Latest Patents From Dr. George Cotsarelis
- Thread starter Noisette
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cotsarelis
It seem that if your dermabrasion your scalp wait for 2 days for scab to fall off and then add aza you will have follicle neogenesis.
- Reaction score
- 1,531
Anyone have clues about de novo HF's growing direction ? Did they managed to find a solution for this ?
Like i said, i've maid quite a long post about this with quotes, research paper but i can't f***ing post it
Any member willing to post it for me ?
Having new follicles is great, big breakthrough, but my worry is that these follicles will grow in random directions, totally unnatural, and i've gather some infos in that matter
Like i said, i've maid quite a long post about this with quotes, research paper but i can't f***ing post it
Any member willing to post it for me ?
Having new follicles is great, big breakthrough, but my worry is that these follicles will grow in random directions, totally unnatural, and i've gather some infos in that matter
Aza deoxycitdine patent 4 on 1st page.I can buy this.Notice it says after scalp detachment apply one a day for 2 days.
I don't care what direction the hair grows.Keep the hair short problem solved.
Noisette
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1,341
It seems that you have to wait a little before you can post some pics as you are a new member here. Welcome @BaldyBalderBald
If you want I can post it for you
Notice it says after scab detachment.Then apply once a day for 2 days.They use deoxycitdine in DMSO.I can get 10grams for 400 dollars.
- Reaction score
- 1,531
Well, keeping hair short, like a buzz cut for example, is where your hair direction will be the more noticeable
- Reaction score
- 1,531
It seems that you have to wait a little before you can post some pics as you are a new member here. Welcome @BaldyBalderBald
If you want I can post it for you
Thx Noisette
Happy to finally interact and not stay in shadows like a stalker
And yes, i saved it in a .txt if you could post it for me
Noisette
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1,341
@Wolf Pack @Roberto_72 : Could he post some pics in the near future ? Thanks
It's a post from @BaldyBalderBald,
As he can't yet post some pics, I post for him the following Text
" Hi everyone,
First post here, just finally sign-up after few years lurking here for new upcoming treatments to get rid of fina after 13 years regimen of 1mg/d.
Started balding at 15....yeah 15 f*****g years, tried minoxidil until 18, then switched over fina cause minoxidil fucked up my scalp bad, managed to maintain Norwood 1.5 13 years but this f*****g disease finally seems to catch up with me...aaaanyways...been doin' some research on follicular neogenesis and i got some food for thoughts for you.
Creating some new hair follicles seems fine, but in order to achieve an acceptable cosmetic and natural look, it needs multiple criterias
1. Density, obviously
2. Thickening
3. Direction
I don't know if density and thickening results will be good, Follica and Dr. Cots seems to be ellusive on this part.
Third one seems to be the problem here, in all patents or discussions i've read about de novo HFs...well direction is not controlled by any means and to me this is the major issue of this technique, especially for hairline, no one wants a frontal hairline or hair randomly grow in every god damn directions, and most major Norwood 0 hairlines have a very specific direction pattern, like Christian Bale one for example :
f****r got a solid one.
Anyway the only sources i've find talking about this quote that de novo HFs directions are quite random and organised in clusters...in mice whatever.
"Distribution and orientation of neogenic hairs in regenerated wounds. (A) Commonly, regenerated HFs form one large cluster (also see Fig. 3). One or a few small secondary cluster(s) can also be present. (B) Seldom, multiple small de novo HF clusters can form (eight clusters here). (C), (D) Orientation of de novo HFs can range from seemingly random (D, purple region; also see Fig. 3) to unidirectional. Commonly, the neogenesis zone can contain several sub-clusters of HFs with distinct orientation (C). Hairs have similar direction within a sub-cluster, but often opposite of that in the neighboring sub-cluster (white vs. black in C and D). Here, WNT pathway reporter BAT-gal (A−C) and BRE-gal reporters (D) were used to aid visualization of neogenic hairs as strongly lacZ-positive. Size bar 1 mm."
Full paper here : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/reg2.38/full
Dr. Bernstein mention it too in an article talking about follicular neogenesis and hair cloning, quoting
"Another problem of hair cloning is that the orientation of hair direction must be controlled. With mouse experiments, the hairs grow at all different directions. Scientists need to find a way to align the hair so that it grows in the right direction. Hair, of course, must also be of a quality that is cosmetically acceptable and matches the patient existing hair. And the hair should grow in follicular units. Individual hairs will not give the fullness or natural look of follicular units."
Source : https://www.bernsteinmedical.com/medical-treatment/hair-cloning/answers/
Some photos of neogenesis or not quite good like this one, and you can see the direction randomness :
Noticed "graft" being mentionned, result of cultured DPCs cells being transplanted, same result as new formed DPCs cells.
@hellouser , if you're reading this, this got to be the first and major question for Follica's team at the next Hair Congress, but I already assume Dr. Cots will elude this again.
As for the DHT sensitivity of de novo HFs, I remember reading that they won't be but i can't find the source anymore, i'll keep searching, all I found is about PGD2 and seems to indicate the opposite actually, but i'll definetly retrieve the source where i've read they won't be sensitive, being basically "out of system" follicles.
Prostaglandin D2 Inhibits Wound-Induced Hair Follicle Neogenesis through the Receptor, Gpr44
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022202X15361753 "
It's a post from @BaldyBalderBald,
As he can't yet post some pics, I post for him the following Text
" Hi everyone,
First post here, just finally sign-up after few years lurking here for new upcoming treatments to get rid of fina after 13 years regimen of 1mg/d.
Started balding at 15....yeah 15 f*****g years, tried minoxidil until 18, then switched over fina cause minoxidil fucked up my scalp bad, managed to maintain Norwood 1.5 13 years but this f*****g disease finally seems to catch up with me...aaaanyways...been doin' some research on follicular neogenesis and i got some food for thoughts for you.
Creating some new hair follicles seems fine, but in order to achieve an acceptable cosmetic and natural look, it needs multiple criterias
1. Density, obviously
2. Thickening
3. Direction
I don't know if density and thickening results will be good, Follica and Dr. Cots seems to be ellusive on this part.
Third one seems to be the problem here, in all patents or discussions i've read about de novo HFs...well direction is not controlled by any means and to me this is the major issue of this technique, especially for hairline, no one wants a frontal hairline or hair randomly grow in every god damn directions, and most major Norwood 0 hairlines have a very specific direction pattern, like Christian Bale one for example :
f****r got a solid one.
Anyway the only sources i've find talking about this quote that de novo HFs directions are quite random and organised in clusters...in mice whatever.
"Distribution and orientation of neogenic hairs in regenerated wounds. (A) Commonly, regenerated HFs form one large cluster (also see Fig. 3). One or a few small secondary cluster(s) can also be present. (B) Seldom, multiple small de novo HF clusters can form (eight clusters here). (C), (D) Orientation of de novo HFs can range from seemingly random (D, purple region; also see Fig. 3) to unidirectional. Commonly, the neogenesis zone can contain several sub-clusters of HFs with distinct orientation (C). Hairs have similar direction within a sub-cluster, but often opposite of that in the neighboring sub-cluster (white vs. black in C and D). Here, WNT pathway reporter BAT-gal (A−C) and BRE-gal reporters (D) were used to aid visualization of neogenic hairs as strongly lacZ-positive. Size bar 1 mm."
Full paper here : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/reg2.38/full
Dr. Bernstein mention it too in an article talking about follicular neogenesis and hair cloning, quoting
"Another problem of hair cloning is that the orientation of hair direction must be controlled. With mouse experiments, the hairs grow at all different directions. Scientists need to find a way to align the hair so that it grows in the right direction. Hair, of course, must also be of a quality that is cosmetically acceptable and matches the patient existing hair. And the hair should grow in follicular units. Individual hairs will not give the fullness or natural look of follicular units."
Source : https://www.bernsteinmedical.com/medical-treatment/hair-cloning/answers/
Some photos of neogenesis or not quite good like this one, and you can see the direction randomness :
Noticed "graft" being mentionned, result of cultured DPCs cells being transplanted, same result as new formed DPCs cells.
@hellouser , if you're reading this, this got to be the first and major question for Follica's team at the next Hair Congress, but I already assume Dr. Cots will elude this again.
As for the DHT sensitivity of de novo HFs, I remember reading that they won't be but i can't find the source anymore, i'll keep searching, all I found is about PGD2 and seems to indicate the opposite actually, but i'll definetly retrieve the source where i've read they won't be sensitive, being basically "out of system" follicles.
Prostaglandin D2 Inhibits Wound-Induced Hair Follicle Neogenesis through the Receptor, Gpr44
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022202X15361753 "
bigentries
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 73
I think it's a given that the first generation of treatments will be terrible in crucial aspects like hair direction. And you are right, no hairline is better than a weird hairline
My take: I don't care and neither should you. If a treatment gives enough density then a hairline reconstruction with a competent hair transplant surgeon should be enough to consider it a real cure
My take: I don't care and neither should you. If a treatment gives enough density then a hairline reconstruction with a competent hair transplant surgeon should be enough to consider it a real cure
- Reaction score
- 512
@Noisette: simply amazing. Thank you very much!!
- Reaction score
- 1,531
- Reaction score
- 1,531
Only potentially solution i see for this matter is their disruption device
Process is still unclear but maybe disruption done with a certain angle can promote hair growth in that particular direction, i don't know, like a support for tomato plant.
Anyway, the process is known for many decades and i don't see Follica release a product where result will be unnatural and potentially worst than a wig or a hair transplant actually
Maybe this long awaited trials or for aspects like this one
Process is still unclear but maybe disruption done with a certain angle can promote hair growth in that particular direction, i don't know, like a support for tomato plant.
Anyway, the process is known for many decades and i don't see Follica release a product where result will be unnatural and potentially worst than a wig or a hair transplant actually
Maybe this long awaited trials or for aspects like this one
- Reaction score
- 213
I think in Congress they will show the first results on people. and we will see in which direction the hair grows
- Reaction score
- 316
Apparently the mechanism that controls direction is called planar cell polarity and is still a subject of research. It guides the initial arrangement of cells. Not just hair, everything that forms a pattern. Here are some relative articles - the first one, with a quick read, doesn't say much besides a reference to PCP in flies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257556/#!po=46.5517 the second is all about flies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2828277/#!po=56.9444 third is more general and perhaps more interesting http://jcb.rupress.org/content/207/2/171
Tbh the subject complexity to number of fucks given ratio is not looking very good for me. If anyone has the balls and will to look into PCP further be my guest. From what I'd read so far I thought perfect directionality is a given but it's nice to be reminded assumptions aren't always right.
Tbh the subject complexity to number of fucks given ratio is not looking very good for me. If anyone has the balls and will to look into PCP further be my guest. From what I'd read so far I thought perfect directionality is a given but it's nice to be reminded assumptions aren't always right.
Noisette
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1,341
The last Text I've posted it's from @BaldyBalderBald
I hope he can make great post like that if he have full access to HairLossTalk.com
Edit: @BaldyBalderBald : you can write your questions for the World Congress for Hair Research here (Hellouser can edit his interviews)
Here : https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...congress-2017-fund.105184/page-4#post-1550689
Last edited: