Follica Delays Due To -planned Obsolescence- | Page 3 | HairLossTalk Forums

Follica Delays Due To -planned Obsolescence-

Discussion in 'New Research, Studies, and Technologies' started by Palex, Mar 5, 2018.

  1. Tano1

    Tano1 Established Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    179
    Dislikes Received:
    11
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    You can call it whining, but don’t forget that good is the reason you’re still here. If you had great then you’d probably live a much “fuller” life according to your post. And yes that has a double meaning.

    De novo follicles is the best thing about Follica. All they need to do is enhance what they’ve already discovered. Or have you grown accustomed to worrying about your hair for the rest of your life? You’re worried about it now after all a decade later. Except this time you’ve already lost ground as you’ve said and follica can be around 2019 so regeneration is probably A must for you now IF it’s that important.
     
  2. Tano1

    Tano1 Established Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    179
    Dislikes Received:
    11
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    Exactly. I’m glad you admitted that you want sufficient coverage. More per cm sq = more coverage. It’s a simple concept.
     
  3. Rolandconil

    Rolandconil Established Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2017
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    185
    Dislikes Received:
    15
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    Are there really no people who have undergone clinical studies of follica?
     
  4. occulus

    occulus Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    641
    Dislikes Received:
    84
    This is the last reply I'm making to you, because you're disingenuously quoting one sentence of an entire argument and using it as a straw man, but "good" got me 10+ years of hair and all the success I had with it. Just because I'm still waiting for "great" because "good" exhausted 10 years after I tried it doesn't mean "good" wasn't worth it; on the contrary, "good" was quite literally priceless. And if Follica hits their deadline, "good" will have done exactly what I had hoped - it carried me to the next treatment.
     
    That Guy likes this.
  5. Tano1

    Tano1 Established Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    179
    Dislikes Received:
    11
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    Yea see it’s a much quicker conversation when you admit it. No point in quoting the whole post since all we did was get off topic.

    Good is not bad. Another 20 years of Fina will still be good, just not for the ones who have lost its effectiveness because they’ve been on it for awhile.
     
  6. occulus

    occulus Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    641
    Dislikes Received:
    84
    Admit what? Get off topic? What's your point - or the point of this thread - to begin with? That anything short of a cure isn't a cure? So I guess you do absolutely nothing about your hair loss? You just watch it fall out, because the available protocols don't cure it? It's like tossing a drowning man a life preserver, and having him throw it back at you because he's still in the water.
     
    That Guy likes this.
  7. That Guy

    That Guy Senior Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Messages:
    2,319
    Likes Received:
    4,775
    Dislikes Received:
    319
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    Except it's not as simple as you think because the number needed for individuals varies.

    Yes, there is an average, but it's only an average. People have different thickness of hair, head size, natural positions of hairlines, etc.

    You're also acting like it's a hard fact that it produces X amount and you forget that it's already been stated the process can be repeated. So how much a person is like to grow from one session likely depends on how good of shape their stem cells are in (age-dependent usually), existing medical or genetic conditions that might affect their response, how faithfully they follow the at-home regimen, etc.

    One person after just a couple months might have a considerably higher amount of growth than another, but it's not like the wounding can't be done again on the other person, nor that troubleshooting their lesser response is impossible.

    But again, none of this matters because studies have already shown it is capable of sufficient coverage without meeting a particular number outright.

    [​IMG]
     
    occulus, Jesse Navarro and dermrafok like this.
  8. Tano1

    Tano1 Established Member My Regimen

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    179
    Dislikes Received:
    11
    My Regimen:
    My Regimen
    My Regimen
    It’s silly to be real negative about something, but it’s also just as silly to be overly optimistic. Be realistic in what you’re going to get. Yes the process can be repeated and I thought you would’ve brought it up sooner. That’s great and to what extent? Fraxel boasted a 50% improved appearance for acne and other things like scarring with a single treatment and how you can have it done any number of times yet you go to an acne forum and they said they got nothing AFTER the 1st or 2nd treatment. Don’t take my word for it though, feel free to hold me to that claim and look into it if you wish. Fraxel is something different and this is Follica I know, but it’s proof that you can’t just assume you are going to get significant coverage from repeating X amount of times either regardless of your susceptibility to failure or success based on genetics, age and other factors. A more relatable example is minoxidil. If you take more minoxidil and apply it 5 times a day instead of twice, are you going to get more improved results? Are you going to be a full head with this now or what? Wounding is in office, how does that differ from traditional needling? Can you wound at home or just in office? I’ve read their studies and through their site and all I see is in office? Maybe a source citation perhaps? See what I did? All I’m doing is asking questions, except ones you can’t make up an answer to. Going back to the post that started it all, you can’t as you said, “relitigate” on something that hasn’t been proven yet. You can relitigate on your opinions though. Don’t mistake me for wanting my speculation to come to be true, but come on, I’m supposed to believe you why? You’re making statements and I’m only asking questions. The conflict though is that you’re going beyond Follica’s initial statements and adding in your own touch of opinions which is what I call an exaggerated truth.

    Im not acting like the wounding produces X amount is a hard fact. No I’m aware that they made quite a few vellus hairs but only a varying number of the total regrowth was terminal which I agree does vary in each patient because that’s what the study said. That’s why I said all they need to do is enhance it and also said for mild and possibly moderate male pattern baldness, this is either a functional cure or temporary maintenance for people like me, but for how long? When I think about this stuff, I don’t just think about my situation, I think about loss as a whole for everybody and then discuss it. Half of these people probably can’t rely on this. I could see your point from the beginning, but your definition of good is probably somebody else’s definition of shit. It’s not that they’re ungrateful, it’s just that they might have it worse than you and can’t see enough benefit for it to matter. You both said as long as it gives you sufficient coverage right? Hypothetical outcome: what if it didn’t? Would you call it a shit treatment? Do you understand?

    I have a simple microneedling regimen and have been maintaining fine without fina, but I have to be honest that I’m not gonna sit in some depressive or suicidal state and worry about it when I lose ground. I’m going to shave it if shit hits the fan. Also the metaphor you gave wouldn’t really apply to me because I’m not basing my entire existence on hair follicles so I can’t say I’m drowning right now. Sure I want something that will work, but I’m not going to waste a decade worrying about it or be on a religious regimen that requires 4 different treatments daily, quarterly and yearly while risking the possibility of castrating (Fina joke) myself for some added years. The investment isn’t worth it at that point for me. I’m only here until Follica says they have officially obtained a next gen treatment or Tsuji gives the green light. Unless they both fail of course. All I did though was raise additional questions to statements that we already have from Follica that can’t be answered fully because it’s not stated on paper yet. Some things can’t be answered until their pivotal study so you guys can’t put on the I know it all cap on your heads until that’s said and done with. The best way to debate on threads is through citing sources though, something none of us do anymore.

    I’ll tell you what, you have your opinions and I’ll have mine. I don’t think I’m breaking some cardinal rule just because I don’t agree with you over settling with what could be a good, great, or shit treatment depending on who perceives it as such. You guys can have the last word if it makes you more comfortable though. See you on the next thread.
     
    The 7TH Sense likes this.

Share This Page