicles that still retain their original stem cells but are not producing the needed progenitor cells. Now im not saying his word is gospel, im not saying anyones word is gospel, I just choose to prefer the opinions of people who know what they're talking about as opposed to negative naysayers who should be on HairSite.

Before 2011, did you even know that bald scalps retain their stem cells? Did anyone on here know that? NO... so why should I believe the negative opinions of the people on here regarding Histogen?

I dont deny that they have not proved they can grow new follicles in vivo, nobody is saying they can - I only mentioned a difference in hair count, but you cant stipulate with 100% certainty that there were no new follicles created just like I cant stipulate with 100% certainty that new follicles WERE created - that's my only point.

No, we can't be sure they haven't created new follicles. But whether they have or haven't it's pretty obviously not the main reason for increased hair count, because the areas tested were not missing follicles in the first place.

2020 said: "so far Histogen was only able to grow BRAND NEW FOLLICLES in VITRO... from the past two studies they still weren't able to confirm if HSC did in fact grow any new follicles."

You said: "So how do you explain the difference in hair count from baseline to 12 weeks in BOTH studies? "

Simple: revitalised follicles = longer anagen = more hairs growing at any one time = increased hair count.

Anyway, sounds like we are in agreement now that that has been clarified.

Hurry up Histogen. Give us some more results to argue about.

[2020]

UK, my point is that you don't need to grow anything.... everything is already there but for some reason refuse to grow. Follicles shrink and enlarge themselves automatically due to your body's own natural growth factors.

HSC may be able to emulate what stem cells are doing, but what's the point if it will last two years or so since stem cells still refuse to work like that automatically

[Kiwi]

What is replicel?

5,6, 7 years away?

[UK_]

Id love to see Replicel and HSC injected together and then 6 month results.

[nikemata]

What is replicel?

[UK_]

unfortunately that's wrong.... Wnt, VEGF and some others are always being secreted by your body naturally in order to maintain hair in anagen phase. No growth factors -> hair can't reach active phase.

That's why I'm suspicious on how long will these HSC results last since they're not fixing the main problem

NOTHING IS MISSING, IT'S BROKEN!

I dont know why you cant understand this, I KNOW that wnt proteins and everything used in HSC are all used/upregulated in areas of the body (e.g. wound healing & CANCER!), but so are stem cells for the kidney, however, to grow a new kidney you still need to extract the right stem cells, create a viable scaffold and nurture the growth of the cells with the exact compounds in the exact same pattern as the body does during neogenesis. It's not as simple as them "just being there"...

Although the compounds that created and developed every organ in your body are always present in the body throughout your lifetime, your organs dont seem to possess the magical ability to completely regenerate themselves when damaged, what gives? If the compounds that created them are there, why have they become so shit at doing a job they were once masters at?

Biology is more complicated than you think.

[UK_]

Actually he's pretty much right about the first part, and Histogen wouldn't disagree.

He is right that they haven't proven they can grow new follicles in vivo because they haven't tested it on bald scalp - they have only tested it in areas of thinning where all the follicles are still producing hair, but vellus hair. The increase in hair count is most likely just because the terminal hairs are in anagen for so much longer, so more hairs are in anagen at any one time.

I would actually be kind of worried if HSC was producing new follicles in this situation because it would mean the follicle density in the skin actually increased above what it was at birth! Much better that in this situation, HSC just migrates to the existing follicles and reverses the miniaturisation.

When they get around to testing it on bald scalp, then we'll see if they are making new follicles - or possibly if they perfect HSC to the stage where they can prove HSC-treated areas have a higher FU density than hair in the permanent zone.

I think he's actually also technically correct that the growth factors are present in the scalp all the time too - it's just that HSC recreates the embryonic environment where they are present in much greater concentrations. But obviously to say it "isn't anything new" is a distortion.

Im not saying they did say they outright created new follicles - Gail Naughton stated she BELIEVED HSC was creating new follicles from stem cells already in the scalp. Dr Ziering also stated he believed HSC may be reactivating the dormant hair follicles that still retain their original stem cells but are not producing the needed progenitor cells. Now im not saying his word is gospel, im not saying anyones word is gospel, I just choose to prefer the opinions of people who know what they're talking about as opposed to negative naysayers who should be on HairSite.

Before 2011, did you even know that bald scalps retain their stem cells? Did anyone on here know that? NO... so why should I believe the negative opinions of the people on here regarding Histogen?

I dont deny that they have not proved they can grow new follicles in vivo, nobody is saying they can - I only mentioned a difference in hair count, but you cant stipulate with 100% certainty that there were no new follicles created just like I cant stipulate with 100% certainty that new follicles WERE created - that's my only point.

The point about "the growth factors being present all the time" is complete rubbish - I dont know why you cant understand this, I KNOW that wnt proteins and everything used in HSC are all used/upregulated in areas of the body (e.g. wound healing & CANCER!), but so are stem cells for the kidney, however, to grow a new kidney you still need to extract the right stem cells, create a viable scaffold and nurture the growth of the cells with the exact compounds in the exact same pattern as the body does during neogenesis. It's not as simple as them "just being there"...

[Maradona]

huh? They never actually mentioned in any of their studies that they grew BRAND NEW FOLLICLES. It is just implied on their out-of-date website...



unfortunately that's wrong.... Wnt, VEGF and some others are always being secreted by your body naturally in order to maintain hair in anagen phase. No growth factors -> hair can't reach active phase.

That's why I'm suspicious on how long will these HSC results last since they're not fixing the main problem

NOTHING IS MISSING, IT'S BROKEN!

Gotta agree with ya. Let's just hope it lasts a long time.

[2020]

Right. And can you prove ANY of those assumptions? No. So I would rather believe the words of the people who are actually DOING the study than some naysaying negative nobody on a forum.

huh? They never actually mentioned in any of their studies that they grew BRAND NEW FOLLICLES. It is just implied on their out-of-date website...

Your comment about "growth factors being secreted all the time on the scalp which means Histogen blah blah blah" is lunacy - Histogen have recreated a bioengineered process that mimics the cellular environment during embryogenesis, that is, the time before you even resemble a ****ing human being. This environment is not "always on your scalp" - it happens ONCE and only once, unless you revert to being a fetus every weekend like some kind of alien.

unfortunately that's wrong.... Wnt, VEGF and some others are always being secreted by your body naturally in order to maintain hair in anagen phase. No growth factors -> hair can't reach active phase.

That's why I'm suspicious on how long will these HSC results last since they're not fixing the main problem

NOTHING IS MISSING, IT'S BROKEN!