So mpb is caused by Dht or Pgd2?
Pgd2 theory is overriding Dht doctrine?
From what I understand, both an excess of pgd2 on the scalp as well as DHT are testosterone dependent. If Cotsarelis is confident that blocking PGD2 will let you be able to keep your hair, then I really don't care which one it is. I'm just tired of using fin.
12-08-2014 10:41 AM
hellouser
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hairismylife
So mpb is caused by Dht or Pgd2?
Pgd2 theory is overriding Dht doctrine?
MPB suffers at the effects of DHT and PGD2 overexpression. Reversing the two does NOT reverse hair loss. There's more thats going on with MPB anyway;
Upregulation of DKK1 and arachidonic acid. Then downregulation of PGE2, CD200 and CD34 progenitor cells.
You'd need to combat all that. Latanoprost has been known to work on hair by working on the PGF2 and PGE2 receptor and the stuff had worked quite well on diffuse thinners.
12-08-2014 10:44 AM
It's2014ComeOnAlready
Quote:
Originally Posted by HairlossAt15
How do you know?
Because I've read a lot of the literature that's available on his an Garza's work. Cots and his team know everything they will need to know in order to successfully bring a treatment to market. That's the impression I got, and just because Follica is tight-lipped doesn't mean things aren't happening. Their discovery is worth billions, and there's no way they're not very close to releasing something given all the information about his work that we have.
12-08-2014 11:56 AM
FearTheLoss
Quote:
Originally Posted by It's2014ComeOnAlready
Because I've read a lot of the literature that's available on his an Garza's work. Cots and his team know everything they will need to know in order to successfully bring a treatment to market. That's the impression I got, and just because Follica is tight-lipped doesn't mean things aren't happening. Their discovery is worth billions, and there's no way they're not very close to releasing something given all the information about his work that we have.
They aren't in any clinical trials right now, so I don't see how they could be close to releasing something.
12-08-2014 12:02 PM
joely
Quote:
Originally Posted by It's2014ComeOnAlready
Because I've read a lot of the literature that's available on his an Garza's work. Cots and his team know everything they will need to know in order to successfully bring a treatment to market. That's the impression I got, and just because Follica is tight-lipped doesn't mean things aren't happening. Their discovery is worth billions, and there's no way they're not very close to releasing something given all the information about his work that we have.
We were all of the impression they were very close to releasing something until the World Hair Conference, and we realised they wree way off, Cots told desmond that he needs 20 Million and more years of work before releasing anything
12-08-2014 12:24 PM
It's2014ComeOnAlready
Quote:
Originally Posted by FearTheLoss
They aren't in any clinical trials right now, so I don't see how they could be close to releasing something.
I understand that that's what they've been saying. I find it very hard to believe that's the case, because this discovery is a potential one-stop shop to prevent hair loss in men and women. NO other drug will be able to compete, if what I understand about PGD2 inhibition is true. BILLIONS of dollars per year, BILLIONS. I guess no one in America wants to make BILLIONS.
12-08-2014 12:27 PM
Hairismylife
Quote:
Originally Posted by It's2014ComeOnAlready
I understand that that's what they've been saying. I find it very hard to believe that's the case, because this discovery is a potential one-stop shop to prevent hair loss in men and women. NO other drug will be able to compete, if what I understand about PGD2 inhibition is true. BILLIONS of dollars per year, BILLIONS. I guess no one in America wants to make BILLIONS.
Cots patent it already?
12-08-2014 12:32 PM
It's2014ComeOnAlready
Quote:
Originally Posted by joely
We were all of the impression they were very close to releasing something until the World Hair Conference, and we realised they wree way off, Cots told desmond that he needs 20 Million and more years of work before releasing anything
Oh, please. That was nothing but misinformation. The actual quote goes something like this: "$2 million will bring a treatment that's more effective that minoxidil and propecia, $20 million would bring the type of funding needed to give a bald person a full head of hair, but will take more years to achieve."
They don't have $2 million for a drug that's more effective that minoxidil and propecia? I understand puretech ventures received $55 million for a number of treatments in their pipeline, and follica wasn't mentioned. So you mean to tell me they have a drug that could solve hair loss potentially for both men and women, with no sexual side effects, that could bring in billions every year, and they're too cheap to shell out $2 million for it? Then they are the biggest morons history has every known.
12-08-2014 12:34 PM
Hairismylife
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellouser
MPB suffers at the effects of DHT and PGD2 overexpression. Reversing the two does NOT reverse hair loss. There's more thats going on with MPB anyway;
Upregulation of DKK1 and arachidonic acid. Then downregulation of PGE2, CD200 and CD34 progenitor cells.
You'd need to combat all that. Latanoprost has been known to work on hair by working on the PGF2 and PGE2 receptor and the stuff had worked quite well on diffuse thinners.
But you still could get regrowth with RU and minox, combating DHT only.
12-08-2014 12:36 PM
hellouser
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hairismylife
But you still could get regrowth with RU and minox, combating DHT only.
Its not good enough and doesnt work for everyone anyway. Plus,its a bandaid solution.
