Italian Hair Loss Lotion To Hit The Market In 2016

[Sam1]

Is Brotzu lotion just as effective for men as it is for women?

 

[Bitless]

Am I the only one who's having bad feeling as April 14th come? I have a feeling that we will not get any clear answers for anything.

 

[Sam1]

I kinda feel the same maybe that’s why beps isn’t hanging around the forums anymore.

 

[wc5269]

Why would an 83 year old agree to go to a major conference to deliver bad news? That's why I'm confident there must be at least some evidence of efficacy. "this is the lotion I invented, it doesn't work." That makes no sense.

 

[Sam1]

I don’t think it’s going to be bad news just no real answers to all our burning questions.
My hope is that we get lots of info, including the release date etc.

 

[Dangman]

Hey guys just wanted to attend this conference to talk about our failure.

 

[Jimm]

A concern of mine is that Brotzu hasn't released any before-after pictures of the participants in the study.
He could easily have blurred their faces and paid them some money.

Fair enough, he’s an old man and might not understand marketing, but Fidia knows marketing and should have made sure it was done. Probably the cheapest way to advertise for the product aswell, pay the best responders maximum a couple of grand. 100% regrowth as claimed would make the news internationally, resulting in a massive hype.

I don’t understand this at all.

Get him, @Jonnyyy! Get him!

 

[Arrade]

I don’t think it’s going to be bad news just no real answers to all our burning questions.
My hope is that we get lots of info, including the release date etc.

It’s supposed to be presenting the study involving 60 people with androgenetic alopecia, Fidia’s study

 

[Arrade]

Guys I’m going to be honest, I think brotzu will be on the same level as the big 3, nothing more. With no leaked information, it makes it almost impossible that the growth is anything impressive. If they had a substantial product they would have so many leaks from employees, people working for Fidia leaking the brotzu data to the highest bidder. We’re talking hundreds of millions in sales. It would essentially be like trying not to leak the cure for cancer, impossible. This is going to probably be just another weapon in the arsenal, but nothing more. Let’s all be realistic.

Maybe all their employees are full heads and don’t give a sh*t

 

[Arrade]

Guys I’m going to be honest, I think brotzu will be on the same level as the big 3, nothing more. With no leaked information, it makes it almost impossible that the growth is anything impressive. If they had a substantial product they would have so many leaks from employees, people working for Fidia leaking the brotzu data to the highest bidder. We’re talking hundreds of millions in sales. It would essentially be like trying not to leak the cure for cancer, impossible. This is going to probably be just another weapon in the arsenal, but nothing more. Let’s all be realistic.

People that compare baldness to cancer

 

[Arrade]

Unless they hate being rich, I doubt that’s the reason, unfortunately.

How many people leak technology like this? Like isn’t Tsuji’s team leaking their organ cloning to someone in America?
They probably don’t want to lose their salaried job and be sued and get sent to prison

 

[Arrade]

I wasn’t comparing baldness to cancer, in the way you are assuming. I’m talking about in terms of financial gain. The cure for cancer and curing male pattern baldness. That might have went over your head. If you would like I can break it down for you and hold your hand like a small child.

If someone cured cancer it would be a nobel prize, they might even invent an award for them... people care more about curing fatal illnesses over a what most people consider a harmless cosmetic fix

 

[wc5269]

Unless they hate being rich, I doubt that’s the reason, unfortunately.

How would a Fidia employee get rich off this info? Sell it to a competitor? What would a competitor do with the info? Fidia has a patent and would sue anyone that infringed on it.

 

[Bitless]

I haven’t read the patent, but I’m assuming it’s a patent on the combination of the ingredients of the lotion. This can be manipulated in countless ways which is why many entrepreneurs don’t get patents on some compound products, because it require a listing of active ingredients, which can be manipulated and sold by a competitor, which happens everyday.

Which means competitors don't have to pay fidia employees to get the info. All the ingredients are already on patent. Everybody can check that out.

 

[wc5269]

I haven’t read the patent, but I’m assuming it’s a patent on the combination of the ingredients of the lotion. This can be manipulated in countless ways which is why many entrepreneurs don’t get patents on some compound products, because it require a listing of active ingredients, which can be manipulated and sold by a competitor, which happens everyday.

A combination of ingredients that Fidia has assumedly found to be the most efficacious combo, and they will be first-to-market given their head start. But you think there is big money in subsequently releasing an inferior product? You're overthinking this.

 

[wc5269]

If the data was substantial in proving a considerable amount of growth, that would be the key leak. The patent on the ingredients could be altered simply by adding an inactive molecule to the existing, proven effective, compounds of the lotion. Containing a cure would be next to impossible.

There are so many holes in this logic. The fact is that pharma companies routinely patent and release drugs that earn billions of dollars yearly without data leaks occurring. That's literally what big pharma is. Also, If it was so easy to swerve patent laws, why would they wait for the data? As you are suggesting, the reward would be so immense that it would be a worthwhile risk to alter the patent and produce the lotion even without proof of efficacy. Manufacturing cost are nothing to a pharma company compared to R&D

 

[Ollie]

If the data was substantial in proving a considerable amount of growth, that would be the key leak. The patent on the ingredients could be altered simply by adding an inactive molecule to the existing, proven effective, compounds of the lotion. Containing a cure would be next to impossible.

Patent law isn't as simple as making small alterations and saying it isn't the product in the stated patent. It was exactly that which happened in the 80's and 90's which led to patent law changing from rule base to judgement base.

If Fidia's patent was copied in anyway, regardless of small alterations, if it bares any resemblance to the original patent then with newly formed judgement laws you'd still be breaking the law...large fines, prison, *** rape.

 

[hanginginthewire]

Why would an 83 year old agree to go to a major conference to deliver bad news? That's why I'm confident there must be at least some evidence of efficacy. "this is the lotion I invented, it doesn't work." That makes no sense.

To try and bolster a cash grab that will help his children and grandchildren. Or his mistress. Being a senior citizen doesn’t turn someone into a kindly Grandpa from the 1950s.

 

[wc5269]

Most large pharmaceutical companies leach off each other. They offer the same drug with a different name, listing a different price. Please don’t be so nieve to assume each company does their own extensive R&D. A company wouldn’t simply make the product because the patent lists the ingredient. They would want proof that it is functioning as intended, to grow hair. The data is the key. It’s the proof it works. I don’t see your logic.

Nonsense. Example: why is Genentech the only company selling a drug that cures hep c? It's a multi-billion dollar a year drug. Obviously their competitors would want a piece of that pie if all they had to do is add an inactive molecule to sell it. Obviously that's not how it works.

Big pharma companies throw millions of dollars at research molecules that don't even make it to animal testing. Why would they not spend millions of dollars on manufacturing this lotion if they were legally allowed to, and it had blockbuster potential?

 

[Ollie]

This is incorrect. Many products that list active ingridents are copied without legal consequences. It just has to prove that it’s a “new product”. What is defines as “new” is something of a gray area. Many pharmaceutical companies alter old drugs by adding inactive molicules and ingredients to get around recently banned drugs. It’s the same concept.

Getting around drug laws and patent infringement is completely different. By copying say 75% of a patented product (drug or otherwise) means you're liable to infringement of the 'doctrine of equivalents'.

To actually avoid being sued into federal prison you have to have a product which:

-Performs a different function
- Perform the same result but under a completely different mechanism
-Achieves a different result

So if you produce something that benefits hair loss by increasing blood flow, increasing cell metabolism, and neutralising DHT with S-Equol regardless of what else you put into it... you're in prison. And if you adhere to those 3 required differences to not be caught infringing on the patent... well it obviously wouldn't be the lotion.

 

[wc5269]

To try and bolster a cash grab that will help his children and grandchildren. Or his mistress. Being a senior citizen doesn’t turn someone into a kindly Grandpa from the 1950s.

Did you read what you quoted? I'm saying why would he present to tell us it doesn't work? Fidia would likely break that news with a press release, they wouldn't have a doctor present their failure at a major conference. That would do the opposite of what you're implying.

 

[wc5269]

Genentech is not the only company selling a drug to cure hep c.

First, I meant Gilead, my bad. They have by far the best drug and it was essentially the only cure prescribed by doctors for many years. My main point is, why did no other company immediately sell the same drug with different inactive ingredients? According to you they were legally allowed to do so, and they left billions on the table by not doing it.

 

[hanginginthewire]

Did you read what you quoted? I'm saying why would he present to tell us it doesn't work? Fidia would likely break that news with a press release, they wouldn't have a doctor present their failure at a major conference. That would do the opposite of what you're implying.

He’s going to present to tell us it works. But it doesn’t.

 

[wc5269]

He’s going to present to tell us it works. But it doesn’t.

Great. That wasn't what I was talking about. We get it dude, everyone knows where you stand. We'll just have to wait and see.

@wc5269 I’m not sure why you chose to dislike my post. To have the coverage Ollie described the drug would need a product patent, a process patent, a formulation patent etc.

I found your response dismissive, if you would have provided that explanation, I wouldn't have.

It’s not the only drug prescribed by doctors. And if it is the main prescribed drug, well, that would be a discussion for another day, as there are many drugs that function the same way. My point is evident in your post. Other companies made a similar drug, and sold it for profit. And don’t get drugs and solutions confused. This lotion is simply a combination of already existing compounds, allowing a much faster turnaround for competitors if they were interested.

All these companies are using a lot of the same publicly funded, freely available research. That's why multiple drugs that treat the same condition come out around the same time by different companies. However, they're not the same drug, they have different mechanisms. Again, why are there no direct copies if it is as easy as you claim?

 

[wc5269]

Your statements would be ideal in a universe where large corporations didn’t operate unethically. Unfortunately that is not the world we live in. Many pharmaceutical companies as well as tech companies reverse engineer products and have extensive legal teams behind them to brainstorm how, if possible, they can move around patent laws. The belief that many companies all did their own extensive r&d and all came out with cures around the same time, is extremely nieve and untrue.

This is my last post on this topic, people are going to pissed that we filled up multiple pages debating this. It has gotten completely unrelated to Brotzu. Gilead released Sovaldi, and it dominated the Hep C market for years because it was the best hep c drug available. No other pharma company directly copied it like you say they could. And to your point, it's not because they're ethical, it's because patent law made it illegal for them to do so.

 

[whatevr]

People that compare baldness to cancer

Baldness is basically scalp cancer.

 

[wc5269]

I’m not saying they directly copy the product. I’m saying they indirectly copy it. But i agree we are jacking the thread. I honestly hope that I’m wrong. I can almost guarantee that this will not be a cure though. If it is a cure I will get brotzu tattooed on my and post it on this thread.

Since we can circle this back to Brotzu, I'll chime in one more time, lol (the goal is a 1000 pages before the 14th anyway). You did say they could directly copy it. You said all a competitor had to do was add a single inactive molecule to Brotzu Lotion to legally sell it, which would be a direct copy. The whole reason I brought up Sovaldi is to point out that no one has directly copied it, even though it would be extremely lucrative to do so if it were legal.

For the record, I have a hard time believing this will be a cure too (clearly for different reasons). However, an alternative to the Big 3 would be fantastic and a great help to the many of us that can't tolerate finasteride. Personally that's why I'm excited about Brotzu.