-
-
Senior Member
For somebody who's pessimistic, I think 10 years is too long. Especially with the results they have now.
-
So do I. and i agree with Mlao.
With all due respect to all the skeptics, i went back to the 90's in some forums and i can tell you there were never this many professional approaches to HM. Today we have presentations at international annual meetings. Like this year http://www.ishrs.org/PDF/18ASM_ProgramM ... -03-10.pdf
Aderans will be presenting. So will others.
We have peer-reviewed magazines and serious articles reviewed by specialists in the field.
We have photographic evidence as well.
I challenge any skeptic to look through the forums and archives and pull out something similar earlier than 2004.
people who keep saying "5 years from now, yeah we heard that before" have no basis. They don't regard one important aspect: that science develops exponentially. A 1000 years ago things were moving so slowly that it seemed there was no exponential growth in development. But now there is so you cannot judge the 5 years between 2005-2010 with the same logic as you would 2010-2015. It is always faster.
good luck.
-
Originally Posted by crashul
people who keep saying "5 years from now, yeah we heard that before" have no basis. They don't regard one important aspect: that science develops exponentially.
On the other hand, zero raised to any power is still zero.
-
-
Originally Posted by gmonasco
On the other hand, zero raised to any power is still zero.
But it's not zero if you look at the numbers both from Aderans and Histogen...it used to be zero-proof of concept, speculation, theories ...but when you have 100 patients enrolled and treated...it's a double zero but with a 1 in front. You do the maths.
-
Originally Posted by crashul
They don't regard one important aspect: that science develops exponentially. A 1000 years ago things were moving so slowly that it seemed there was no exponential growth in development. But now there is so you cannot judge the 5 years between 2005-2010 with the same logic as you would 2010-2015. It is always faster.
Mr Kurzweil, is that you?
-
-
What's the difference between Histogen and the five year club? A product that they already know will work. In the last year a lot of knowledge has piled up that points to this as the solution, not least the Wnt and related gene research.
All that is left to do is safety research. Now, the sceptics will say, ah, but what about dutasteride? That just needed safety research too. Well, the difference is that Avodart, as it is called, is a less well known drug than Propecia and blocks a form of DHT that is not well understood and is often less effective. Hardly worth marketing then, especially as it's rumoured to destroy some people's hairlines!
In contrast, Histogen works. We know that already. They just need to check it is safe and what the right dosage and frequency is. I fully expect to have a full head of hair, if not the density, by 2014.
-
i really hope u guys are right but i think u are all in to be VERY disappointed. I just had a consult with a top 3 clinic and they said they get insider updates on things like this before everyone else does, and they told me this hm/cloning is a long ways off.
Take that with a grain of salt if you want, like i said i hope im wrong, but i dont think i will be.
Similar Threads
-
By Thinning@30 in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 3
Last Post: 08-10-2014, 04:23 AM
-
By joe from staten island in forum Hair Loss Treatments
Replies: 9
Last Post: 02-01-2012, 08:49 PM
-
By mavikabir85 in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 2
Last Post: 05-24-2010, 10:37 PM
-
By tbtadmin in forum The Bald Truth: Show Archives
Replies: 16
Last Post: 04-26-2010, 07:56 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
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks