Response From Tsuji Team. Sort Of...

[nameless]

What am I doing here?

Actually taking time to read about and share information about new research that could better treat or cure hairloss. I tend to side with the positive outlook because the outlook is positive.

In less than a year of being here I've:

• Created the most comprehensive fact thread about FIDIA's lotion on the web.

• Brought news of RepliCel's (then) impending data and other news to the forums; the first to do so anywhere outside of business news articles and within minutes of it being posted. This lead to the most in-depth discussion of the company and its tech that I have personally seen, spanning dozens of pages. Pages where you mostly complained about it because it probably won't be of much help to you since you're significantly bald.

• Answered many, many questions on the forums and especially via PM of people thinking about trying Minoxidil or Finasteride or experiencing side effects of the latter without all the scare mongering.

among other things.

You?

• Complain in impact that girls don't love you because you're bald.

• Argue scientifically incorrect information at almost every turn and contradict yourself. You, along with another user, insisted that hairloss is "aging" and as such, a reversal of that process (which you actually believe could be here in five years) would thus reverse hairloss despite all elementary-level science that can be found in two-second Google search disproving your entire theory. Still believe that aging cure will be here in five years?

• Make a million threads that amount to essentially baseless, hopeful speculation or attack threads on other users. Remember your thread from a few months back about how you were spinning the Tsuji timeline to mean that it would be out next year (2018)? I remember.

• Rant and rave about epithelial cells like there is no possible solution, yet you triumphantly claimed that Alexey Terskikh had solved the problem by using IPSCs to bypass the problem entirely.

It's obvious to most here that you are mentally suffering the ultimate mid-life crisis. You feel you've been robbed because of hairloss, we get it, and you're having extreme difficulty coming to terms with that fact that although we are realistically faced with the possibility of treatments that will will be superior to contemporary ones and could even outright cure hairloss, it won't give you the years you missed out on back.

It's causing you to spout crazy bullshit at alarming frequency

What a bunch of horseshit. What an exaggeration of your own worth.

* You post misleading and outright false positive bs.

* You may have posted something about FIDIA but I don't care about it, whatever it is. I only want to know (1) when a cure happens and (2) when they find a solution to the inductivity problem. Those are the only 2 things that matter to me.

* You brag about posting Replicel info when Replicel got something like 4% regrowth. Whoop Dee Doo! That makes it half as good as finasteride + minoxidil, two treatments that are already available. And nobody needed your help to find out about Replicel. We were going to find out about Replicel whether you were here or not.

* You answered some questions - so what? Practically everyone here has answered questions. You have a low bar for self-congratulation and self-aggrandizement.

* I don't complain about women not liking bald guys anymore than anyone else. Sometimes I actually post that it's reasonable for women to dislike bald guys. The only thing I get consistently annoyed with women about is when they try to lie about disliking bald guys. That annoys me because I don't like the lying part of the equation. On the issue of women not being attracted to bald men - I think it's reasonable for them not to be into bald guys. After all, what is attractive about baldness?

* I still insist that aging plays a role in hair loss. And just because you and some other bro-science types say I'm wrong doesn't make me wrong. Only a fool would respect the opinion of the bro-scientists here. I don't respect 90 something percent of what the bro-scientists here (yourself included) say.

* In fact, top research scientists are saying that a cure for the aging process will be here within 4 years. You dispute what they say but I agree with them. I respect those top scientists more than any of the horseshit that comes from your bro-science mouth.

* Yea I have posted opposing concepts. My opinions change as I get new evidence or as I re-think existing evidence. Most mature intelligent people change their opinions when they get new evidence or rethink older evidence and of course you want to make a big deal of that as if it means something important. And of course you don't understand a person changing his position about an issue because you're in permanent auto-pilot positive bs mode. I'm not. I'm willing to rethink things and adjust to new information. You're just a broken record singing "everything is rosy".

* Yea Alexey Terskikh has solved the inductivity problem with iPS cells BUT Tsuji has said not said he's willing to use the iSP cells to solve the inductivity problem to treat hair loss. If he's unwilling to use iPS cells to treat hair loss then it's irrelevant that it would probably work.

* I will gladly accept that cures are coming as soon as Tsuji says that he will definitely use iPS cells to treat hair loss or that he has found another way to solve the inductivity problem. I think I'm being very reasonable here. You and your band of MERRYmen want to sweep the inductivity problem under the carpet. But I do not. I think it's a real problem that has to be solved.

* Your speculative horseshit about me being negative because I'm angry that I've lost years to hair loss is stupid. The moment that Tsuji announces that he is ready to use iPS cells for hair loss, or that he's found some other solution to the inductivity problem, I'll start popping champagne corks. The time I've lost is lost and unless they cure the aging process there's nothing I can do about that lost time. I understand that. I just want to stop losing more time asap. I'm going to try to get this through your thick skull one more time - I'm being negative because there really is a HUGE roadblock in the way of Tsuji curing hair loss - loss of hair inductivity during cell culture.

* What is your intellectual deficit that you can't grasp that I'm raising a genuine issue? What is wrong with you? I think you must be insane not to have noticed that we have 3 cell based groups (Aderans, Replicel, Intercytex) that have all failed because of this same inductivity problem and you also don't get it that even Team Tsuji is saying that this is a BIG problem and they haven't solved it yet.

* iPS cell technology was well known before Team Tsuji gave us their recent interview so if they were OK with using iPS cells to get around the inducivity problem why didn't they say that in their recent interview? If they were willing to use iPS cell tech why did they say they still have to solve the inductivity problem? Why didn't they instead say "We're going to use iPS cell tech to solve the inductivity problem so there are no big tech problems left to solve."?

* I admit that you occasionally come up with some good comments but when push comes to shove you're just another positive bs peddler who sweeps the negative stuff under the carpet.

 

[nameless]

Nameless thinks hairloss is due to aging? Are you insane lol I had the first signs of hairloss when I was 15 lmao wow guys I must be aging 200x times the normal pace then

Thanks for the useless and ignorant bro-science.

We all age differently. And individual parts of your body can also age differently from other parts. In other words, your hair can break down fast while your liver stays strong.

It sounds like you were born with very bad hair genes. Good.

This means that even when they finally give you new hair you will rapidly start losing it again and you will have to buy the treatment again. And this will keep happening. You will keep having to buy the cure every few years to try to keep up with the losses. You will be losing your new hair about as soon as you get it. And I'm glad. I think it's funny. It makes me happy to think about it.

I think you should just wear a wig and not bother trying to get a cure for your hair loss since you won't be able to buy new hair fast enough to keep up how quickly it's falling out. ROFLMAO!

 

[lemoncloak]

I need to stop reading all the sh*t that gets posted in here and get a life. It's probably time to make hairlosstalk a weekly thing.

 

[nameless]

Besides; if they did solve the issue it would be all over the place right now. Nonetheless i'm sure that tsuji is the highest qualified team to get the job done one day.

They are highly qualified to take on this task but it might take a long time to get this problem licked. We don't know yet.

 

[Rofler]

And Jahoda's experiment where he used uncultured cellular material to grow hair on his wife's arm is decades old. If Tsuji's mouse experiment also utilized uncultured cellular material then Tsuji's mouse experiment provides no advancement over Jahoda's decades old experiment. He simply repeated Jahoda's decades old experiment, except instead of injecting the uncultured cellular material into someone's forearm, Tsuji injected the uncultured cellular material into mice.

So why has Tsuji Team made a scientific paper if all they did was a repeat of the old experiment? If there is nothing new why it's so hyped?

 

[nameless]

So why has Tsuji Team made a scientific paper if all they did was a repeat of the old experiment? If there is nothing new why it's so hyped?

Why not? Researchers repeat research by other scientists all the time.

 

[Rofler]

Why not? Researchers repeat research by other scientists all the time.

So that hype was nothing about from the beggining?

 

[nameless]

I need to stop reading all the sh*t that gets posted in here and get a life. It's probably time to make hairlosstalk a weekly thing.

Yea but you can do HairLossTalk.com while you also do other things. Right now I'm doing HairLossTalk.com while I'm watching the NFL draft.

 

[nameless]

So that hype was nothing about from the beggining?

I don't know. It doesn't matter. The point is that That_Guy asked for an explanation how Tsuji could have grown human hair on a mouse if there are inductivity glitches.

1. I responded by saying that cells lose their inductivity during culture and perhaps Tsuji didn't culture the cells involved in that experiment. I have a valid point. That would explain how Tsuji got human hair to grow on a mouse. He could have injected uncultured human hair cells into the mouse.

2. The point is that what really matters is that there has to be a reason for why Tsuji was able to get human hair to grow on a mouse so my explanation is a good possibility.

3. You see, a bro-science loon who calls himself "That-Guy" says that since Tsuji got human hair to grow on a mouse that means there are NO glitches to the technology. And of course that defies what Tsuji himself says since Tsuji says they still have to solve the inductivity problem. I was just trying to tell That_Guy how it is that Tsuji could grow human hair on mice but the same process might not grow hair for humans. My explanation is that the cells used on the mice weren't cultured but when it comes time to implant the cells in humans the cells will have to be cultured to create enough of them to grow a good amount of hair. And when the cells are cultured they'll lose their ability to grow hair.

 

[That Guy]

You're a f*****g moron. Just shut the f*** up.

No sh*t Tsuji probably used uncultured cells. The point is the process grows hair and there is no reason that same process shouldn't work in humans. The "induvitivity issue" you keep ranting about is completely irrelevant to that fact.

I hope you get your hair back just so that you can beat back down when the college girls turn down a creepy, bulbous guy in what will be his 50s at the time.

 

[H]

I dont really think there's any evidence to suggest Tsuji is not on the right track I mean the interview wasn't even a year agoand they are taking on a problem no one else has solved so I feel like they deserve some time. I just really hope that this problem is solved before I'm 30.

 

[nameless]

p

fantasticly well said.

Yea, it's well said bullshit and self-aggrandizement.

 

[nameless]

I dont really think there's any evidence to suggest Tsuji is not on the right track I mean the interview wasn't even a year agoand they are taking on a problem no one else has solved so I feel like they deserve some time. I just really hope that this problem is solved before I'm 30.

I agree. to a point. Yes, Tsuji is on the right track, but he has a big problem to solve and it's not solved yet. And you're right that so far nobody else has been able to solve it. And that's because it's a HARD problem. Top hair loss researchers have been trying to solve it for over a decade. It's a BIG & VERY COMPLICATED problem. But some of these people make it sound like it's a walk through the park.

 

[nameless]

Jahoda: "We can not grow enough hair for patients until we solve the inductivity problem and that problem is not solved yet."

Christiano: "We can not grow enough hair for patients until we solve the inductivity problem and that problem is not solved yet."

Tsuji: "We can not grow enough hair for patients until we solve the inductivity problem and that problem is not solved yet."

That_Guy: "Tsuji has cured hair loss and Tsuji's clinical trials are just a formality. I know Tsuji, Jahoda, Christiano, and virtually all other hair researchers say the inductivity problem has to be solved for cell-based therapy to cure hair loss but the inductivity problem is irrelevant to curing hair loss. Trust me. I have bro-science on my side.

 

[H]

How old r u?

24

 

[nameless]

You're a f*****g moron. Just shut the f*** up.

No sh*t Tsuji probably used uncultured cells. The point is the process grows hair and there is no reason that same process shouldn't work in humans. The "induvitivity issue" you keep ranting about is completely irrelevant to that fact.

I hope you get your hair back just so that you can beat back down when the college girls turn down a creepy, bulbous guy in what will be his 50s at the time.

1. Hey a**h**, you're the one who asked for an explanation for how Tsuji can grow that small amount of hair on mice but be unable to grow a cosmetically satisfying amount of hair on humans. I gave you a good explanation and you're getting your panties all in a bunch. What a loon.

2 And Tsuji's tech won't work in humans if the cells are cultured because when the cells are cultured they will lose inductivity. Inductivity is the cell's ability to produce follicles you loon. And the cells have to be cultured in order to produce enough of them to produce enough follicles. The cells grew hair in those mice because those cells weren't cultured.

 

[nameless]

That_Guy, below is a statement by you that statesTsuji's clinical trials are more PR than anything else. In other words you're saying that it's a forgone conclusion that Tsuji's treatment works already. Do you really think it's appropriate or helpful for you to post bullshit like this? So far we've had 3 cell-based therapies fail because of the same problem - loss of inductivity - and Tsuji's treatment is ANOTHER CELL BASED THERAPY. Team Tsuji is saying they still have to solve the same problem. And yet here we have you proclaiming that Tsuji is a definite smashing success. Who fool enough to believe your bullshit?




That GuySenior Member
↑
"The human trials will be PR more than anything. They show that it works and people are going to f*****g NUTS 'round the world."

 

[H]

It won't work in humans if the cells are cultured because when the cells are cultured they will lose inductivity. Inductivity is the cell's ability to produce follicles you loon. And the cells have to be cultured in order to produce enough of them to produce enough follicles you moron.

I think That Guy is probably asleep so your good on loon comments for tonight man.

 

[nameless]

I think That Guy is probably asleep so your good on loon comments for tonight man.

You misspelled the word "you're". You spelled it "your". It's 2nd grade grammar, man. You need to go back to school. And start with 1st grade.

And don't tell me what to post.

 

[H]

You misspelled the word "you're". You spelled it "your". It's 2nd grade grammar, man. You need to go back to school. And start with 1st grade.

And don't tell me what to post.

Your throwing a tantrum like a kindergartner so I guess I am just trying to be a more mature now that I'm in 1st grade.

 

[Omega2327]

1. That_Guy, below is another example of Mr. Toyoshima talking about the inability to culture cells. He does NOT use the words "loss of Inductivity" and that's making you think that all Team Tsuji has to do is find a way to culture the cells. But the problem is more complicated than that.

2. Look how Mr. Toyoshima says "Stem cell function is lost with proliferation" therefore yes, there is limit to stem cell proliferation. What Mr. Toyoshima is saying here is that in the sense that the cells lose "function" (inductivity) during culture that means that for all intents and purposes they can't be cultured. He is NOT saying that the cells actually can't be cultured. He's saying that since the cells lose inductivity during culture it's pointless to culture them, UNLESS you find a solution to the problem of loss of inductivity.


Mr. Toyoshima: Generally speaking, it is said that there is a limit to stem cell proliferation. It is generally known that the stem cell function is lost with proliferation, therefore yes, there is limit to stem cell proliferation. In case of human follicular papilla cells having the function as the mesenchymal stem cells, the stems cells can be multiplied by several thousands of times in 3 weeks when we use our technologies. On the other hand, as for the epithelial stem cells, as I mentioned earlier we are still in research for this, therefore there is only a small number of human cases. Consequently, an accurate value for this case is yet to be determined in the near future. However, collectively from these researches, we think that we may be increase follicles at least by about 1,000 times.


3. I think he's Japanese and Japanese is his first language. Sometimes he uses different words/terms than other scientists are using. Instead of saying "culture" he will sometimes say "proliferation" and instead of saying "inductivity" he will sometimes say "function" or "functionality". And this is causing you some confusion. Make no mistake about it, he's saying that the problem is loss of inductivity, which is the same problem all of the other cell-based hair research teams are reporting.

Nameless, are you a doctor or something? Because you are absolutely full of sh*t. All he's saying when he says there's a limit to proliferation is that a single sample cannot result in infinite amplification. He goes on to say that "collectively from these researches, we think that we may be increase follicles at least by about 1,000 times". If you have a sample of 100 follicles, this would give you 100,000 follicles (if successfully cultured), which would be a cure for all intensive purposes.

They need to be able to culture this sh*t as he mentioned. That's the issue as shown below:

"On the other hand, as for the technology to cultivate epithelial stem cells of follicles, it still remains a significant challenge globally."

"We consider the development of the technology to culture epithelial stem cells as the most significant issue we face. In order to regenerate a clinically effective number of follicles, a sufficient number of cells need to be secured while satisfying the safety and functional requirements."

Stop twisting his words around and misinforming this entire forum like a godamn f*****g moron. Learn how to interpret simple English. The problem is cultivation, not proliferation. He just has to be able to culture enough cells successfully to be able to make the "limited" proliferation effective. That's the challenge. Retard.