Evening chaps
This is my first post so be gentle with me.
Firstly great forum , only found about Follica, neo genesis, wouding and all that jazz 2 days ago and have been glued to the screen like some hirstute (or not so hirstute) junky.
Anway - I've been interested in Wnt (not only Wnt7a, but generally) production particulary whether its necessary for the production or rejuvenation of HF. Firstly I found this interesting piece of information
"Traditionally, it is assumed that Wnt proteins can act as Stem Cell Growth Factors, promoting the maintenance and proliferation of stem cell,
However, a recent study conducted by the Stanford University School of Medicine revealed that Wnt appears to block proper communication, with the Wnt signaling pathway having a negative effect on stem cell function. Thus, in the case of muscle tissue, the misdirected stem cells instead of generating new muscle cells (myoblasts), they differentiated into scar-tissue-producing cells called fibroblasts. The stem cells failed to respond to instructions, actually creating wrong cell types."
and from another article I perused.
"Another research group has just discovered that Wnt is able to suppress mouse stem cell activity because as mice age their bodies make less of another protein called klotho. Well, klotho restrains Wnt and the absence of klotho causes Wnt to suppress stem cell division."
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1976560
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004478.html
This would suggest that Wnt is not especially important in the creation of stem cells at best, at worst it may actually negatively affect them. The basic idea being that when a stem cell comes in to contact with increased Wnt (i have no idea how much as a percentage over normal) the communication process that tells stem cells what they are to turn into becomes "garbaled" and as a result they may become something that they should not be, such as fibroblast.
Now in terms of HF production/rejuvenation what does this mean? In my humble opinion the purpose of the Wnt in Follica's original pantent was to promote stem cell devlopment. The two articles above suggest that increase in Wnt production actually has a negative affect. Furthermore I thought the point of the plucking of hair and dermabrasion/wounding of the stratum corneum were to return the skin to an embyonic state and in doing so induce production of stem cells in the first place. I suppose that the inclusion of Wnt, in the original Follica patent, was to increase the number of stem cells, however this no longer seems to be.
As an aside, a respected member of this forum, Orin, said (page 24) that Follica seems to have dropped Wnt in whatever form from its patent kit, I suspect this is true and a source for this would be nice. It would be interesting to see when and why Follica did this, I suspect it may tie in with the release date (these studies were posted in August/September 2007) and content of the two articles posted above.
What does this mean? In my ever increasly humbling opinion, it would appear that there is no need to add an element that increases Wnt, but I do not believe that it would be harmful to our efforts either, just of no actual benefit. Considering wounding of the skin alone produces HF, by inducing the production of stem cells, then in theory all that is needed is a way of stimulating stem cells to produce new hair producing cells from the embryonic skin instead (at least in part) from making something else. As a result I will be focussing on plucking, dermabrasion and EGFR inhibitors.
I realise that alot of this information will probably be old hat to many of you and by now will be ingrained on your brain, but this post is as much for me as it is for anyone else and it provides me with a digestible and organised progression of what I have read on this board and where we seem to be now.
Finally, it might be an idea for different members to focus on different things such as one group on dermabraision and another on EGFR inhibitors. I am not saying sole or exclusive focus, but just spend a little more time on one more so than another so that any expertise could be built on the pratical and not only theoretical application of both. I will be starting with dermabrasion options, both optimum routes regardless of expense and ghetto versions.
Finally (for the second time), i'm sure you don't need reminding of this but I think its important, all Follica is doing is putting together a methodology. A methodology that consists of pre-existing methods (i.e. dermbrasion) and drugs. There are numerous studies that have proved that this works, (even a member of this forum has had "proven" results with dermarbrasion alone) that's not really the issue now. Its all about safely testing the efficacy of our collective knowledge based upon a well theorised methodology. I firmly believe that with our pooled efforts and ideas we will soon get to a point where we will have a fully working method of growing some hair on the top of our heads.
Are you still awake????
This is my first post so be gentle with me.
Firstly great forum , only found about Follica, neo genesis, wouding and all that jazz 2 days ago and have been glued to the screen like some hirstute (or not so hirstute) junky.
Anway - I've been interested in Wnt (not only Wnt7a, but generally) production particulary whether its necessary for the production or rejuvenation of HF. Firstly I found this interesting piece of information
"Traditionally, it is assumed that Wnt proteins can act as Stem Cell Growth Factors, promoting the maintenance and proliferation of stem cell,
However, a recent study conducted by the Stanford University School of Medicine revealed that Wnt appears to block proper communication, with the Wnt signaling pathway having a negative effect on stem cell function. Thus, in the case of muscle tissue, the misdirected stem cells instead of generating new muscle cells (myoblasts), they differentiated into scar-tissue-producing cells called fibroblasts. The stem cells failed to respond to instructions, actually creating wrong cell types."
and from another article I perused.
"Another research group has just discovered that Wnt is able to suppress mouse stem cell activity because as mice age their bodies make less of another protein called klotho. Well, klotho restrains Wnt and the absence of klotho causes Wnt to suppress stem cell division."
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1976560
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004478.html
This would suggest that Wnt is not especially important in the creation of stem cells at best, at worst it may actually negatively affect them. The basic idea being that when a stem cell comes in to contact with increased Wnt (i have no idea how much as a percentage over normal) the communication process that tells stem cells what they are to turn into becomes "garbaled" and as a result they may become something that they should not be, such as fibroblast.
Now in terms of HF production/rejuvenation what does this mean? In my humble opinion the purpose of the Wnt in Follica's original pantent was to promote stem cell devlopment. The two articles above suggest that increase in Wnt production actually has a negative affect. Furthermore I thought the point of the plucking of hair and dermabrasion/wounding of the stratum corneum were to return the skin to an embyonic state and in doing so induce production of stem cells in the first place. I suppose that the inclusion of Wnt, in the original Follica patent, was to increase the number of stem cells, however this no longer seems to be.
As an aside, a respected member of this forum, Orin, said (page 24) that Follica seems to have dropped Wnt in whatever form from its patent kit, I suspect this is true and a source for this would be nice. It would be interesting to see when and why Follica did this, I suspect it may tie in with the release date (these studies were posted in August/September 2007) and content of the two articles posted above.
What does this mean? In my ever increasly humbling opinion, it would appear that there is no need to add an element that increases Wnt, but I do not believe that it would be harmful to our efforts either, just of no actual benefit. Considering wounding of the skin alone produces HF, by inducing the production of stem cells, then in theory all that is needed is a way of stimulating stem cells to produce new hair producing cells from the embryonic skin instead (at least in part) from making something else. As a result I will be focussing on plucking, dermabrasion and EGFR inhibitors.
I realise that alot of this information will probably be old hat to many of you and by now will be ingrained on your brain, but this post is as much for me as it is for anyone else and it provides me with a digestible and organised progression of what I have read on this board and where we seem to be now.
Finally, it might be an idea for different members to focus on different things such as one group on dermabraision and another on EGFR inhibitors. I am not saying sole or exclusive focus, but just spend a little more time on one more so than another so that any expertise could be built on the pratical and not only theoretical application of both. I will be starting with dermabrasion options, both optimum routes regardless of expense and ghetto versions.
Finally (for the second time), i'm sure you don't need reminding of this but I think its important, all Follica is doing is putting together a methodology. A methodology that consists of pre-existing methods (i.e. dermbrasion) and drugs. There are numerous studies that have proved that this works, (even a member of this forum has had "proven" results with dermarbrasion alone) that's not really the issue now. Its all about safely testing the efficacy of our collective knowledge based upon a well theorised methodology. I firmly believe that with our pooled efforts and ideas we will soon get to a point where we will have a fully working method of growing some hair on the top of our heads.
Are you still awake????
