LOL. Coming from the guy who came up with the wacko theory that Samumed delayed its phase 2 trials to 'time' it with the 21st Century Act. The amount of times I held myself back from commenting on your asinine theories. You connect dots that don't exist and will come up with any excuse to sell yourself the slightest of hope.
You're going to be severely disappointed because of your deluded expectations.
I'll read before commenting if you agree to think before commenting.
And to which part do I not know what I am talking about? Are you saying this thread was not created as a result of the Samumed presentation? Then I suggest you read the opening post. Are you saying that there wasn't someone who had this treatment with minimal results? I've read otherwise. But of course you've probably formulated a reason for why that guy was lying or something. Maybe he was being payed by someone to lie on these forums, right? ya ok.
The guy who complained that Kerastem didn't work on him posted his grievance a little less than 3 months after treatment, and based on what he said we aren't even 100% sure he even got Kerastem because what he got sounds a little different from Kerastem, and then there's the issue that he said he's in the USA Kerastem trial and he knows for a fact that he got active treatment because an insider friend told him so, which is a highly doubtful claim. When we told him 3 months isn't long enough to determine if a treatment works or not he did not have a good response to that point, he also did not have a good response when we said the treatment he says he got sounds a little different than Kerastem, and he did not have a good response when we said it's doubtful he would know if he got active treatment rather than placebo.
Who would actually take seriously the complaint of a man who hasn't even given the treatment 3 months to work? I guess you would but nobody with any sense would. The rest of us ALL know that less than 3 months is not long enough to determine if a treatment works or not. And one of his stated complaints appears to be that he experienced a shed since treatment, which might mean that he did get active treatment and it is working on him, but of course you aren't even taking into account that he appears to be saying that he's had a shed. And I don't trust his judgment in his assessment that he DEFINITELY got active treatment since after all he's a person who's judgment tells him that he should see a bunch of new hair in less than 3 months after treatment. He obviously does not have great judgment.
I don't believe you ever held back from commenting on my theory that Samumed was timing its' supplemental phase 2 to mirror the 21st Century Cures Act. If you had felt that was an asinine theory you would have said something back then but you didn't so that means you didn't have a problem with the theory back then. Your position that you wanted to comment on it back then is now a day late and a dollar short. And anyway, I never said that theory was a certainty. I just said that it was a possibility. And of course, given the evidence that we had at the time it was possible back then, although that is now no longer plausible since it's obvious now that they will have to do more testing. So you are saying something NOW that is obvious now but was not obvious at the time, and you're trying to pretend that you knew it back then. Forget it!
You don't know what you're talking about. Blabbing on about how Kerastem doesn't work when the greater likelihood is that it DOES work although probably not to the degree we would like. The photographic evidence makes it clear that it does grow some hair PLUS the scientific evidence put forth by Yale University established that adding adipose tissue to the scalp should regrow at least some hair. You talk as if you think you know more than Yale University scientists. You need to go back to school.