Why is the pgd2 discovery not in clinical trials?
- Thread starter Chromeo
- Start date
elephant_knight
Banned
- Reaction score
- 1
There is only one study saying that oral cetirizine lowers pgd2, yet at the same time, there is also an study that says that oral cetirizine does not lowers pdg2... :S
supermusic
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 34
This article you linked they say that more then one scientist thinks that they believe a cure will be out in 2 years. If its more then 2 years they flat out lied to us shouldnt they then have to issue a correction or admit they made a mistake? The media flat out lies to us on many occasions and they need to be held to what they spout off. If its not 2 years or they are not sure then phrase it like that dont just make things up.
I remember George Cotsarelis saying he was misquoted and it would be much longer then two years, yet here they say 2 and another scientist agrees with him. If that is not true then fix it, and plenty of other media outlets reported the same thing.
Men all around the world suffering from male pattern baldness should be ecstatic to hear that scientists believe within two years a cure for baldness will be on store shelves.
I remember George Cotsarelis saying he was misquoted and it would be much longer then two years, yet here they say 2 and another scientist agrees with him. If that is not true then fix it, and plenty of other media outlets reported the same thing.
Men all around the world suffering from male pattern baldness should be ecstatic to hear that scientists believe within two years a cure for baldness will be on store shelves.
yes, but my point is that pgd2 is not gonna do anything for your hairloss. Think about it, there was a ton of talk about pgd2 in march of 2010 and all of a sudden, the conversation is dead. Do you really think this is a mere coincidence?
- - - Updated - - -
prostaglandin f however can be of some aid as demonstrated more recently(latanoprost, bimstoprost).
- - - Updated - - -
prostaglandin f however can be of some aid as demonstrated more recently(latanoprost, bimstoprost).
Chromeo
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 76
That may well be the case, but making sweeping statements such as "my point is that pgd2 is not gonna do anything for your hairloss" is completely without foundation and ill-advised. We haven't even discovered the most effective way to block PGD2 yet and you are willing to state that basically PGD2 plays no part in this whatsoever. I believe this to be a foolish assumption. Please refrain from making such statements without any authority whatsoever on the matter beyond what I presume is a hunch.
I just think people should be focusing their efforts on prostaglandin f2 which has demonstrated through the initial bimatoprost/human trials to be as effective as minoxidil at a very low dosage(I believe they are increasing the dosage for the next round of studies). So far, there is really no evidence that decreasing it in humans is associated with androgenic alopecia. I'm just trying to make rational arguments here so people don't waste their time, we know that there is no link between allergies(high pgd2) and hairloss and keep in mind that this pgd2 hairloss discovery had been made well over a year ago and the discussion amongst it in the research world has died. I don't believe this is a mere coincidence. Do a simple search on google of pgd2 and hairloss and all you will find are the march 2012 links and nothing recent on this topic.
persistentone
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 27
The PGD2 inhibitor study was published in nature:
http://www.nature.com/news/clues-to-the-cause-of-male-pattern-baldness-1.10277
Note this quoted section:
The researchers also report that inhibition of hair growth by PGD2requires a molecule called G-protein-coupled-receptor-44 (GPR44). GPR44 is thought to be important in allergic diseases, including asthma, and several companies are already testing drugs that block GPR44 in clinical trials to treat these diseases[SUP]2[/SUP].
“I would imagine that you could use one of those drugs topically to inhibit the GPR44 receptorâ€, which would in turn limit PDG2inhibition of hair growth, Cotsarelis says.
So the primary researcher of this study - which studied the ability to generate new follicle growth after injuring the scalp and somehow infusing a PDG2 inhibitor - is saying that he thinks that existing drugs out to inhibit PDG2 should in theory work for a topical treatment. So my question is how can any group not be studying this research question right now? I mean if you are developing a drug for allergic reactions, did not someone in your marketing department let you know that there is an application for hair loss that would be a much larger market?
When I contacted the company Follica they don't even have studies *planned* out into the future. Just incredible to me that there can be such low hanging fruit here and no one taking the initiative to study it aggressively.
http://www.nature.com/news/clues-to-the-cause-of-male-pattern-baldness-1.10277
Note this quoted section:
The researchers also report that inhibition of hair growth by PGD2requires a molecule called G-protein-coupled-receptor-44 (GPR44). GPR44 is thought to be important in allergic diseases, including asthma, and several companies are already testing drugs that block GPR44 in clinical trials to treat these diseases[SUP]2[/SUP].
“I would imagine that you could use one of those drugs topically to inhibit the GPR44 receptorâ€, which would in turn limit PDG2inhibition of hair growth, Cotsarelis says.
So the primary researcher of this study - which studied the ability to generate new follicle growth after injuring the scalp and somehow infusing a PDG2 inhibitor - is saying that he thinks that existing drugs out to inhibit PDG2 should in theory work for a topical treatment. So my question is how can any group not be studying this research question right now? I mean if you are developing a drug for allergic reactions, did not someone in your marketing department let you know that there is an application for hair loss that would be a much larger market?
When I contacted the company Follica they don't even have studies *planned* out into the future. Just incredible to me that there can be such low hanging fruit here and no one taking the initiative to study it aggressively.
Its hard for me to believe that no big company like Merk who lost patent on propecia is not even slightly interested at looking into this. I get the feeling they are or have and its possible out of the blue some new thing pops up targeting this if it does in fact work. Heck just looking into this and similar pathways your probably going to find something that works.
Just relax they said its going to be cured in 2 years and I think its already been almost 1 so one more year male pattern baldness is cured.
Just relax they said its going to be cured in 2 years and I think its already been almost 1 so one more year male pattern baldness is cured.