Aderans

[StinkySmurf]

I was told by a person who I believed the results were very good so I'd like to know what exactly are they doing if they aren't doing DP. Anyone have a guess?

[534623]

So, all in all is $15000 worth what they can achieve? that's definitely something that we should discuss!

No, we shouldn't discuss this - otherwise the kids in this forum will create threads like "F***Off Desmond84 ..." or something ...

[Desmond84]

If it works, but just for an uncertain time or if you still need additional meds etc, then it will be rather a question about the involved costs all in all over a period of time. In this case, I would rather go for transplants.

Exactly right!

What's the point of getting a 1cm2 bald patch just to find out there's 40% chance there's nothing they can do for you! On top of it, they will charge $500-$600 for this genetic test!

Then if you are a responder, you have to pay them $15000 just to rejuvenate hairs that only miniturised over the last 18 months!

Furthermore, you will still have to take Fin untill CB comes out! which wont be at least till 2017-2018

So, all in all is $15000 worth what they can achieve? that's definitely something that we should discuss!

[Jairus]

More great news...

This is a load of absolute bollox - seems they have let the dollar signs compromise the release of a genuine product.

What the f**k is the point in paying 10k for a product that will just rejuvinate and not immunize? The point of this was to do away with Fin.

Im not going near Fin and was really looking forward to Aderans.

Looks likw 4+ HT's for me now.

[534623]

I had so much hope for Aderans.....so much.

Not just you ...

But hey hey ...

- Aderans: J
They seem to be rejuvenating your hairs so that they grow again. They will then be like you should jump on Finasteride to keep this hair or it will miniaturise again!

Even so, and IF this works what you describe, this would be superb for lots of guys out there. Maybe there will be something similar to Propecia in the meanwhile, but not that "risky" or problematic for patients. So the point is - HOW MUCH of your still existing hair will they indeed be able to "rejuvenate".

If it works, but just for an uncertain time or if you still need additional meds OR consecutive procedures etc, then it will be rather a question about the involved costs all in all over a period of time. In this case, I would rather go for transplants.

[Desmond84]

Desmond, I have to ask again..

"Replicel, Aderans, Follica & Intercytex have all folded!"
"It's all over I think! Baldness will not be cured in this decade"
Based upon WHAT exactly Desmond?

Artista, I'm so sorry for being so negative last night! Finding out about Aderans giving up their DP protocol really got me down! It was confirmed both by Boldy & IronMan and Dr. Nigam & Lauster!!!!

If their DP model was coming out, we would get to keep our remaining hair forever! so you can imagine my frustration when you find out they cheaped out just so they can make more money quicker

So here's what I mean:
- Replicel: Achieved 6% regrowth in most trial subjects. Now although the regrowth rate was low (Minoxidil: 10% & Fin: 15-20%), Replicel has the potential to immunise your follicles against DHT! Now, here's the problems:
a) Replicel has minimal funding and after releasing their recent results, their shares dropped in price by 300%!
b) Assuming they will try and improve their formula, they will try to conduct another Phase 2 results. This will push their product launch date back to at least 2017-2018.

- Aderans: Ji gami will cost at least $10,000-15,000. And that's just being optimistic. Now, I was happy to pay that knowing I will get to keep my hair for a very long time to come since my DP cells will be immune to DHT! But what they're doing now is different. They seem to be rejuvenating your hairs so that they grow again. They will then be like you should jump on Finasteride to keep this hair or it will miniaturise again! In such a case, would you pay them that kind of money?

- Intercytex: this company which was really well funded by UK government reached great heights and produced considerable amount of hair! But in 2008, recession hit Europe and their funding got pulled! So they shut down. Then, Aderans bought this company in order to gain their patents and research. But instead of using them, Aderans simply kept it on their shelves to prevent future competition!

- Follica: a company that had probably the most proactive scientist involved in hair loss (Dr Costralis) associated with it. Unfortunately, Follica finished their Phase 2 results in 2010 and never went into Phase 3. Dr Costralis then moved on with his PGD2 adventures and no new information about Follica has been released ever since!

Now, all we're left with are:
- Hair transplants
- Histogen

I wanna be psyched up about Tsuji Lab and Dr. Lauster. But their technique is a mammoth of a task compared to Replicel and Aderans. So, based on what we've gone through with Aderans/Relicel,I really don't know if they'll be successful in bringing out a solution before most of the guys on this forum turn 45-50!

I had so much hope for Aderans.....so much. Unfortunately, when a company releases very limited information over 11 years, you find yourself searching in the dark for a power switch that was never there!

I really want to be optimistic but I don't know how! I've been down this whole weekend!

[534623]

Your customers are going to get pretty pissed when they give a 1cm² biopsy, and it doesn't work. You can give them a refund when it doesn't work, but then that effects your profit model, and it still doesn't fix the problem that your negative responses outweigh the positive ones.

Same thoughts here. And guess what:
They will get this on the market - for sure. And now guess how much just this TEST will cost a patient ... they will ALWAYS make a profit. But surely not always each and every patient.

[StinkySmurf]

Do you guys understand what I mean/predict with that?
Perhaps this is just a paranoia - but I doubt I have paranoia...

They filed the patent below for the pre-screen, but I don't think the scenario is the same as the fox test. Yes, they will try to sell you a HT if you can't get HM, and honestly, at thats the point where they probably should, but in my mind the pre-screen is what prevented people from moving forward in the past because your need 10 happy customers for every 1 unhappy customer so think of how hard it will be to market something that only works half the time. Your customers are going to get pretty pissed when they give a 1cm biopsy, and it doesn't work. You can give them a refund when it doesn't work, but then that effects your profit model, and it still doesn't fix the problem that your negative responses outweigh the positive ones.

http://www.aderansresearch.com/pdfs/US_Patent_7985537.pdf

[534623]

"here later you can see the increase in hair follicles and obviously... countable... if you think of the balding circle... this is the edge of the balding circle so there are more hair follicles here whereas here towards the center fewer hair follicles... and you can see here the ability of these cells to turn on hair follicles that had been miniaturized and had been over time reduced, over and over, the length and duration of their anagen cycle"

Thanks StinkySmurf.
Could you please make a short transcript of the "skin sample thingy" I mentioned in my previous post? I think this part is pretty interesting ...

I'm talking about this thingy.

[StinkySmurf]

We injected the whole area (blue circle in the pic) after injecting cells just into the 4 sample injection sites.

Later we started injecting this whole balding area after we would inject the four square centimeters that we were gonna track with macrophotography.

[StinkySmurf]

Those follicles who have been miniaturized for the shortest period of time and which are most receptive (prone to) for such kinds of approaches …

"here later you can see the increase in hair follicles and obviously... countable... if you think of the balding circle... this is the edge of the balding circle so there are more hair follicles here whereas here towards the center fewer hair follicles... and you can see here the ability of these cells to turn on hair follicles that had been miniaturized and had been over time reduced, over and over, the length and duration of their anagen cycle"

[534623]

Then he is saying something about skin samples from the trail subjects BEFORE they get cell-injections, to determine, whether or not a trail subject will be responsive for the treatment at all - right?
Does it mean they are doing this to "manipulate" the final trail results? I mean, does it make sense doing such pre-testing? I mean, of course they will get better results, when they just inject just those trail subjects, which are still "receptive" for such treatments - right? wtf...

Wow - IF I'm not completely wrong, the following (same) will happen as soon as this thingy is on the market ...

Dr. Cole wrote recently in another hairloss forum (in another context)...
**************************************
Here we go again with the argument about the advantage of adipose (fat) on the FUE grafts. This argument is as old at the one where novices like you tell us that patients need a FOX test first to see if they are candidates for FUE. We dispelled that theory in early 2003, yet you kept reporting that patients needed one. The Fox test was never necessary, but those who did not know how to do FUE needed a way to lure patients into their office for a FUE procedure. Then after the patient came in, the patient would have a FOX test that would show the follicle transection rate was too high so the patient would be told he needed a strip procedure. How do I know this happened? I had plenty of patients come to my office for a FUE procedure that had failed their FOX test, but they did not like the alternative – a strip procedure – so they came to see me. I did an FUE procedure on these patients with no problem.
**************************************

Do you guys understand what I mean/predict with that?
Perhaps this is just a paranoia - but I doubt I have paranoia...

[534623]

"And so this system will only work in people who have atrophic or miniaturized hair follicles... like in male pattern and female pattern... uhh... alopecia or hair loss or androgenetic allopecia... and the way we were able to pin down that mechanism is by injecting these male cells into that skin model..."

Right, thanks.
And what exactly is he saying in this scene ...

"We injected the whole area (blue circle in the pic) after injecting cells just into the 4 sample injection sites." - or something. Results?
Then he is saying ...
"Those follicles who have been miniaturized for the shortest period of time and which are most receptive (prone to) for such kinds of approaches …" - or something, right?
Then he is saying something about skin samples from the trail subjects BEFORE they get cell-injections, to determine, whether or not a trail subject will be responsive for the treatment at all - right?
Does it mean they are doing this to "manipulate" the final trail results? I mean, does it make sense doing such pre-testing? I mean, of course they will get better results, when they just inject just those trail subjects, which are still "receptive" for such treatments - right? wtf...

[StinkySmurf]

So WHAT EXACTLY is he saying about this approach (which they intend to bring on the market)?
Can you please complete my quote/sentence above? What exactly is he saying? Can you help me please to find out whether or not this shit will work for me?

"And so this system will only work in people who have atrophic or miniaturized hair follicles... like in male pattern and female pattern... uhh... alopecia or hair loss or androgenetic allopecia... and the way we were able to pin down that mechanism is by injecting these male cells into that skin model..."

[534623]

"The problem with the hair patch assay was it was not very translatable to the human condition, and early on we spent a lot of time looking at developing architecture that... err scaffolding... that we can put our cells in to try to orient the growth of hair follicles because despite all of the success that we are so proud of this is of limited utility in an aesthetic environment."

So there you go. They went with an approach they could make it through Phase 3 with on a $150 million dollar budget instead of going for something so complex as creating a follicle with a scaffolding because that involves aesthetic issues like the angle of hair growth that are an order of magnitude more difficult and these are not folks that want to go outside the company for money. This is a slightly down on it's luck $500 million dollar company where the majority of shares are held by just three parties, and lets face it, they don't want to go after the market of people that are willing to have surgery... thats the whole point of the opening chart where they say they want to be the botox of hair. In other words, they want to reach economies of scale. They are not looking for a solution that involves needing a bunch of artist grade plastic surgeons. They're looking for something thats mass market at least initially.

Thanks Stinky Smurf, really great. THAT’s what I wanted to hear – concerning ARI’s former “brand new hair follicles from scratch” approach.

Okay, now it’s time talk about ARI’s new approach (basically similar to the other approach), and what Dr. Washenik is saying in the video concerning the new “Morphogenic Switch” approach …

http://youtu.be/l_JHbtXJ0a8

05:55>>>“This system will only work in people …”

So WHAT EXACTLY is he saying about this approach (which they intend to bring on the market)?
Can you please complete my quote/sentence above? What exactly is he saying? Can you help me please to find out whether or not this shit will work for me?