Progress of upcoming treatments

[nrj]

A guy who works in my building has obviously had FUE.... a lot of FUE. His doner zone is so depleted he has a big bald patch at the back of his head. I don't know what doctor did it but it looks pretty bad.

But for all that, I can't see a single scar on the back of his head, and I've looked pretty carefully when I've been behind him in the elevator. It's just really sparse.

I figure a doctor who is so eager to fleece money out of his patients he'd do that probably isn't the greatest surgeon in the world, but even so he's managed to do it without noticeable scarring. I guess some guys get the white shotgun scars and some just don't.

Incidentally he is what really put me off FUE and transplants in general. On top of the bald patch he has a really unnatural head of hair, too thin overall and noticeably thicker but still unnatural looking for about half an inch at the hairline. Judging on family history I'm almost certain to end up a full NW6 and this guy is proof that a NW6 just does not generally have enough donor hair to look natural.

I would have to be pretty damn certain Replicel or Aderans is going to work in the near future before I went under the knife.

fair enough, but its 1 guy at 1 surgeon.

In theory enough procedures with Dr. Gho should give you a full head of hair with around 80-90% regeneration.

[Have Hope3]

RepliCel

Is anyone else waiting for Replicel data from Phase I to be released. If so, does anyone know when? I feel like this could be the biggest game changer in the hair loss industry. And yes, if positive results are shown in HM in 2012, I will start saving for a hair transplant too.

Hey DTD, I was told by their director of communications via email that the phase 1 results would be released in late March and they hope to start the phase 2 injections in the fall of 2012. She then said that 2015 was a realistic goal for RepliCel to be available to the public.

[nrj]

Hey DTD, I was told by their director of communications via email that the phase 1 results would be released in late March and they hope to start the phase 2 injections in the fall of 2012. She then said that 2015 was a realistic goal for RepliCel to be available to the public.

excellent !! lets hope we havent lost too much hair by then

[HairTalk]

Hey DTD, I was told by their director of communications via email that the phase 1 results would be released in late March and they hope to start the phase 2 injections in the fall of 2012. She then said that 2015 was a realistic goal for RepliCel to be available to the public.

Let's bear in mind, whether RepliCel ever proceeds to phase-II testing will depend on the results of phase-I: until those results come in, no one has any clue to whether this procedure will be successful.

I'm sorry if this sounds overtly negative, but I don't feel it's sensible to get one's hopes up very easily — especially not in the hair-restoration industry.

[DotheDewNorwood2]

Hope3, thanks for channeling the info. I really appreciate it. My fingers are crossed.

[Thinning@30]

I know how important hope is to us all, so I hate to sound pessimistic, but one thing that bothers me about everyting that Replicel has told us so far, is that they don't seem to have figured out their distribution plan yet. In other words, if all the trials prove successful, how we will all get a Replicel treatment? Will these be done at hair transplant clinics? Dermatology offices? Also, how will treatments be administered, and who will administer them? Will the providers of the Replicel treatment need some kind of training in the procedure?

I guess my point is that there are so many unkowns that even if Replicel's procedure clears trials on schedule,this does not mean that we will all get our hair back on January 1, 2015. A truly effective baldness treatment without terrible side effects would be immensely popular, and if the providers are not on top of things, I can see all kinds of problems with shortages and distribution cropping up.

[Thinning@30]

Count me in, if we see good news this year, I'll wait a few months and will start to search for good FUE doctors to fix my hairline. By the time the rest of my hair would need attention HM would already be there

I also don't see the reason why to choose Gho over a good FUE doctor. Gho might offer regrowth (and that is still unconfirmed), but it's way more expensive. And people overreact about FUE scarring, I never read anyone complain about it before Gho started to sound again

Concerning Aderans, even if they only bring half of the density, I'm in. I can buzz it for the rest of my life

I actually think that because the Aderans, Histogen, Replicel, etc, trials look promising, all hair loss sufferers should be especially wary of hair transplants at this stage in the game. The next generation of hair loss treatments look promising in early trials, but there is no reason to think that they would work on the scar tissue that is created by conventional hair transplants. I would bet that all the clinical trials for the new treatments were conducted on virgin scalps. The new treatments may or may not work on transplanted scalps, we just don't know yet. One reason I haven't had a transplant myself is because I am afraid that the next generation of treatments won't work or won't be as effective on patients with transplanted hair.

[HairTalk]

I actually think that because the Aderans, Histogen, Replicel, etc, trials look promising, all hair loss sufferers should be especially wary of hair transplants at this stage in the game. The next generation of hair loss treatments look promising in early trials, but there is no reason to think that they would work on the scar tissue that is created by conventional hair transplants. I would bet that all the clinical trials for the new treatments were conducted on virgin scalps. The new treatments may or may not work on transplanted scalps, we just don't know yet. One reason I haven't had a transplant myself is because I am afraid that the next generation of treatments won't work or won't be as effective on patients with transplanted hair.

I agree, but, Histogen's exclusion criteria (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/N...istogen&rank=1) do leave me confused:

10. [...] Hair transplantation surgery during the last 6 months. [...]

12.Presence of hair transplants or scalp surgery.

So, does this or does this not mean persons who received hair-transplantation surgery more than six months prior to Histogen's study will be excluded?

[Sogeking]

I know how important hope is to us all, so I hate to sound pessimistic, but one thing that bothers me about everyting that Replicel has told us so far, is that they don't seem to have figured out their distribution plan yet. In other words, if all the trials prove successful, how we will all get a Replicel treatment? Will these be done at hair transplant clinics? Dermatology offices? Also, how will treatments be administered, and who will administer them? Will the providers of the Replicel treatment need some kind of training in the procedure?

I guess my point is that there are so many unkowns that even if Replicel's procedure clears trials on schedule,this does not mean that we will all get our hair back on January 1, 2015. A truly effective baldness treatment without terrible side effects would be immensely popular, and if the providers are not on top of things, I can see all kinds of problems with shortages and distribution cropping up.

Hey Thinning. I hate to be a negative chap. But CEO David Hall said that if phase I trials are good they would like to attract Big Pharma. I am honestly dreading the thought.

But let us not speculate, one thing at a time. First: phase I trials results. Ee can then discuss other stuff later....

[NeedHairASAP]

Hey Thinning. I hate to be a negative chap. But CEO David Hall said that if phase I trials are good they would like to attract Big Pharma. I am honestly dreading the thought.

But let us not speculate, one thing at a time. First: phase I trials results. Ee can then discuss other stuff later....

Big Pharma could be good. Economies of size are what allow prices to dip below introductory prices

[Kirby_]

I'm not naive enough to believe that Big Pharma has our best interests at heart (heck, see the lack of universal healthcare in the States). However I have a low tolerance for the conspiracy theory angle either, to be honest.

[sausage]

surely you could have your scalp removed and have the scalp and hair of a dead person sewn onto you head, that would solve hair loss?

or could the donor scalp not work on the recipient and end up dying and rotting away on your head.

Maybe not then.

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Hey Thinning. I hate to be a negative chap. But CEO David Hall said that if phase I trials are good they would like to attract Big Pharma. I am honestly dreading the thought.

But let us not speculate, one thing at a time. First: phase I trials results. Ee can then discuss other stuff later....

I too would absolutely dread it if they were to attract Big Pharma. As most of us know, big pharmaceutical companies just want constantly "treat" diseases instead of curing them, and they sure as hell don't give a damn about the good of the people. But I'm not sure that that's what Replicel is trying to do. After all, they say on their website that they're attempting to develop a permanent solution to hair loss, which I think means that they're shooting for a cure and not a treatment, since a treatment would not be permanent and would require multiple, periodic doses to retain and regrow hair. I hope Replicel is similar to Anthony Atala's lab in North Carolina, where they explicitly state that they're looking to "cure" diseases, not simply "treat" them. I think what Replicel is hoping to do is to get great Phase I results and then use these results to attract investors, which will help fund things like further clinical trials. I don't think they are looking to outsource their technology to some big pharmaceutical company, since that would take away millions from their forseeable profit margin. If their hair loss treatment is a permanent cure for hair loss (meaning that it regrows hair and prevents hair loss), then it would literally be a billion dollar treatment, even if it would cost a ton of money. Hell, hair transplants, Rogaine, and Propecia are multi-million dollar industries and I think less than 10% of hair loss sufferers even opt for these treatments, so one can only imagine how extremely profitable a permanent cure for hair loss would be.

[youngsufferer]

I too would absolutely dread it if they were to attract Big Pharma. As most of us know, big pharmaceutical companies just want constantly "treat" diseases instead of curing them, and they sure as hell don't give a damn about the good of the people. But I'm not sure that that's what Replicel is trying to do. After all, they say on their website that they're attempting to develop a permanent solution to hair loss, which I think means that they're shooting for a cure and not a treatment, since a treatment would not be permanent and would require multiple, periodic doses to retain and regrow hair. I hope Replicel is similar to Anthony Atala's lab in North Carolina, where they explicitly state that they're looking to "cure" diseases, not simply "treat" them. I think what Replicel is hoping to do is to get great Phase I results and then use these results to attract investors, which will help fund things like further clinical trials. I don't think they are looking to outsource their technology to some big pharmaceutical company, since that would take away millions from their forseeable profit margin. If their hair loss treatment is a permanent cure for hair loss (meaning that it regrows hair and prevents hair loss), then it would literally be a billion dollar treatment, even if it would cost a ton of money. Hell, hair transplants, Rogaine, and Propecia are multi-million dollar industries and I think less than 10% of hair loss sufferers even opt for these treatments, so one can only imagine how extremely profitable a permanent cure for hair loss would be.

I'm 20 years old and this is my first post so I'm sure you'll use that against me but I had to register to respond to this.

I've been lurking here for about a year now when I started receding and I'm now a norwood 3. The fact that Replicel WANTS to include big pharma in their treatment should be the first sign that we don't want anything to do with replicel. You've already said pharma wants to treat not cure, which is absolutely true. Why pay 20,000 dollars and cure somebody when you can milk them for 100,000 over a lifetime. That's the motivation right? These companies are racing for the treatment because there's a huge goldmine at the end, not because they actually want to help people.

Another thing is, do you really think replicel and other companies care about what Spencer has to say about them? People spend millions on rogaine/propecia/otherbullshit without even looking anything up. These companies know that people will buy no matter what and they're looking to milk it as much as they can, the only factor of who wins the race is who's treatment works the best. In the end, that's all it is, a TREATMENT. These companies know they can tell Spencer one thing and go the other direction, and they don't have to join the IAHRS because they'll make money regardless.
As a young business owner this is my opinion, that's all it is.


I respect Spencer and all he does for this community, but get used to being bald fellas.

[re22]

One step at a time. It's good to question these things, but you're getting into conspiracy theory territory right now.