Replicel

so i believe i saw something that said the cost of these procedures would be 15k everytime? in order for this procedure to be effective, dont you need to go in every 2 years? LoL at the company that thinks i would pay 15k every two years. someone shed some light

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by szn

so i believe i saw something that said the cost of these procedures would be 15k everytime? in order for this procedure to be effective, dont you need to go in every 2 years? LoL at the company that thinks i would pay 15k every two years. someone shed some light

---

Can you please show where you got the information from about the price? All Replicel has said about the price is that it would be compatable and then some, compared to the hair transplant prices. And why would you have to go there every second year? Can you please explain your reasoning?

i just keep forgetting which treatment involves going back every couple of years. maybe im just confused. that is why i asked someone to shed some light in replicel :p

I think you mean Histogen. Because they have been able to grow hair back, but they haven't (at least temporary) been able to make the hair follicles DHT-resistant.Therefore, you have to re-vist and re-inject their product after the DHT kills the new follicles. This would though take many many years, at least according to the Histogen's CEO.

I don't think people should be negative about Replicel. Their product can be the greatest treatment ever in the history of hairloss. We should consider our selves lucky to belong to this generation! And I do think I read that Aderans was able to restore and regrow hair, but that the hairs wasn't cosmetically desired. They used the Dermend papilla cell, I think, but Replicel uses dermal sheaths cells. You can see the differences between the results of the different cells in Replicel's pre-clinical work:

http://www.google.no/search?tbm=isch...6j1l7l0.frgbld.

Try to rewrite that link :)

Ps, I don't mind going once every 20 or more years and cashing out around $20k,
BUT going once every 2, 3 years and cashing out that much money would be over the top.
(but well I REALLY think in 20 years we'll have a FULLY permanent, relatively cheap solution)

We'll be a bit smarter in 30 days.

What's up? Why is Replicel's website down?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hairysituation

What's up? Why is Replicel's website down?

---

It seems to be working fine for me

So, we are expecting news next month? I am STOKED!

Yeah man! Late april will determind wheater or not there's hope!

We know that Histogen was able to regrow hair, so there's a big possibility that Replicel will show some result as well. But I was wondering how many percent they have to be able to regrow before I can accomplished a full head of hair, like I never had lost a follicle. 100 percent?

I had another idea and potential question for Replicel, especially post announcement. According to Replicel's interviews, they are able to stimulate dormant follicles-turn them back "on" to growing plus they are able to grow brand new follicles.

So, with my non-scientific background, it seems that generating brand new hair follicles can only occur in spaces lacking hair follicles. So, dormant hair follicles essentially sitting there not growing hair will end up taking up space and ultimately prevent a brand new hair follicle from growing in its spot.

Therefore, the amount non-growing hair follicles existing may be a limiting factor in the generation of new hair follicles (assuming that a brand new hair follicle is unable to growth from below).

It will be very interesting to find out the number of new hair follicles generated per cm2 compared to the number of dormant follicles revived per cm2, if such analysis is even possible.

Possibilities:

1) An initial dosage may end up creating as many new hairs as possible, as these new DSC cells seek open prime scalp real estate between dormant follicles.

2) Subsequent dosages may yield fewer new follicles as prime follicle real estate is already taken up by existing dormant follicles and the newly generated follicles from the initial dosage.

3) Subsequent dosages may be more likely to revive existing follicles than create brand new ones.

4) If it is determined that a far higher number of new follicles could be created vs. dormant ones stimulated, would it be possible to perform a reverse FUE to clear scalp space for the generation of new follicles?

Personally, I have a feeling that they will have greater success in reviving existing hair follicles, but there is the possibility that this may not be the case.