Aderans

[mjolnir]

I must admit, I've been playing with the idea of taking Fin myself, but after reading this article, every single hair on my head was convinced it was a VERY bad idea http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0807101330.htm

44% of the people with persistent sexual sides having suicidal thoughts ? Man, really, that's SO not worth it ...

Of course the other option is always a hair piece. Cost and upkeep would be a bit of a pain, but cosmetically they look pretty good now, and you're not actually messing with your body.

[clarence]

Totally agreed. Anybody going for FUT nowadays is crazy anyway. I feel sorry for everybody with such tremendously ugly scar on the back of their head, which is totally unnecessary anyway. I just uploaded a picture of my donor area shot at the HASCI clinic, right after 'surgery', barely any blood visible, see my album.

Go ahead, just feel sorry all you like for a choice which is not one bit of your business, but don't you sit there behind your screen with your primitive hairstyle and offend my sanity because of my future choice in favor of FUT over the (in my case) inferior method, FUE. And I wonder, what could be more necessary for me than preserving the density of the donor area, despite the scar.

[Arashi]

Go ahead, just feel sorry all you like for a choice which is not one bit of your business, but don't you sit there behind your screen with your primitive hairstyle and offend my sanity because of my future choice in favor of FUT over the (in my case) inferior method, FUE. And I wonder, what could be more necessary for me than preserving the density of the donor area, despite the scar.

Brother, we're all in the same boat and I didn't mean to offend anyone. I just meant I personally strongly feel that a HT isn't worth it when it leaves you with such a scar, but that's my personal opinion. I also meant that anyone choosing FUT over FUE/HSI nowadays because they still believe FUT yields better results (which was true in the past, but not anymore) is just misinformed, but of course I was speaking generally. You say in your specific situation FUT is superior and I'm sure you've come to that conclusion by doing good research, so I really wonder, why is that ?

[clarence]

Brother, we're all in the same boat and I didn't mean to offend anyone. I just meant I personally strongly feel that a HT isn't worth it when it leaves you with such a scar, but that's my personal opinion. I also meant that anyone choosing FUT over FUE/HSI nowadays because they still believe FUT yields better results (which was true in the past, but not anymore) is just misinformed, but of course I was speaking generally. You say in your specific situation FUT is superior and I'm sure you've come to that conclusion by doing good research, so I really wonder, why is that ?

Because of effects on the donor area. It takes less than math skills to see that one method preserves density and the other reduces density. That's why, and I would rather have a FUT in a heartbeat, even if it yielded less and cost more than FUE.

[Arashi]

Because of effects on the donor area. It takes less than math skills to see that one method preserves density and the other reduces density. That's why, and I would rather have a FUT in a heartbeat, even if it yielded less and cost more than FUE.

That's false. First of all, if you take out a strip of skin, that part of your skin has to be filled up. This means that:
1) Current skin streches a bit, which results in (slightly) lower density.
2) your hairline at the front and back of the head both recede (albeit slightly).

Furthermore, HSI yields 80% regrowth of the donor (at least, that's what they tell you at the clinic), so that preserves density quite well too. With FUT you (of course) don't have regrowth so you lose 80% more hair.

[clarence]

That's false. First of all, if you take out a strip of skin, that part of your skin has to be filled up. This means that:
1) Current skin streches a bit, which results in (slightly) lower density.
2) your hairline at the front and back of the head both recede (albeit slightly).

Furthermore, HSI yields 80% regrowth of the donor (at least, that's what they tell you at the clinic), so that preserves density quite well too. With FUT you (of course) don't have regrowth so you lose 80% more hair.

Ok, maybe I should have said one method preserves density and the other reduces that density. Like if one man buys coffee from the grocery store, and another man buys from a wholesale where they give him a discount, they first one saves money, and the other one loses that money.

FUT density is alot more than 80%. Yes, I am that vain.

[Arashi]

FUT density is alot more than 80%.

Like said, skin will stretch thus reducing density. Besides you lose all the hairs in the donor area, while 80% grows back with HST. But let's not turn this thread into a debate FUT vs FUE/HST. If you want to go ahead with FUT and don't mind the scar and are happy with the result, then that's a good thing of course.

[Winston]

But let's not turn this thread into a debate FUT vs FUE/HST. If you want to go ahead with FUT and don't mind the scar and are happy with the result, then that's a good thing of course.

That's a good thought Arashi, this is an Aderans thread, lets try to keep it on track.

[Alf]

But why isn't aderans updating their website?

[Desmond84]

OK guys, time to start talking about release date:

As most of you heard on the presentation, Aderans has given up on reaching the "70% response rate" target and instead are looking for genetic markers that will indicate whether you're a responder or not.

So what does this mean for their release date?

How long do you suspect this will take?

When do you think Phase 3 will start?

What worries me is, genetic markers were NOT on their timeline schedule back in 2010. Does this mean they are lagging behind more than 1 year as initially thought?

[Alf]

OK guys, time to start talking about release date:

As most of you heard on the presentation, Aderans has given up on reaching the "70% response rate" target and instead are looking for genetic markers that will indicate whether you're a responder or not.

So what does this mean for their release date?

How long do you suspect this will take?

When do you think Phase 3 will start?

What worries me is, genetic markers were NOT on their timeline schedule back in 2010. Does this mean they are lagging behind more than 1 year as initially thought?

But genetic markers is something hey cna look for in parallel with the rest f the reseach and they donęt need it to sell the product? I would at least give the product a shot even if it was 50/50 if it worked(and it shuldnt cost full price if it doesn't work, you only need some injections to see how it if it works)

[neversaynever]

A few thoughts,

1. MODERATORS of this forum need to step in and control the discussion so that it stays on topic and refrains from abuse. It is VERY annoying when there is news like this and there is page after page after page of talk which has NOTHING to do with Aderans.

2. My personal view is that Aderans have knocked the socks of Histogen and Repicel. Their trial is huge and their photos show CLEAR re-growth. Something I cant really see in Histogens macro shots.

3. OK, so theyre not creating new follicles but this is a huge step forward. Between DHT, BDGF, TGFbeta1, PGE2, PGD2 and so much more, there is no way we will develop a therapy that fixes the signalling problem that makes us bald. Cell multiplication and bio-engineered hairs are the only real possible 'cure'. Aderans are achieving re-growth that is visible after just one injection. And they seem active in finding out just how many of those cells are working and how many are not. Its a big big plus. They have proven that cells can be multiplied to provide a visible change. How can that not be a huge step towards a cure?

4. Are those hairs now DHT resistant? Is that signalling issue now resolved? Essentially those shrinking hairs have inducted these new cells. The next big step is for them to find out how many of the injected cells are actually being inducted and possibly subjecting transformed hair to some kind of "DHT test"?

5. Spencer needs to interview this guy. Id say as a top priority. If he, or a moderator is reading this, please oblige!

People might play down Aderans regrowth but I would pay £20k right now if it was available. Sorry to NW7s and NW6s but there are plenty of people around with plenty of hair left that they can save. Is their a video available of the questions that audience went on to ask him?

[Desmond84]

Alf, I just wanna get this hair loss over and done with! I can't wait till I can safely dump my Propecia

You could be right actually. They probably know already what these genetic markers are! Any estimates on year of release?

[neversaynever]

OK guys, time to start talking about release date:

As most of you heard on the presentation, Aderans has given up on reaching the "70% response rate" target and instead are looking for genetic markers that will indicate whether you're a responder or not.

So what does this mean for their release date?

How long do you suspect this will take?

When do you think Phase 3 will start?

What worries me is, genetic markers were NOT on their timeline schedule back in 2010. Does this mean they are lagging behind more than 1 year as initially thought?

Genetic markers shouldnt worry you. It at least means they are pro-active in vastly improving the current results. With markers they can track the new cells and find out the % of cells being inducted and maybe the conditions in which induction is optimal. Phase 3 wont be for a while. Phase 2 isnt quite done yet and they have some big planning and research to do.

[Desmond84]

A few thoughts,

1. MODERATORS of this forum need to step in and control the discussion so that it stays on topic and refrains from abuse. It is VERY annoying when there is news like this and there is page after page after page of talk which has NOTHING to do with Aderans.

2. My personal view is that Aderans have knocked the socks of Histogen and Repicel. Their trial is huge and their photos show CLEAR re-growth. Something I cant really see in Histogens macro shots.

3. OK, so theyre not creating new follicles but this is a huge step forward. Between DHT, BDGF, TGFbeta1, PGE2, PGD2 and so much more, there is no way we will develop a therapy that fixes the signalling problem that makes us bald. Cell multiplication and bio-engineered hairs are the only real possible 'cure'. Aderans are achieving re-growth that is visible after just one injection. And they seem active in finding out just how many of those cells are working and how many are not. Its a big big plus. They have proven that cells can be multiplied to provide a visible change. How can that not be a huge step towards a cure?

4. Are those hairs now DHT resistant? Is that signalling issue now resolved? Essentially those shrinking hairs have inducted these new cells. The next big step is for them to find out how many of the injected cells are actually being inducted and possibly subjecting transformed hair to some kind of "DHT test"?

5. Spencer needs to interview this guy. Id say as a top priority. If he, or a moderator is reading this, please oblige!

People might play down Aderans regrowth but I would pay £20k right now if it was available. Sorry to NW7s and NW6s but there are plenty of people around with plenty of hair left that they can save. Is their a video available of the questions that audience went on to ask him?

You're so right! Definitely as close as we can get to a cure before 2020.

Regarding DHT resistance: I suppose, if the 2 year follow ups show hair count maintenance then we can safely assume they are DHT resistance