- Reaction score
- 1,325
If I told you they did, you would probably not believe it. So what's the point arguing?
Stemson is going to use minipigs in the next stage of their hair cloning research
- Thread starter werefckd
- Start date
Considering I'm in all them, I'd say there is no point in arguing, yeah.
- Reaction score
- 1,325
I think you are in all the wrong ones.
I also think that they will succeed, but for some of us it will be too late, I will repeat it again when you are over 30 sign up for cryonics, we wont benefit from these miracle therapies as young people
- Reaction score
- 732
As promising as they seem. They still haven’t even trialed their technology even in pigs.. ridiculous
- Reaction score
- 1,325
Maybe they are trying to engineer those minipigs before then can try their tech on them.
- Reaction score
- 179
agreed. i think anybody slick bald is betger served with self acceptance. even those like myself who stilm have a good head of hsir but cannot take finasteride are better served to grt comfortable with the repellent appewrance it will be for some. i think stemson is many years, probably no less than 15 away from handing this out. but even if you are just looking for maintenance i do not believe there will be anything that beats finasteride long term and if you get sides from it then thats pretty much over. if you dont respond then dutasteeide should do it, if you dont respond to dutasteride it was just not meant to be.
i have zero confidence in any of the "growth promoter" products these never actually work. as far as prevention goes degradinf sndrogen receptors or doing inhibitory dna therapy sounds good however this is still a decade away and i would prefer for the trials to be done by a company whos credibility has been called into question recently.
remember the statistics are not on anyones side, hundreds of promising treatment, not one got throigh. i quit finasteride today and i know full well that no money i could ever have could prevent this sh*t from going down because the tech is stilk stuck in 1998 period.
no new pathway has been identified, there was an "innovate paper" ppsted recently discribing all the cellular pqthways activated in AA but this was known in 2005 nothing new at all.
i think the personification of this degenerancy and chief degenerate and lead "researcher" like Costeralis who have promised major breakthroughs since 2002 every 4 years have contributed to this defeatist attitude for good reasons.
why would anyone develop this sh*t? up until recently men caring about their appearance was seen as a major flaw, its not masculine and its a normal part of agin anyway. our ancestors were not brave enough to speak up about how this is bothering them and thus no light was shed.
it wilm take 10 years of degeneracy in online dating and social media for enough awareness to arise around this topoc, for people to get their mouth shut who say "what do you mean, it is normal for men to go bald, it is a normal part of aging" hwoever nobody would say this to a 22 year old woman getting her skin fucked up like a granny. and thats what it is, it is premature deterioration, a genetic xondition, a disease, it is not normal aging at all, there is not such a massive distribution in when someone ages. soyou tell me some men are just old fucks at 19? f*** off.
but sadly finssteride is better tolerate than some want it to be. it is very well tolerated and if it was jot for main stream media money driven fear mongering and the drive for sensationalism even more men woukd take it
the notion to just shave and grow a stinky ugly beard and roid up like an overcompensating dumb f*** is going to die at some point
but since finasteride works so well for many there is no financila incentive to drive any of this forward. thats why there was no prpgress in 30 years. in addition comes this is a cosmetic problem and even worse, it is quite hard to solve from a biological standpoint. its no easier than more severe diseases but those get more funding of course.
people do not understans there is a million things that can go wrong eith stemson or any other treatment.
it see the only opportunity in developing mechanisms to make existing therapies work. oral minoxidil, mesotherapy with lipids or any delivery where systemic impact is minimal.
nano carriers that grt repulsed by the lower skin barriers and degrade in blood but contain - finasteride or dustasteride.
i think either focus on that which is hard becsuse nobody can do this at home as you have no equippment or forget abojt this all. what is the point in clinging to these reseaech projects that are decades away, daily. for me it prevents acceptance and moving on which i think is very much needed for many here, terminallx sick also do not cling to the latest reseaech, they understand it is unrealistic and try to make the best out of the time they have.
it might not sem this way but loom at the forum here in 2002.its exactly the same spirit. now people are more broken though but the determinism is the same.. itsreally depressing to see
i have zero confidence in any of the "growth promoter" products these never actually work. as far as prevention goes degradinf sndrogen receptors or doing inhibitory dna therapy sounds good however this is still a decade away and i would prefer for the trials to be done by a company whos credibility has been called into question recently.
remember the statistics are not on anyones side, hundreds of promising treatment, not one got throigh. i quit finasteride today and i know full well that no money i could ever have could prevent this sh*t from going down because the tech is stilk stuck in 1998 period.
no new pathway has been identified, there was an "innovate paper" ppsted recently discribing all the cellular pqthways activated in AA but this was known in 2005 nothing new at all.
i think the personification of this degenerancy and chief degenerate and lead "researcher" like Costeralis who have promised major breakthroughs since 2002 every 4 years have contributed to this defeatist attitude for good reasons.
why would anyone develop this sh*t? up until recently men caring about their appearance was seen as a major flaw, its not masculine and its a normal part of agin anyway. our ancestors were not brave enough to speak up about how this is bothering them and thus no light was shed.
it wilm take 10 years of degeneracy in online dating and social media for enough awareness to arise around this topoc, for people to get their mouth shut who say "what do you mean, it is normal for men to go bald, it is a normal part of aging" hwoever nobody would say this to a 22 year old woman getting her skin fucked up like a granny. and thats what it is, it is premature deterioration, a genetic xondition, a disease, it is not normal aging at all, there is not such a massive distribution in when someone ages. soyou tell me some men are just old fucks at 19? f*** off.
but sadly finssteride is better tolerate than some want it to be. it is very well tolerated and if it was jot for main stream media money driven fear mongering and the drive for sensationalism even more men woukd take it
the notion to just shave and grow a stinky ugly beard and roid up like an overcompensating dumb f*** is going to die at some point
but since finasteride works so well for many there is no financila incentive to drive any of this forward. thats why there was no prpgress in 30 years. in addition comes this is a cosmetic problem and even worse, it is quite hard to solve from a biological standpoint. its no easier than more severe diseases but those get more funding of course.
people do not understans there is a million things that can go wrong eith stemson or any other treatment.
it see the only opportunity in developing mechanisms to make existing therapies work. oral minoxidil, mesotherapy with lipids or any delivery where systemic impact is minimal.
nano carriers that grt repulsed by the lower skin barriers and degrade in blood but contain - finasteride or dustasteride.
i think either focus on that which is hard becsuse nobody can do this at home as you have no equippment or forget abojt this all. what is the point in clinging to these reseaech projects that are decades away, daily. for me it prevents acceptance and moving on which i think is very much needed for many here, terminallx sick also do not cling to the latest reseaech, they understand it is unrealistic and try to make the best out of the time they have.
it might not sem this way but loom at the forum here in 2002.its exactly the same spirit. now people are more broken though but the determinism is the same.. itsreally depressing to see
"
Follicle Thought: And you have been working in pig studies?
Geoff Hamilton: We have. The pig model is the closest approximation to human skin and there are various reasons why we need to approximate human skin as close as we can. But, we want to be sure that before we test in humans, that we have recreated, as closely as possible, what we will encounter in human skin and that we’ve designed the parameters of the therapy to be successful in that kind of environment. "
30? What? Hahaha If you have money, hair and a nice body, it is probably the best time of a man's life. You are more mature and confident.
Men have different patterns of beauty during all their life. Women have one: youth.
It is not all bad that ppl are more broken. At least they can focus on other aspects of their lives. It is good to have a sense of reality.
male self-esteem will be a crucial problem in the coming years in the West, it still is today.
I see baldness as a problem of a "wealthy society" but the fact remains that I perceive it as a serious problem, I am young and I find myself in a world with precise rules in which it is a real crap.
I don't follow redpill theories or anything like that, I find them as the apotheosis of nihilism, but I admit that various points are true, and as much as it sucks I try to improve myself as much as I can but baldness is a f*****g dead end.
I do not blame those who have hopes on the forum, coming here and reading promising articles or statements is pure copium for me too, not infrequently we have had posts that have helped us for a better understanding of the problem and I have hopes that something "practical" can come out of here. maybe I'm deluding myself.
I think the etiology of baldness can be guessed from today by looking for as many connections as possible with the different studies, this I fear has never been concretely done even by the startups that propose solutions (maybe it sounds presumptuous, I just hope I'm wrong), we take too many for granted what's this.
Then there are cases like that of hopemed: it is clear that prolactin plays a role in baldness and it is very likely that their approach is a total revolution, but some problems - which we have discussed - are more related to their "communication structure" rather than to the scientific approach they drop their arms.
it's always the same f*****g problem: big statements in public for the search for funding ----> sinking projects even if promising, I hope this specific case goes differently (also because I seem to understand that there is the bayer behind it, maybe someone will be able to clarify how).
What is certain is that until the big industries come into play, little will be done, or at least there will be little funding, and now they seem to have no particular interest, but it doesn't mean that it can suddenly change.
I see bald people getting younger and younger, more and more insecurity about physical appearance by younger and younger guys, it's not just related to girls or dating, indeed I think it's first of all a problem of self-perception (obviously a distortion of the social model ), maybe we are "the vanguard" or maybe we are halfway through before seeing something really revolutionary.
I'm in literally the same ones as you, most of them before you joined. I'd love to hear of a single compound thats been tested that's actually shown verifiable results.
I'm not saying the discords are not better then this dumpster fire of a forum, but let's not pretend there is some serious breakthroughs happening yet there either.
Pretty sure they have started trialing on pigs, but were having non-reliable yields. The CEO talks about it in one of the recent interviews.
The non-reliable yields are related to the cell manufacturing process, not the resulted hair itself (I don’t think they ever made a specific comment about that)
- Reaction score
- 107
What do you guys mean by non reliable yields? Like they aren't able to reliably clone the hairs or that the hairs don't really grow when implanted onto pigs?
- Reaction score
- 1,325
I am in 21 servers and I doubt you are in all GBs? there are some breakthroughs and the UT-34 one has a good potential. I had success on ASC-J9 and I am looking for that to repeat with UT-34. Meanwhile this forum is talking about microneedling with minoxidil results from reddit, KY bottles sold with mice dosage and CPA as the next best thing in HRT.
HairLossTalk.com forum is like the comics trip in the newspaper: it's entertaining and comical at times.
You basically just said it, there is some potential. There is no breakthroughs as of yet, the vast majority of all buys have been complete flops to date, and while I think there is potential, pretending like anything has been verifiably successful as of yet is just not correct.
Here, it's not hard to find;
Follicle Thought: And you have been working in pig studies?
Geoff Hamilton: We have. The pig model is the closest approximation to human skin and there are various reasons why we need to approximate human skin as close as we can.
Whatever this means, they are working with pigs & the pig model.
I think it means that all the scaffolds they are creating are not yielding new hairs in the same way that a graft you get transplanted only has a 90-95% survival rate. Only difference is that I doubt they are anywhere near 90% or it wouldn't be that large of an issue.