Do you have any research to back up these claims? How do you know reversal of fibrosis will lead to the growth of new hair?
well the benaxoprofen research is available. Im sure i even saw a photo of that particular patient on a research document too which i cant seem to find now. And some anecdotal experinces which i agree is not scientific but is at least something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UK_
You say it will grow "some" hairs - how much is "some"? Because im sure you need approx 80,000 hairs to come anywhere near a NW2 look - does "some" equate to around 50 vellus hairs? lol.
well perosnally i belive it has the potential to fully reverse a nw7 into a nw1 over a period of time - what this time period is, i have no clue but a lengthy one IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UK_
Sounds like a bunch of "dream talk" to me.
perhaps you can make it "reality talk" by trying out a cox 2 blocker. Of course you would have to be a nw7 to clearley establish growth.
The argument that "these drugs are being taken by people all the time, and no hair growth is reported" is not a good one. Many of these people arent fully bald so any growth that comes through with the help of this drug, they would not be aware of this fact.
You need to be fully bald to be aware of any growth that comes through - the patient that was on benaxoprofen was fully bald, hence why it wqas reported.
07-23-2012 08:23 PM
2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by gutted
we already know histogen works, it grew hair in the temple regions which is the first area to be affected by fibrosis and the reason why results with minoxidil and propecia are not so good. We can only assume that it reverses this and personally i beleive it reverses it 100%.
it what? You believe that HSC downregulates inflammation and reverses fibrosis on top of stimulating hair and creating brand new follicles? I pray that that is true.
Thymosin super hair growth results pretty much confirm this upregulated inflammation theory.
07-23-2012 08:31 PM
gutted
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2020
it what? You believe that HSC downregulates inflammation and reverses fibrosis on top of stimulating hair and creating brand new follicles? I pray that that is true.
Thymosin super hair growth results pretty much confirm this upregulated inflammation theory.
dude youve gone crazy...looooool
inflammation is present around wound sites/scar tissue.
If histogen reverses tissue back to its "normal" tissue then it obviously reverses inflamation.
Histogen is the perfect long term solution for most people with baldness.
It doesnt address the excess dht problem that causes inflammation but with age this problem diminishes.
IMO there is no NEW follciles - its the old ones that have regenerated. Stem cells are still present in balding scalps.
07-23-2012 08:56 PM
2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by gutted
dude youve gone crazy...looooool
no? :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gutted
inflammation is present around wound sites/scar tissue.
If histogen reverses tissue back to its "normal" tissue then it obviously reverses inflamation.
.... you can apply the same logic to minoxidil then. They haven't really tried it on completely bald people and I don't understand why it's taking them so long. They could be doing so many things in the background while they're waiting for their subjects. They're literally waiting for hair to grow...
Quote:
Originally Posted by gutted
Histogen is the perfect long term solution for most people with baldness.
It doesnt address the excess dht problem that causes inflammation but with age this problem diminishes.
I hope so but your speculations are just as worthy as mine. Even right now it is possible to halt baldness but virtually impossible to regrow anything meaningful. Getting HSC done and just taking some "maintenance" pills would be a dream :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gutted
IMO there is no NEW follciles - its the old ones that have regenerated. Stem cells are still present in balding scalps.
me neither but on their website they claim that their treatment can indeed grow brand new follicles. It has been confirmed in vitro but not yet in vivo.
07-24-2012 01:22 AM
Maradona
You have gone crazy 2020.
What you read is two or three papers. One of them is PGD2 and the other is the stem cells presence on a bald scalp. Now you are combining the two and saying PGD2+stem cells can regrow all your hair back or something along the lines.
It's fine to think that those stem cells are all you need to reactivate your follicles. That's an opinion.
But there are questions we have unaswered and I believe this is the reason why we cannot develop an effective treatment to work for everyone:
is reactivation possible?
You'll probably say yes but we have no proof of it happening in really bald scalps of AGA. Things are VERY different when happening in vivo than in vitro.
Are the stem cells really all you need to grow your hair back?
We don't know that. Just because they are called "stem cells" or because it was called "stem cells" by Cotsarelis doesn't mean they are really stem cells and can sprout hair on their own. Maybe there is another big player that was ravaged and eaten by MPB.
Is there any other factor besides the stem cells that is required for the activation of "new hair"?
Maybe there are more proteins and co-factors present in a bald scalp that prevent hair from growing. We have discovered one or two but it doesn't mean that's all of them.
It's not like they put two bald scalps inside an equipment then they press a button and the equipment tells them all the different amounts of proteins and types of proteins present in non-aga scalps and aga scalps. It's not easy to find differences.
Are there any other types of "stem cells" that are required for the "new" stem cells to grow hair that cannot be replaced by humans and were ravaged by MPB as well?
We don't know much about MPB.
Histogen will work for some and might even be considered a cure some. Everyone's different.
07-24-2012 03:01 AM
UK_
2020, given that you believe Histogens increase in hair count isnt due to the creation of new hair follicles, do you also feel this same way for the results about Replicel? Do you believe they failed to create ABSOLUTELY NO NEW FOLLICLES AT ALL?
Yeah no treatment will work for everyone... look at DP cells, for some people it worked wonders but for the majority the cells just clumped together in the scalp and the body simply destroyed them lol. DSC cells do not do this, they spread out and even migrate to existing follicles, they also theoretically create new hair follicles.
To treat NW7's this is the treatment you need, something along these lines, and I dont understand WHY approval is taking so long all they are doing is using your own cells and increasing their number they are not even messing with the cells it is just a micro micro version of what Gho is doing.
IMO Replicel should have conducted their trials in Asia, just a thought because it is a growing trend, they could have also had good links with Histogens HSC in Japan and Team Tokyo - creating the ultimate hair loss utopia:D:D:D:D.
07-24-2012 07:58 AM
MackJames
I've been on sulfasazine for arthritis for well over a year and noticed no change in hair quantity or quality. Because of my condition I come into regular contact with other arthritis suffers on sulfasazine and took it upon myself to ask them if they've notice any changes in their hair. None of them have noticed a change, meaning, no change occurred or the change was so imperceptible to be irrelevant.
Despite my experience, I know the advocates on TBT who believe sulfasazine works as a treatment for mpb will make every kind of argument that my experience doesn't mean a thing because they desperately want it to be true.
What we have here is a good example of theory versus fact. What theoretically might work on paper doesn't always translate into real world results. I'd take that into consideration before you start shelling out your hard earn dollars on products like sulfasazine and equol.
07-24-2012 09:11 AM
gutted
Quote:
Originally Posted by MackJames
I've been on sulfasazine for arthritis for well over a year and noticed no change in hair quantity or quality. Because of my condition I come into regular contact with other arthritis suffers on sulfasazine and took it upon myself to ask them if they've notice any changes in their hair. None of them have noticed a change, meaning, no change occurred or the change was so imperceptible to be irrelevant.
Despite my experience, I know the advocates on TBT who believe sulfasazine works as a treatment for mpb will make every kind of argument that my experience doesn't mean a thing because they desperately want it to be true.
What we have here is a good example of theory versus fact. What theoretically might work on paper doesn't always translate into real world results. I'd take that into consideration before you start shelling out your hard earn dollars on products like sulfasazine and equol.
so far the only sulfasalazine case i know of is from a user on HLH who claimed to regrow his full frontal hair line whilst on it.
Benaxoprofen also inhibits 5-LOX (in addition to cox 2) which im not sure sulfsalazine does. And its this combination that reveres mpb, Loreal have a patent on this.
Im only aware of Sulfsalazine inhibitting cox-2, which IMO should be enough to stop balding.
Do you notice an increase in nail growth since being on it?
07-24-2012 09:24 AM
UK_
loreal might aswel sell off that patent because they have already cured hair loss with neogenic:D:D:D:D
07-24-2012 09:31 AM
gutted
Quote:
Originally Posted by UK_
loreal might aswel sell off that patent because they have already cured hair loss with neogenic:D:D:D:D
loooool
you never know it may grow some hairs on your scalp!
