Gadgetine

Stemson is going to use minipigs in the next stage of their hair cloning research

F

froggy7

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
210
trialAcc said:
I was going to, but I ran out of finasteride and trigged a massive shed and now progressive loss when I started doing my research last year and I've been losing ground in the crown/mid scalp as well for the last year or so. I had even started inquiring about booking a consult at Hanson & Wong right before covid started.

I still have good coverage everywhere except temples but now that I see thinning and haven't been able to halt it again I'm hesitant to proceed. As I said, I'd rather shave it and accept if I'm destined to be a NW6+ then have transplants everywhere. I'm not willing to use concealers and have a bare crown for the rest of my youth, I'd just rather buzz it down.
Click to expand...
you can write private message....
 
T

trialAcc

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531
lon chaney said:
nice, man, sounds reasonable and like we're in similar positions, although i'm more diffuse than receding. keep us updated, we'll see how everything transpires re timelines
Click to expand...
It's the fact that I'm starting to diffuse that's really put a pause on it for me, as I said above, I really don't think I'm the type of person who would be satisfied with a full NW5+ transplanted head. I'd rather just shave.

I'll update for sure as I decide what I'm going to do, as I have two great surgeons close to me (Hanson & Wong and Rahal) that I would be happy to have do FUE work on my hairline.
 
S

SAMY

Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
14
Every time we get bad news from clinical trials on alopecia and i don't want to live with the 5-YEARS AWAY lie anymore.
I will shave and try to accept.
 
H

H

Senior Member
Reaction score
775
SAMY said:
Every time we get bad news from clinical trials on alopecia and i don't want to live with the 5-YEARS AWAY lie anymore.
I will shave and try to accept.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it has been 5 years away for 20+ years now. The only thing concrete you can go off of is the hair loss industry's past performance which is pretty reliable and it doesnt look good.
 
F

froggy7

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
210
H said:
Unfortunately it has been 5 years away for 20+ years now. The only thing concrete you can go off of is the hair loss industry's past performance which is pretty reliable and it doesnt look good.
Click to expand...
now we have got stemson th, did intercytex has better solution?
 
H

H

Senior Member
Reaction score
775
Keratinpro said:
Well obviously you can't have something that is in the middle of clinical trials lol
Click to expand...
My point is though as far as I am concerned they are of the same status. Intercytex never brang anything to commercialization and neither has Stemson yet. Now I understand that Stemson is doing well so far at least from the information we have but its isnt like all of the hairloss companies in history were piss poor companies with sh*t prospects they all had lofty goals and smart people behind them and well we all know how the story has gone so far.
 
P

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,513
I'll say this, I've always liked Alexey. He is very smart, and he's always been honest and happy to answer questions as well. I particularly hope he succeeds out of all of them.
 
K

Keratinpro

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
135
H said:
My point is though as far as I am concerned they are of the same status. Intercytex never brang anything to commercialization and neither has Stemson yet. Now I understand that Stemson is doing well so far at least from the information we have but its isnt like all of the hairloss companies in history were piss poor companies with sh*t prospects they all had lofty goals and smart people behind them and well we all know how the story has gone so far.
Click to expand...
You see this is where the vast majority of people fail to understand. The concept or "idea" of hair cloning/ hair loss cure has been thrown around for decades. There were a few major drawbacks then compared to now. The science of hair loss was overwhelmingly limited, the research in the past 5 years alone has shown more information about hair loss than all those years ago. But if you somehow disagree with that, then there is also the matter of technology. The technology of today is vastly superior to that of 10 years ago. When you have the combination of both poor science + lack of technology as well as giving hope to the public for years on end despite the hurdles that you face, it slowly creates despair in those who've been suffering hair loss for decades and that same hopelessness gets passed onto the newer generations, to have your hopes low because look at what happened to us. And the same argument gets brought up, that, "oh such and such company failed to bring a cure all those years ago so what's different now?" Maybe I'm wrong but the vast majority of people online are pessimistic based off of old technology and limited science and don't want to accept the advancements that have been made. I mean it was only 2 years ago where a scaffold was created in order to help the direction of the hair follicle, this was unheard of 5 years ago. Stemson has already moved onto pigs, and supposedly that has made advancements despite Alexey thinking it would take time for that to happen. I'm sure that you will disagree with me and that's fine. AR antagonist that don't produce systemic side effects with solid science and a large sample size, when was that even considered a possibility between 1992-2015? And you're talking about Intercytex, I might be wrong but wasn't that a thing in 2006? The science and technology were nowhere near as to what they are now. Do you mind me asking how old you are?
 
Last edited:
F

froggy7

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
210
Keratinpro said:
You see this is where the vast majority of people fail to understand. The concept or "idea" of hair cloning/ hair loss cure has been thrown around for decades. There were a few major drawbacks then compared to now. The science of hair loss was overwhelmingly limited, the research in the past 5 years alone has shown more information about hair loss than all those years ago. But if you somehow disagree with that, then there is also the matter of technology. The technology of today is vastly superior to that of 10 years ago. When you have the combination of both poor science + lack of technology as well as giving hope to the public for years on end despite the hurdles that you face, it slowly creates despair in those who've been suffering hair loss for decades and that same hopelessness gets passed onto the newer generations, to have your hopes low because look at what happened to us. And the same argument gets brought up, that, "oh such and such company failed to bring a cure all those years ago so what's different now?" Maybe I'm wrong but the vast majority of people online are pessimistic based off of old technology and limited science and don't wont to accept the advancements that have been made. I mean it was only 2 years ago where a scaffold was created in order to help the direction of the hair follicle, this was unheard of 5 years ago. Stemson has already moved onto pigs, and supposedly that has made advancements despite Alexey thinking it would take time for that to happen. I'm sure that you will disagree with me and that's fine. AR antagonist that don't produce systemic side effects with solid science and a large sample size, when was that even considered a possibility between 1992-2015? And you're talking about Intercytex, I might be wrong but wasn't that a thing in 2006? The science and technology were nowhere near as to what it is now. Do you mind me asking how old you are?
Click to expand...
true, 100%
 
M

Mighty

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
131
Keratinpro said:
You see this is where the vast majority of people fail to understand. The concept or "idea" of hair cloning/ hair loss cure has been thrown around for decades. There were a few major drawbacks then compared to now. The science of hair loss was overwhelmingly limited, the research in the past 5 years alone has shown more information about hair loss than all those years ago. But if you somehow disagree with that, then there is also the matter of technology. The technology of today is vastly superior to that of 10 years ago. When you have the combination of both poor science + lack of technology as well as giving hope to the public for years on end despite the hurdles that you face, it slowly creates despair in those who've been suffering hair loss for decades and that same hopelessness gets passed onto the newer generations, to have your hopes low because look at what happened to us. And the same argument gets brought up, that, "oh such and such company failed to bring a cure all those years ago so what's different now?" Maybe I'm wrong but the vast majority of people online are pessimistic based off of old technology and limited science and don't want to accept the advancements that have been made. I mean it was only 2 years ago where a scaffold was created in order to help the direction of the hair follicle, this was unheard of 5 years ago. Stemson has already moved onto pigs, and supposedly that has made advancements despite Alexey thinking it would take time for that to happen. I'm sure that you will disagree with me and that's fine. AR antagonist that don't produce systemic side effects with solid science and a large sample size, when was that even considered a possibility between 1992-2015? And you're talking about Intercytex, I might be wrong but wasn't that a thing in 2006? The science and technology were nowhere near as to what they are now. Do you mind me asking how old you are?
Click to expand...
Technology is always improving, but this doesn't mean that other fields of knowledge improve at the same pace. This is a simple truth for scientists that study the human body. Results come slowly. It is not pessimism. It is a truth.

Moore's Law is not applicable to hairloss study. Just have patience or start moving to change your situation. For hair loss, unrealistic hope or optimism can be way more dangerous than a dose of of pessimism.
 
K

Keratinpro

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
135
Mighty said:
Technology is always improving, but this doesn't mean that other fields of knowledge improve at the same pace. This is a simple truth for scientists that study the human body. Results come slowly. It is not pessimism. It is a truth.

Moore's Law is not applicable to hairloss study. Just have patience or start moving to change your situation. For hair loss, unrealistic hope or optimism can be way more dangerous than a dose of of pessimism.
Click to expand...
That’s fine to have your opinions I’m not wanting to persuade people. I’ll just be disappointed that if these inventions were to come to light and all of those pessimistic individuals will also take benefit of these advancements.
 
K

Keratinpro

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
135
eeyore said:
New job listing from Stemson for a "Cell Culture Technician" https://apply.workable.com/stemson-therapeutics/j/08E189FE41/

Not sure if this is good news that they're trying to speed things up or it means that they're only now just starting to begin to prepare for pig trials. Any thoughts on this @trialAcc ?
Click to expand...
I don’t think they are beginning to prepare for pig trials because that guy on the Fortunis video did say that the process had been trialed on pigs a couple months back. So if I had to guess I think the former is right and they’re trying to speed up the process.
 
T

trialAcc

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531
eeyore said:
New job listing from Stemson for a "Cell Culture Technician" https://apply.workable.com/stemson-therapeutics/j/08E189FE41/

Not sure if this is good news that they're trying to speed things up or it means that they're only now just starting to begin to prepare for pig trials. Any thoughts on this @trialAcc ?
Click to expand...
Any hiring is "good news" in some sense. I wouldn't look too much into it unless it was something very telling such as "clinical trail lead" or a group of mass hiring's asking for experience in human phase 1/2 trial settings or something. They can also finish their proof of concept pig and get started preparing for human trials but still be doing longer trials on pigs and even mice at the same time using altered methods, density, coverage, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2023 XenForo Ltd.
Top