+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 327
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Scandinavia
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Some of these photos look promising....pretty much too good to be true

    http://patentimages.storage.googleap...920-D00039.png

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    68

    Default

    Why are they in black and white and so bad looking?

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baldnotbeautiful View Post
    Why are they in black and white and so bad looking?
    +1..............

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,004

    Default

    Conpecia: Knockin is a very respectable member of many forums, I would suggest a little less hostility perhaps. As always, one should necessarily exude a skepticism when considering potential treatments, but lets see how this plays out.

    It's terribly interesting, to say the least.

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baldnotbeautiful View Post
    Why are they in black and white and so bad looking?
    I have a few patents and unless things have changed in the 2 years, the Patent office has really primitive requirements for figures and images. As I recall, they MUST be black&white, and I think the way they get handled, the resolution ends up being pretty low.

    As an aside...for the pathologically pessimistic, conspiracy loving lunatics that attack anyone that doesn't support uninformed "gotchas"...I am NOT saying this technology is credible or clinically relevant, I am merely saying that in terms of the patent pics, the quality is not surprising to me. If the company had a website trying to sell a product using the same pic...that's a different story.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clandestine View Post
    Conpecia: Knockin is a very respectable member of many forums, I would suggest a little less hostility perhaps. As always, one should necessarily exude a skepticism when considering potential treatments, but lets see how this plays out.

    It's terribly interesting, to say the least.
    My initial hostility was directed toward the claim, not the claimant. It was redirected to the claimant after being called a negative troll for voicing extreme skepticism toward an extreme claim.

    Regardless, I agree with you that this is interesting and seems to be backed with more data than the average snake oil claim, which I don't think it is. But to list such a wide array of serious benefits out of nowhere invites a lot of skepticism. Again, not knocking knockin for calling our attention to this, just seems too good to be true in itself.

    And the way it's written really pisses me off

  7. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conpecia View Post
    And the way it's written really pisses me off
    When you say this, do you mean the way the patent is written? If so, you need to understand that it is fairly common to attempt to claim any discreet beneficial effects you believe may be possible functions of the therapeutic (as individually numbered claims). The requirements for "reduction to practice" vary in terms of being granted the claim, and the patent office may reject any number of claims based on "prior art", "obviousness", etc...

    The thing is, you have to read this as a patent, not a marketing brochure. If these guys think there is possible applicability to address these things, of course they are going to attempt to get those claims so:
    A) If what they originally thought would be the most likely application proves untenable, they have backups
    B) after they do all the leg work on developing the technology, they actually get to profit from that work

  8. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conpecia View Post
    Lmfao this guy just called me petty for being skeptical of a treatment that solves every hairloss problem known to humans forever with no sides while curing grey hair and dandruff. Wow.

    Don't back off the claim bud, this doesn't just say it "grows thick terminal hair." Read that laundry list of cures and stick to it you're gonna try to refute me.

    And don't appeal to the other members as though I'm trolling to ruin the party here. If anything I'm making sure a bunch of people don't get their hopes up to be let down for the billionth time by yet another product that promises the stars and doesn't ****ing work. I appreciate you bringing this to our attention but don't attack me when I raise completely reasonable suspicions of it.

    The bolder the claim the greater the skepticism. You present the boldest of claims.
    Get peoples hopes up? you do realize this is the cutting edge future treatments section of a hairloss forum dont you? Everyone on here has hopes of a cure or even a partial cure.

    This patent calls for the use of potential combinations of A type B type and C type Natriuretic peptides in combination with betamethasome and or minoxidil. Of course they are gonna list every possible beneficial response to each combo. And patents are filed to protect inventions, so of course they are going to cover all possible effects to prevent others from using Natriuretic peptides in hair products.

    And nowhere does it claim to give your follicles immunization to DHT.... just that the new growth lasted at least 6 months after cessation of the first treatment cycle. You made that "fact" up. Free your mind from these same old arguments.

    I just wanted to show you guys that most of you are behind the curve on new info and science relating to hairloss. And No this particular method has yet to acheive full regrowth but the improvements are obvious.... the test subjects grew terminal, not vellous hairs.

    Haters gonna hate

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,270

    Default

    It is true the majority of the cases were not for MPB, but just imagine using this AND something like CB!? You should all have boners right now....

  10. #20
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conpecia View Post
    ....And who wrote that patent, a middle schooler? There are ways to begin a sentence that do not include the words furthermore and moreover.

    Oh by the way, it also cures dandruff...
    I suppose I should have read the whole thread before replying...apparently you were talking about the patent language.
    All I can say is, you are criticizing something you apparently have no experience with.
    A patent that can actually be LEGALLY defended has to be written in a certain way. They do not read like a Stephen King novel or a Popular Science article.

    Legal text sounds almost like a different language, and is often referred to as "Legalese". I went through a long process of back and forth with lawyers (that also had substantial biology experience, in one case a molecular bio PhD and a law degree) in a highly reputable Boston firm. Once they had a grasp on the mechanisms, the language in the patent was such that I had to confirm they did actually understand what we had talked about, because it didn't seem to say what I thought it should, and they then explained the legal necessity of the wording. Also, the amount of "Whereas", "Moreover", "Furthermore", etc at the beginning of claim sentences is high and not related to good prose rules.

Similar Threads

  1. Louis shows off his new Walsh & Go hair
    By gmonasco in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-12-2012, 08:51 AM
  2. Seasons Greetings and good growth to all in 2012
    By Spex in forum Men's Hair Loss: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-23-2011, 10:43 AM
  3. Small postage stamp FUE by Dr. Lindsey with some growth at 17 weeks
    By Dr. Lindsey in forum Hair Transplant Results By IAHRS Recommended Surgeons
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-21-2010, 09:46 AM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-23-2010, 08:08 AM
  5. Two months and two weeks after HT, no growth
    By TennisPlayer in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-20-2010, 09:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

» IAHRS

hair transplant surgeons

» The Bald Truth

» Recent Threads

1800 graft repair case results by Dr. Lindsey
Yesterday 08:38 AM
Last Post By Dr. Lindsey
Yesterday 08:38 AM
Navigating the German Job Market as a Kenyan Citizen
11-04-2023 06:31 AM
Last Post By Keegan212
Yesterday 03:51 AM
DR HAKAN DOGANAY/ 4500 GRAFTS / Implanter Pen+FUE
03-26-2024 04:15 PM
Last Post By Hakan Doganay, MD
03-26-2024 04:15 PM
The Mane Event for Thursday, June 15th, 2023
06-15-2023 02:59 PM
Last Post By gisecit34
03-26-2024 08:05 AM