What happened two Follica Phase 3 study?

clarence-forgotpassword · Jul 4, 2022

pegasus2 said:
Couldn't have said it any better

I thought you were the guy who believed Follica "aren't doing anything we can't do at home".

pegasus2 said:
Depends what they call new hairs. By their definition you could say we are getting new hairs too. They aren't doing anything we can't do at home

Sure you can make 1600 holes per square cm at home, but what if Follica can make them with less edema/erythema? Does this have no implications for growth?

coolio · Jul 4, 2022

When you're putting 1600 holes into a single cm2, you aren't worried about minimizing surrounding damage. The top layer of the whole area is being turned into hamburger meat by that kind of density.

It's a different kind of wound than anything you get from a normal dermaroller/stamper. It's closer to being an abrasion wound than a piece of smooth skin with holes in it.

RagnarLothbrok · Jul 4, 2022

clarence-forgotpassword said:
I thought you were the guy who believed Follica "aren't doing anything we can't do at home".

Sure you can make 1600 holes per square cm at home, but what if Follica can make them with less edema/erythema? Does this have no implications for growth?

I don't think they can produce much more growth than we are already seeing in the interwebs but they can definetely optimize it with very fast, comfortable procedures every 2 weeks, whereas it seems for home use it must be some giga bleeding session with shorter frequency to achieve something similar. And maybe these home sessions have more risks of long-term problems from so much continuous wounding.

RagnarLothbrok · Jul 4, 2022

coolio said:
When you're putting 1600 holes into a single cm2, you aren't worried about minimizing surrounding damage. The top layer of the whole area is being turned into hamburger meat by that kind of density.

It's a different kind of wound than anything you get from a normal dermaroller/stamper. It's closer to being an abrasion wound than a piece of smooth skin with holes in it.

To be fair they literally tested microburning and abrasion of the scalp before jumping on needling, so yeah, they always aimed at the highest damage possible while not producing scar tissue

pegasus2 · Jul 4, 2022

clarence-forgotpassword said:
I thought you were the guy who believed Follica "aren't doing anything we can't do at home".

They aren't. People are choosing to ignore Follica and wound deeper than they have to.

clarence-forgotpassword said:
Sure you can make 1600 holes per square cm at home, but what if Follica can make them with less edema/erythema? Does this have no implications for growth?

No. The follica patent specifically states that wounding should create erythema, and the inflammation is part of what makes it work. I've never suffered edema from wounding, I assume you meant inflammation

clarence-forgotpassword · Jul 4, 2022

pegasus2 said:
They aren't. People are choosing to ignore Follica and wound deeper than they have to.

No. The follica patent specifically states that wounding should create erythema, and the inflammation is part of what makes it work. I've never suffered edema from wounding, I assume you meant inflammation

Well, with "erythema and edema", I was trying to evoke any sorts of unfavorable effects of needling, such as unnecessary bleeding. Interestingly, Follica's Dr. Dhurat responded to a patient's question saying you should never microneedle so much that you bleed. (It's on this forum.) Her statement is absurd, but on the other hand, why did she say that? (Is there something to it?) Another potentially unfavorable effect is crusting, as I keep asking myself, will the crust interfere with minoxidil absorbtion? (Even though I always shave my head before microneedling with the D2, it's very difficult to wash off all the blood or to not get any crusting.)

Rassmann is one doctor saying the needles should go from 1.0 to 1.5mm. He also refutes neogenesis, recommends microneedling on a daily basis rather than weeks apart, and never discusses any type of tools other than manual dermarollers. He seems a bit out of touch.

RagnarLothbrok · Jul 5, 2022

I wouldn't care much about random doctor opinions, Follica is the only who bothered to make several trials to answer exactly this question and they proved it with statistical significance. Another debate is if you can correctly replicate it yourself with cheaper device or not.

clarence-forgotpassword · Jul 27, 2022

clarence-forgotpassword said:
Well, with "erythema and edema", I was trying to evoke any sorts of unfavorable effects of needling, such as unnecessary bleeding. Interestingly, Follica's Dr. Dhurat responded to a patient's question saying you should never microneedle so much that you bleed. (It's on this forum.) Her statement is absurd, but on the other hand, why did she say that? (Is there something to it?) Another potentially unfavorable effect is crusting, as I keep asking myself, will the crust interfere with minoxidil absorbtion? (Even though I always shave my head before microneedling with the D2, it's very difficult to wash off all the blood or to not get any crusting.)

Rassmann is one doctor saying the needles should go from 1.0 to 1.5mm. He also refutes neogenesis, recommends microneedling on a daily basis rather than weeks apart, and never discusses any type of tools other than manual dermarollers. He seems a bit out of touch.

Hm, I was wrong about the last part. Dr. Rassman does mention Dr. Pen and dermapen on his blog and on tressless several times. Although I haven't found a quote of him discussing the advantages or disadvantages of dermaroller vs. device.

cryingariver · Aug 18, 2022

Cotsuckarelis is busy sucking on big pharma's throbbing c***. Follica ain't releasing sh*t.

cloudsanrain · Aug 18, 2022

Iv'e seen so much *** dragging from these companies with all their trials taking forever and all the wating . I will never beleve anything from them untill their product is actual release to the public .

Kagaho · Aug 18, 2022

Today Follica is nothing more than minoxidil + scalp wounding. They are doing the effort to find a better growth stim. But thats a very hard quest

cryingariver · Aug 19, 2022

Kagaho said:
Today Follica is nothing more than minoxidil + scalp wounding. They are doing the effort to find a better growth stim. But thats a very hard quest

After 20 years??? Cotsuckarelis started sh*t talking back in the 2000's. If he didn't have anything he should've shut his face. then again, he's another a**h** looking for fame so that big pharma can come to him and give him a golden payoff.

Kagaho · Aug 21, 2022

Yeah, I know the feeling. Its frustrating and Follica is one of the worst when it comes to unkept promises. But its false they didnt produce anything. They did, but the indian study and others proved we can do it without paying thousands of dollars

Just cheap old minoxidil and some form of skin disruption, thats it.... All the mental gymnastics about hole density is not backed by any serious study.

Im pretty sure they will only advance when/if they find a strong growth stim.

Raccooner · Aug 21, 2022

cryingariver said:
Cotsuckarelis is busy sucking on big pharma's throbbing c***. Follica ain't releasing sh*t.

Here is my reply I received from Follica.

"Many thank you for reaching out with your interest in Follica and our upcoming trials. I understand and am sorry to hear regarding your condition.

We cannot provide specific details on the trial at this time but are still targeting 2022. More information will be shared on our website once available. The study will also be listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov with information on the trial and where it will be conducted.

Best,

Jonathan

Follica, Inc."

I was thinking of replying to them inquiring about "what's holding up the show" but think the odds of a reply to this type of message is slim to none. What do you think?

glammetal · Aug 22, 2022

Raccooner said:
Here is my reply I received from Follica.

"Many thank you for reaching out with your interest in Follica and our upcoming trials. I understand and am sorry to hear regarding your condition.

We cannot provide specific details on the trial at this time but are still targeting 2022. More information will be shared on our website once available. The study will also be listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov with information on the trial and where it will be conducted.

Best,

Jonathan

Follica, Inc."

I was thinking of replying to them inquiring about "what's holding up the show" but think the odds of a reply to this type of message is slim to none. What do you think?

That was a great move.I feel relieved to hear that they still plan to start in 2023.

Kagaho · Aug 22, 2022

Be cautious guys. They've been saying the same thing since ages.

glammetal · Aug 25, 2022

This is guys from their half year report which was published yesterday 08/25/2022

"Follica Incorporated continued to advance its regenerative platform designed to treat androgenetic alopecia, epithelial aging and other related indications. Preparations are underway for the registration clinical program in male androgenetic alopecia and initiation is anticipated in 2022."

Trichosan · Aug 26, 2022

Raccooner said:
Here is my reply I received from Follica.

"Many thank you for reaching out with your interest in Follica and our upcoming trials. I understand and am sorry to hear regarding your condition.

We cannot provide specific details on the trial at this time but are still targeting 2022. More information will be shared on our website once available. The study will also be listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov with information on the trial and where it will be conducted.

Best,

Jonathan

Follica, Inc."

I was thinking of replying to them inquiring about "what's holding up the show" but think the odds of a reply to this type of message is slim to none. What do you think?

I'm not seeing anything from Follica (what an ***, he won't even link the specific trial) on the website he mentions-about 120 trials in progress or completed
Study #77 & #80 notable: