Hair Loss - Follica pictures

Hair Transplant Patient Reviews

TAGOHL

19.06.2008, 20:46

Follica pictures (Hair Multiplication & Research)
Post reply

This was posted on another site. My apologies if it's already been posted here:

http://tressless.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/follica-neogenesis.jpg

You've got six pics. The top 3 are befores, and their respective afters are below each one.

1) A wound + a WNT inhibitor (hair growth inhibition)
2) A wound (new hair follicles)
3) A wound + WNT (many new hair follicles)

TAGOHL is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

haroldo

26.06.2008, 04:57

@ cal
RIGHT
Post reply

ť Haroldo -
ť
ť As I understand it, the basis of the follicle formation (as it applies to
ť Folica's work) is that suppressing the EGF-R makes a certain "choice"
ť between two possible skin formations get tipped in favor of follicle
ť formation. (As opposed to more sebum gland formation, which is what
ť naturally happens at the site of an injury healing site after we've left
ť the womb?)

More or less yeah.

ť Sort of like, "Less EGF-R = more WNT signalling" at least for our
ť purposes?

Possibly. This is where it gets tricky.

ť So I'm thinking that as it applies to the Folica work, the lithium-based
ť WNT signalling should technically help regrow hair to some extent. But it
ť may not hold significant importance compared to the results of the EGF-R
ť inhibition that they're primarily intending to do? Like, the EGF-R
ť inhibition is just MUCH more effective at the same activity than
ť lithium-based WNT boosting would be (without the EGF-R inhibition)?

I guess now we are at the end of what we know and we have to speculate. Basically I am not sure whther having wnt/lithium would act synergestically with EGFR inhibition (ie create more hairs when used together) or whether wnt inhibition is superfluous in the presence of EGFR inhibition (EGFR inhib + wnt is no better tha EGFR inhib). I think a lot of people are going to conclude the former based on the fact that the newest patent mentions EGFR inhibition. However I have given some reasons before as to why this may be so. And it does mention wnt, minoxidil and other things which all help so wnt signalling is by no means out of the picture. for all we know EGFR inhibition may just be more practical/affordable/justifiable to a regulatory body.
hh

haroldo is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Mr.Fantastic

25.06.2008, 18:13

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť I'm currently experimenting using quercetin which is known to inhibit EGF
ť
ť ť with the lithium, caffeine and minoxidil mix. I'm rewounding next week
ť by
ť ť using a glycolic skin peel all over the top of my bare scalp. I DO seem
ť to
ť ť have some dark terminal hairs appeared especially at the widow's peak
ť area
ť ť but I'm not ENTIRELY sure that they are new and/or I'm sceptical about
ť ť early success. As I've said before, should the results warrant it (a
ť ť proliferation of growth on a completely bald scalp) I will procure a
ť camera
ť ť and post pics.
ť
ť Baccy, I'd highly recommend that you go for salicylic acid (SA).
ť Considering that most of the bald people have oily skins, SA will help with
ť that, as it penetrates the pores and work there as well - it's all about
ť creating as best environment for regrowth as we can. Also SA is a known
ť anti-inflammatory peel and is much better tolerated than glycolic acid.
ť
ť I would also advise you to thoroughly research after-care procedure for
ť chemical peels - as being careless while the skin is healing can lead to
ť microscars - not good!

What about tca..

Mr.Fantastic is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

25.06.2008, 13:43

@ Baccy
RIGHT
Post reply

ť I'm currently experimenting using quercetin which is known to inhibit EGF
ť with the lithium, caffeine and minoxidil mix. I'm rewounding next week by
ť using a glycolic skin peel all over the top of my bare scalp. I DO seem to
ť have some dark terminal hairs appeared especially at the widow's peak area
ť but I'm not ENTIRELY sure that they are new and/or I'm sceptical about
ť early success. As I've said before, should the results warrant it (a
ť proliferation of growth on a completely bald scalp) I will procure a camera
ť and post pics.

Baccy, I'd highly recommend that you go for salicylic acid (SA). Considering that most of the bald people have oily skins, SA will help with that, as it penetrates the pores and work there as well - it's all about creating as best environment for regrowth as we can. Also SA is a known anti-inflammatory peel and is much better tolerated than glycolic acid.

I would also advise you to thoroughly research after-care procedure for chemical peels - as being careless while the skin is healing can lead to microscars - not good!

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

Baccy

25.06.2008, 12:54

@ cal
RIGHT
Post reply

ť So I'm thinking that as it applies to the Folica work, the lithium-based
ť WNT signalling should technically help regrow hair to some extent. But it
ť may not hold significant importance compared to the results of the EGF-R
ť inhibition that they're primarily intending to do? Like, the EGF-R
ť inhibition is just MUCH more effective at the same activity than
ť lithium-based WNT boosting would be (without the EGF-R inhibition)?

I'm currently experimenting using quercetin which is known to inhibit EGF with the lithium, caffeine and minoxidil mix. I'm rewounding next week by using a glycolic skin peel all over the top of my bare scalp. I DO seem to have some dark terminal hairs appeared especially at the widow's peak area but I'm not ENTIRELY sure that they are new and/or I'm sceptical about early success. As I've said before, should the results warrant it (a proliferation of growth on a completely bald scalp) I will procure a camera and post pics.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

25.06.2008, 09:02

@ haroldo
RIGHT
Post reply

Haroldo -

As I understand it, the basis of the follicle formation (as it applies to Folica's work) is that suppressing the EGF-R makes a certain "choice" between two possible skin formations get tipped in favor of follicle formation. (As opposed to more sebum gland formation, which is what naturally happens at the site of an injury healing site after we've left the womb?)

Sort of like, "Less EGF-R = more WNT signalling" at least for our purposes?

So I'm thinking that as it applies to the Folica work, the lithium-based WNT signalling should technically help regrow hair to some extent. But it may not hold significant importance compared to the results of the EGF-R inhibition that they're primarily intending to do? Like, the EGF-R inhibition is just MUCH more effective at the same activity than lithium-based WNT boosting would be (without the EGF-R inhibition)?

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

haroldo

25.06.2008, 09:00

@ haroldo
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť The most recent patents from Folica did not mention any WNT-promoting
ť ť substance being used at all.
ť ť
ť ť I still don't understand the on-again/off-again presence of WNT
ť signalling
ť ť in the Folica operation. Is this hair growth really an EGF-R project,
ť a
ť ť WNT project, or does it take both?
ť
ť Either. EGF inhibits the formation of new hair follicles. EGF inhibition
ť enhances it. as you saw from those mouse photos DKK1 (a wnt antagonist)
ť inhibits new hair follicle formation. Again wnt7a enhances it.
ť Minoxidil enhances it. FGF enhances it. EDAR enhances it. The emphasis on
ť EGF is possibly because there is no theoretical chance of enhanced cancer
ť risk from inhibiting EGF and the desire to get the quickest product out
ť there. Or it may be because EGF inhibition is more succesful. Or it may be
ť because the cost of drugs that inhibit EGF while expensive is far cheaper
ť than the ammount of wnt ligands necessary per procedure (lithium may be a
ť relatively weak substitute for wnt in vivo). At any rate though still not
ť understood there seems to be a lot of overlap between wnt/edar pathways and
ť others. Stem cells respond to multiple cues telling them what to become.
ť hh

Actually heres my best explanation - the earlier patent talked a lot about bringing the wounded area in contact with a hair follicle or somesuch -0 the stem cells take their cues from their environment in regeneration and thus if a slick bald spot were to be induced to grow hairs thats tougher than a hairy area. Now the new patent doesnt mention this part at all. So either they figure that isnt necessary anymore or the EGFR inhibition circumvents that aspect in a way that wnt signalling by itself did not.

Wnt is still helpful though and is mentioned as being one of the things that enhances the effect (though they talk about it as a Beta-catenin activator).

It may be significant that they also mention that EGF inhibition led to the development of not just more follicles but larger follicles. This is one of the most exciting/promising things about the Follica stuff - manipulation of these pathways BMP/wnt etc has shown that they are responsible for the control of hair follicle size. So peoples forecasts that you may get some hair but with crap density may be very off the mark. still its always good to keep expectations in check.
hh

haroldo is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

haroldo

25.06.2008, 07:09

@ hairback
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť ť ""Lithium salts have a narrow therapeutic/toxic range and should
ť ť therefore
ť ť ť ť not be prescribed unless facilities for measuring plasma
ť ť concentrations
ť ť ť are
ť ť ť ť available."
ť ť ť ť
ť ť ť ť what if some of that shyte seeps into your bloodstream?
ť ť ť
ť ť ť
ť ť ť Prescription lithium requires a very high dose for it to be effective.
ť
ť ť ť But because the dosage for effectiveness is so high, it also risks
ť ť ť toxicity, which is why you need blood tests. That is what they mean
ť by
ť ť a
ť ť ť narrow therapeutic/toxic range. It doesn't mean that a little bit is
ť ť ť toxic. The levels you would absorb applying it topically wouldn't
ť even
ť ť ť approach a toxic range. In fact, you can easily take 100 mg of
ť lithium
ť ť ť orotate (non-prescription OTC in the U.S.) orally without any
ť toxicity
ť ť ť issues.
ť ť
ť ť What he said.
ť ť I dont know why people get so angry and worked up about this stuff that
ť ť they dont even take the time to understand. If someone came in and said
ť ť "Well this wont work because of study X by blah et al" that is one
ť thing
ť ť but these constant posts by people of "None of this is going to work
ť ť because nothing has ever given me my hair back and I am very bitter"
ť doesnt
ť ť help anyone.
ť ť Theres a lot of reasons why this may not work.
ť ť It might not work in human scalp (unlikely)
ť ť It might not work in balding/bald scalp (much more likely)
ť ť or at least not work as well as in non-balding scalp unless some
ť ť particular pathway is blocked/stimulated (quite likely)
ť ť Thats on the Follica end. On our end theres a million other reasons why
ť i
ť ť might not work - how effective is topical lithium in stimulating wnt?
ť How
ť ť effectively is it absorbed - not well would seem to be the answer. how
ť ť soluble is the readily available lithium orotate form in alcohol/water
ť -
ť ť not very. Are people getting the crucial timing right etc
ť ť In short people are trying to recreate something with tools they can
ť ť obtain here and now. Follica are finding out if it works AT ALL
ť (doubtless
ť ť they know this by now) and then screwing around to try and find how to
ť get
ť ť the best results. While we are using lithium they are gonna use an
ť actual
ť ť wnt protein that they bought off sigma-aldrich. In short this is akin
ť to
ť ť people reading a patent on finasteride and then messing about with
ť green
ť ť tea and saw palmetto to try and help themselves before it becomes
ť ť available. If that bothers you then post elsewhere.
ť ť hh
ť
ť My question is whether it is safe to experiment on our own??????????

I would think so. With a bit of research and common sense I dont see this being any more "dangerous" then any other hairloss treatment.
hh

haroldo is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

haroldo

25.06.2008, 07:07

@ cal
RIGHT
Post reply

ť The most recent patents from Folica did not mention any WNT-promoting
ť substance being used at all.
ť
ť I still don't understand the on-again/off-again presence of WNT signalling
ť in the Folica operation. Is this hair growth really an EGF-R project, a
ť WNT project, or does it take both?

Either. EGF inhibits the formation of new hair follicles. EGF inhibition enhances it. as you saw from those mouse photos DKK1 (a wnt antagonist) inhibits new hair follicle formation. Again wnt7a enhances it.
Minoxidil enhances it. FGF enhances it. EDAR enhances it. The emphasis on EGF is possibly because there is no theoretical chance of enhanced cancer risk from inhibiting EGF and the desire to get the quickest product out there. Or it may be because EGF inhibition is more succesful. Or it may be because the cost of drugs that inhibit EGF while expensive is far cheaper than the ammount of wnt ligands necessary per procedure (lithium may be a relatively weak substitute for wnt in vivo). At any rate though still not understood there seems to be a lot of overlap between wnt/edar pathways and others. Stem cells respond to multiple cues telling them what to become.
hh

haroldo is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

hairback

24.06.2008, 11:20

@ haroldo
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť ""Lithium salts have a narrow therapeutic/toxic range and should
ť therefore
ť ť ť not be prescribed unless facilities for measuring plasma
ť concentrations
ť ť are
ť ť ť available."
ť ť ť
ť ť ť what if some of that shyte seeps into your bloodstream?
ť ť
ť ť
ť ť Prescription lithium requires a very high dose for it to be effective.
ť ť But because the dosage for effectiveness is so high, it also risks
ť ť toxicity, which is why you need blood tests. That is what they mean by
ť a
ť ť narrow therapeutic/toxic range. It doesn't mean that a little bit is
ť ť toxic. The levels you would absorb applying it topically wouldn't even
ť ť approach a toxic range. In fact, you can easily take 100 mg of lithium
ť ť orotate (non-prescription OTC in the U.S.) orally without any toxicity
ť ť issues.
ť
ť What he said.
ť I dont know why people get so angry and worked up about this stuff that
ť they dont even take the time to understand. If someone came in and said
ť "Well this wont work because of study X by blah et al" that is one thing
ť but these constant posts by people of "None of this is going to work
ť because nothing has ever given me my hair back and I am very bitter" doesnt
ť help anyone.
ť Theres a lot of reasons why this may not work.
ť It might not work in human scalp (unlikely)
ť It might not work in balding/bald scalp (much more likely)
ť or at least not work as well as in non-balding scalp unless some
ť particular pathway is blocked/stimulated (quite likely)
ť Thats on the Follica end. On our end theres a million other reasons why i
ť might not work - how effective is topical lithium in stimulating wnt? How
ť effectively is it absorbed - not well would seem to be the answer. how
ť soluble is the readily available lithium orotate form in alcohol/water -
ť not very. Are people getting the crucial timing right etc
ť In short people are trying to recreate something with tools they can
ť obtain here and now. Follica are finding out if it works AT ALL (doubtless
ť they know this by now) and then screwing around to try and find how to get
ť the best results. While we are using lithium they are gonna use an actual
ť wnt protein that they bought off sigma-aldrich. In short this is akin to
ť people reading a patent on finasteride and then messing about with green
ť tea and saw palmetto to try and help themselves before it becomes
ť available. If that bothers you then post elsewhere.
ť hh

My question is whether it is safe to experiment on our own??????????

hairback is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

24.06.2008, 10:59

@ haroldo
RIGHT
Post reply

The most recent patents from Folica did not mention any WNT-promoting substance being used at all.

I still don't understand the on-again/off-again presence of WNT signalling in the Folica operation. Is this hair growth really an EGF-R project, a WNT project, or does it take both?

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

haroldo

24.06.2008, 07:23

@ AJ
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ""Lithium salts have a narrow therapeutic/toxic range and should therefore
ť ť not be prescribed unless facilities for measuring plasma concentrations
ť are
ť ť available."
ť ť
ť ť what if some of that shyte seeps into your bloodstream?
ť
ť
ť Prescription lithium requires a very high dose for it to be effective.
ť But because the dosage for effectiveness is so high, it also risks
ť toxicity, which is why you need blood tests. That is what they mean by a
ť narrow therapeutic/toxic range. It doesn't mean that a little bit is
ť toxic. The levels you would absorb applying it topically wouldn't even
ť approach a toxic range. In fact, you can easily take 100 mg of lithium
ť orotate (non-prescription OTC in the U.S.) orally without any toxicity
ť issues.

What he said.
I dont know why people get so angry and worked up about this stuff that they dont even take the time to understand. If someone came in and said "Well this wont work because of study X by blah et al" that is one thing but these constant posts by people of "None of this is going to work because nothing has ever given me my hair back and I am very bitter" doesnt help anyone.
Theres a lot of reasons why this may not work.
It might not work in human scalp (unlikely)
It might not work in balding/bald scalp (much more likely)
or at least not work as well as in non-balding scalp unless some particular pathway is blocked/stimulated (quite likely)
Thats on the Follica end. On our end theres a million other reasons why i might not work - how effective is topical lithium in stimulating wnt? How effectively is it absorbed - not well would seem to be the answer. how soluble is the readily available lithium orotate form in alcohol/water - not very. Are people getting the crucial timing right etc
In short people are trying to recreate something with tools they can obtain here and now. Follica are finding out if it works AT ALL (doubtless they know this by now) and then screwing around to try and find how to get the best results. While we are using lithium they are gonna use an actual wnt protein that they bought off sigma-aldrich. In short this is akin to people reading a patent on finasteride and then messing about with green tea and saw palmetto to try and help themselves before it becomes available. If that bothers you then post elsewhere.
hh

haroldo is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Sceptic

23.06.2008, 11:39

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť ť You ARE stupid
ť ť
ť ť very very disgusting
ť ť
ť Really, did you read debris post above mine?

yes, the whole thread really

ť
ť
ť ť ť...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't
ť ť ť work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??
ť ť
ť ť do you have some study to prove that applying coca-cola over one's head
ť ť don't work ? Yes, what you must prove is that something works,
ť something
ť ť isn't true just because it hasn't been proved false ( logical fallacy )
ť
ť Are you one drugs?? I can't believe I'm dealing with people like you...why
ť don't you guys everyone a favor and read up on some research that's been
ť done recently. It Has been proven to regrow hair.

like many other things.

ť There is a reason why
ť they are moving on with commercialization, Zohar isn't stupid to just give
ť away $5 million for fruitless research.

It's me who is on drugs ? LOL

ť ť I see that you want to believe, and I have nothing against that, I
ť really
ť ť don't care, but it looks that you have read a couple of patents, some
ť study
ť ť abstracts, read some forums and you pretend that you know something,
ť are
ť ť you a doctor, a biologist ... ? do you know the fundamentals of hair
ť ť growth and hair loss at "deep level" ? If you think that just because
ť ť Fuchs is a respected scientist then follica will work, well, it's what
ť you
ť ť think, but don't insult people just because they don't agree with you,
ť ť because as it hasn't still be proven to work on a human scalp hair, we
ť are
ť ť not obliged to believe that it works ... capisce ?
ť
ť WTF? Did you watch that Elaine Fuchs' video? It has very detailed info
ť about follicles & skin. I don't insult anyone, do a forum search, I've
ť replied numerous times to debris questions but then he comes back to
ť everyone being dreaming & it won't work. He definitely has some sort of
ť Manic disorder (moody behavior) and actually reminds me of helpme007.
ť
ť You're another clueless reader, who just wants to give his insight and be
ť respected for whatever baseless comments he/she makes. I really don't have
ť respect for people like you,

I'm devastated

ť it's a Research forum, I'm no genius either
ť but I like to read up on the research and discuss it with other members in
ť a realistic manner. Instead of giving stupid Coca-Cola examples or saying
ť just because something hasn't worked in the past there won't be a cure.

I've never said there won't be a cure, you "no genius". Don't get frustrated if someone doesn't share your hopes, I don't know why you people get so sensitive, you think follica will be a cure, I doubt it very much, period, no problems.

Sceptic is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

23.06.2008, 07:00

@ bug2
Been Experimenting
Post reply

Cheers Bug2. Might get hold of some of that.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

AJ

23.06.2008, 00:10

@ baldbaby
RIGHT
Post reply

""Lithium salts have a narrow therapeutic/toxic range and should therefore
ť not be prescribed unless facilities for measuring plasma concentrations are
ť available."
ť
ť what if some of that shyte seeps into your bloodstream?

Prescription lithium requires a very high dose for it to be effective. But because the dosage for effectiveness is so high, it also risks toxicity, which is why you need blood tests. That is what they mean by a narrow therapeutic/toxic range. It doesn't mean that a little bit is toxic. The levels you would absorb applying it topically wouldn't even approach a toxic range. In fact, you can easily take 100 mg of lithium orotate (non-prescription OTC in the U.S.) orally without any toxicity issues.

AJ is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

22.06.2008, 23:56

@ baldbaby
RIGHT
Post reply

Oh, well, since it's an AMERICAN that's wanting to try the lithium . . .

Get over yourself.

WNT-signalling has been proven in studies to make a difference in hair in certain situations. Lithium is the only feasible WNT-signalling substance out there for us to try and it's known not to be killing & maiming anyone.

So people are talking about trying Lithium. What a shock. It must be because they're stupid cheapo Americans. It couldn't possibly be because they just want to get their friggin' MPB cured by hook or by crook.

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

baldbaby

22.06.2008, 23:06
(edited by baldbaby, 22.06.2008, 23:21)

@ Baccy
RIGHT
Post reply

ť Lithium Orotate is a health supplement. We work with what we can. We
ť already know it has had SOME success and there is scientific data to back
ť it up. It's cheap and harmless in normal quantities. So, why not?

to tagohl - sorry if I was sounding like a moron. i am a moron... yesterday my iq was clocked at 4. but u don't have to discriminate against us morons... we're a persecuted majority.

about lithium - you say ppl want it cause it's "dirt cheap". maybe that's the problem with too many ppl here, and too many americans in general. they want everything to be "dirt cheap". that's why americans love mcdonalds. "dirt cheap". but does that mean it's any good?

and this is from the wikipedia article about lithium and bipolar disorder:

"Lithium salts have a narrow therapeutic/toxic range and should therefore not be prescribed unless facilities for measuring plasma concentrations are available."

what if some of that shyte seeps into your bloodstream?

and what do u think the chances of this ever being approved by the fda for hairloss will be?

and i'm not a manic depressive btw. just a "flaming moron"! hope they come up with a cure for this soon. and hope it's "dirt cheap" cause i'm a flaming moron!

baldbaby is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

bug2

22.06.2008, 23:03

@ cal
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť Well Bug2, you've got my attention.
ť
ť
ť
ť Can you elaborate some more?
ť
ť Any thoughts on whether these other means of EGF-R would be likely to work
ť topically (and without messing up the healing of the abraded wound
ť otherwise)?

Why would it "mess up the healing"? Ive seen a forum poster or two make that statement but I wouldnt worry about it. Follica is going for a topical treatment.

ť
ť Or would these things still be able to work on the scalp skin when taken
ť systemically in quantites that are within safe bounds?

Well since they are consumed all the time there certainly isnt any harm. Im no expert on these particular compounds but I believe they both fall into classes that have poor bioavailability. If I was force to try it one way over the other I would go for a topical formulation. Since nobody is forcing you why not do it both ways at the same time.

bug2 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

22.06.2008, 22:44

@ bug2
Been Experimenting
Post reply

Well Bug2, you've got my attention.

Can you elaborate some more?

Any thoughts on whether these other means of EGF-R would be likely to work topically (and without messing up the healing of the abraded wound otherwise)?

Or would these things still be able to work on the scalp skin when taken systemically in quantites that are within safe bounds?

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

bug2

22.06.2008, 22:28

@ Baccy
Been Experimenting
Post reply

Baccy you should add EGCG or Tannic acid. EGFr inhibitors are the most important part(after wounding) Quercetin is good but Tannic acid and EGCG are much more powerful. Even more powerful than some synthetic EGFr inhibitors.

http://jb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/139/3/495

Tannic Acid, a Potent Inhibitor of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase
Er Bin Yang1,*, Liu Wei2, Kai Zhang3, Yu Zong Chen2 and Wei Ning Chen1
1 Hepatitis Viruses and Liver Cancer Research Laboratory, School of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 19 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 637551; 2 Department of Computational Science, National University of Singapore, 10 Kent Ridge Crescent, Singapore 119260; and 3 Department of Experimental Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore 169608

Increasing evidence supports the hypothesis that tannic acid, a plant polyphenol, exerts anticarcinogenic activity in chemically induced cancers. In the present study, tannic acid was found to strongly inhibit tyrosine kinase activity of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFr) in vitro (IC50 = 323 nM). In contrast, the inhibition by tannic acid of p60c-src tyrosine kinase (IC50 = 14 ľM) and insulin receptor tyrosine kinase (IC50 = 5 ľM) was much weaker. The inhibition of EGFr tyrosine kinase by tannic acid was competitive with respect to ATP and non-competitive with respect to peptide substrate. In cultured cells, growth factorinduced tyrosine phosphorylation of growth factor receptors, including EGFr, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and basic fibroblast growth factor receptor, was inhibited by tannic acid. No inhibition of insulin-induced tyrosine phosphorylation of insulin receptor and insulin-receptor substrate-1 was observed. EGF-stimulated growth of HepG2 cells was inhibited in the presence of tannic acid. The inhibition of serine/threonine-specific protein kinases, including cAMP-dependent protein kinase, protein kinase C and mitogen-activated protein kinase, by tannic acid was only detected at relatively high concentration, IC50 being 3, 325 and 142 ľM respectively. The molecular modeling study suggested that tannic acid could be docked into the ATP binding pockets of either EGFr or insulin receptor. These results demonstrate that tannic acid is an in vitro potent inhibitor of EGFr tyrosine kinase.

Mol Nutr Food Res.
2005 Apr;49(4):317-28.
Inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor in apple juice extract.

Effects of test compounds on the protein tyrosine kinase
activity of the EGFR was determined using an enzymelinked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) adapted to a 96-well
plate format. The specific EGFR inhibitor tyrphostin
AG1478 was used as a positive control, showing an IC50-
value in this test system of 2.4 l 0.1 lM [8, 9].
EC, a constituent of the apple juice extract, exhibited only
marginal inhibitory properties in this test system. In order
to characterize structural elements crucial for the target
interaction, a series of related catechins were included into
the testing. Of the catechins tested, Cat showed the lowest
inhibitory properties versus the protein tyrosine kinase
(PTK) activity of the EGFR (11% inhibition at 300 lM concentration),
comparable to that of the stereoisomer EC
(24% inhibition at 300 lM). EGC showed a concentrationdependent
inhibition of the PTK activity at concentrations
F 100 lM, achieving inhibition of 50% of the enzyme activity
only at about 300 lM (Table 2). In contrast, PB1 and
PB2 were found to be more effective, without significant
differences between the two epimers. EGCG and ECG
exhibited by far the highest PTK-inhibitory properties,
representing highly potent inhibitors (Fig. 3A, Table 2).
Within the class of catechins the potency for the inhibition
of the PTK activity of the EGFR can be summarized as
EGCG A ECG AA PB2 L PB1 AA EGC A EC L Cat (Fig.
3A, Table 2). The dihydrochalcon glycoside phloridzin
showed only weak inhibitory properties in this test system
(IC50 = 267 l 50 lM), whereas the respective aglycon phloretin
was clearly more potent (IC50 = 43.4 l 5.1 lM)
(Fig. 3B).

ť 10 days ago, I sanded the entire top of my scalp. I'm Norwood 7 and shave
ť my head so there is no hair there to 'inconvenience' the procedure. For the
ť first few days, I applied a mix of Lithium Orotate, caffeine and emu oil.
ť I am now applying a mix of quercetin (known to inhibit tyrosin kinase),
ť dmso, lithium orotate and caffeine mixed into a 60ml bottle of minoxidil.
ť As I have no hair on top, any results should be obvious. I don't own a
ť digital camera but if I should get any results worth talking about, I'll
ť obtain one and post pictures.
ť However, I'm getting awful side effects and may have to cut down on the
ť quantity of lithium. Basically, I just broke about 6x120mg capsules into
ť the minoxidil bottle, about half teaspoon of caffeine and about four
ť tablets (each 100mg) of quercetin. The side effects range from very bad
ť (chest pressure like a panic attack, shortness of breath) to milder effects
ť such as dizziness and muscle aches and anxiety. I'll keep you guys
ť apprised IF there is anything to shout about.
ť
ť Oh and every couple of days, I'm using a 0.5mm dermaroller over my scalp
ť before applying the topical.

bug2 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Amilcar

22.06.2008, 19:07

@ TAGOHL
Please STOP
Post reply

The board is losing its temper...I understand that those are very difficult moments for the board members,everybody is stressed feeling that the moment of truth has came, ..But please STOP ..lets US continue this road together ...This board and particularly this Hair multiplication & Research has always been somehow outstanding when compared to other hair loss boards...Memebers here decided to understand and talk science instead of just winning and thus have been the light for so many less-informed people in the darkness of hair loss and monsters feeding over the misery of the sufferes...So please stop getting against each other and let us be the light in this land of shadow .

Amilcar is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 18:59

@ baldbaby
RIGHT
Post reply

Lithium Orotate is a health supplement. We work with what we can. We already know it has had SOME success and there is scientific data to back it up. It's cheap and harmless in normal quantities. So, why not?

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

TAGOHL

22.06.2008, 18:52

@ baldbaby
RIGHT
Post reply

ť the only reason ppl are interested in lithium now is because they heard it
ť is a signaller for wnt...

And the only reason you know this is because we just told you.

ť that doesn't mean it is the best signaler.

Do you have something better in mind? That's what I thought.

ť probably other things are much better at encouraging wnt activity than
ť lithium...

Can you name a few that are on the market? Can you name some that are dirt cheap and readily available? The answer to both is no (there, I saved you some time).

ť really stupid and simple minded!

You're a flaming moron.

TAGOHL is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

22.06.2008, 18:40

@ baldbaby
RIGHT
Post reply

When future genetic medical science can stop MPB from ever starting in the first place, then people will abandon that "Propecia" shyte overnight too.

But that doens't mean that people are morons for messing with Propecia in the meantime.

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

baldbaby

22.06.2008, 18:09

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon lithium for
ť ť some other silly thing
ť
ť You ARE stupid...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't
ť work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??
ť
ť On the other hand, Elaine Fuchs is a very respected scientist and she has
ť shown that WNT signalling leads to more follicles. Also, now she is working
ť with Follica to take it to a commercial level. These guys obviously know
ť what they are talking about, and you're just a stupid online troll who is
ť discrediting their research without any evidence.

the only reason ppl are interested in lithium now is because they heard it is a signaller for wnt...

that doesn't mean it is the best signaler. it is just A signaller or promoter of wnt, one of probably many, many, many potential substances and compounds that can promote it

probably other things are much better at encouraging wnt activity than lithium...

i repeat, the only reason ppl here are interested in lithium is because someone randomly found that it promotes wnt

when someone comes up with some compound or pharma agent that promotes wnt better, everyone will just forget about this lithium shyte...

people are also excited about lithium because they think its relatively easy to get, it's on the market and since it can be prescribed for mental disorders, probably a lot of people here have access to it!!

seriously, lots of these people think it'll be as simple as buying lithium tablets with a prescription or something, crushing them up, mixing them with water or alcohol or some vehicle, and then rubbing on your head...

really stupid and simple minded!

the lithium discovery was just random...

if someone discovers that rubbing dogsh*t on your head promotes the wnt gene a little bit, then all of a sudden a bunch of people here will start rubbing it on their heads because it's easy to get...

debris is right, when someone discovers something else that promotes wnt better, everyone will just forget about this lithium shyte...

the other thing is that i doubt lithium will ever be approved to use with dermabrasion or whatever...

who knows what kind of psychological effects it could have on someone who is not bipolar?

baldbaby is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 16:15

@ debris
RIGHT
Post reply

.
ť
ť Thats it, so far months of lithium and results not dramatic enough. The
ť guy with gefinitib thats something I'd consider very dramatic. It in fact
ť is first time I saw something like this from a drug. It looks like similar
ť inhibitor is the key.

As I understand it, he got results 3 weeks after wounding. It may be necessary to repeat the wounding but basically due to extreme redness of scalp etc, there are a couple of days when you cannot show your head. This is not convenient for most people but I am able to facillitate the 'downtime' due to my working pattern.
He mentioned that he has some 'downtime' coming up so he intends to repeat his experiment over a larger area. Bear in mind, he only sanded an area the size of your thumb. I'm doing the entire scalp.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 15:27
(edited by debris, 22.06.2008, 15:35)

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

doublepost

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 15:27
(edited by debris, 22.06.2008, 15:36)

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť sorry but you were the one who started insults. I'm too tired to carry
ť on
ť ť this conversation.
ť
ť debris >> We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon
ť lithium for some other silly thing

right, in reaction to you saying this to someone else: "so saying something like people using lithium are dreaming etc speaks of your own stupidity!"

get some sedatives.

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

22.06.2008, 15:23

@ debris
RIGHT
Post reply

ť sorry but you were the one who started insults. I'm too tired to carry on
ť this conversation.

debris >> We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon lithium for some other silly thing

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

debris

22.06.2008, 15:14

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

sorry but you were the one who started insults. I'm too tired to carry on this conversation.

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 15:12
(edited by debris, 22.06.2008, 15:18)

@ Baccy
RIGHT
Post reply

ť The guy's name is Hatchet and he's currently conducting his experiment but
ť had got a number of thick terminal hairs popped up. He said that he will
ť post pictures if and when the results are dramatic enough to warrant it.
ť Pretty much my own stance on the matter.

Thats it, so far months of lithium and results not dramatic enough. The guy with gefinitib thats something I'd consider very dramatic. It in fact is first time I saw something like this from a drug. It looks like similar inhibitor is the key.

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

22.06.2008, 14:43

@ Sceptic
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť You ARE stupid
ť
ť very very disgusting
ť
Really, did you read debris post above mine?

ť ť...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't
ť ť work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??
ť
ť do you have some study to prove that applying coca-cola over one's head
ť don't work ? Yes, what you must prove is that something works, something
ť isn't true just because it hasn't been proved false ( logical fallacy )

Are you one drugs?? I can't believe I'm dealing with people like you...why don't you guys everyone a favor and read up on some research that's been done recently. It Has been proven to regrow hair. There is a reason why they are moving on with commercialization, Zohar isn't stupid to just give away $5 million for fruitless research.

ť I see that you want to believe, and I have nothing against that, I really
ť don't care, but it looks that you have read a couple of patents, some study
ť abstracts, read some forums and you pretend that you know something, are
ť you a doctor, a biologist ... ? do you know the fundamentals of hair
ť growth and hair loss at "deep level" ? If you think that just because
ť Fuchs is a respected scientist then follica will work, well, it's what you
ť think, but don't insult people just because they don't agree with you,
ť because as it hasn't still be proven to work on a human scalp hair, we are
ť not obliged to believe that it works ... capisce ?

WTF? Did you watch that Elaine Fuchs' video? It has very detailed info about follicles & skin. I don't insult anyone, do a forum search, I've replied numerous times to debris questions but then he comes back to everyone being dreaming & it won't work. He definitely has some sort of Manic disorder (moody behavior) and actually reminds me of helpme007.

You're another clueless reader, who just wants to give his insight and be respected for whatever baseless comments he/she makes. I really don't have respect for people like you, it's a Research forum, I'm no genius either but I like to read up on the research and discuss it with other members in a realistic manner. Instead of giving stupid Coca-Cola examples or saying just because something hasn't worked in the past there won't be a cure.

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

goata007

22.06.2008, 14:33

@ debris
RIGHT
Post reply

ť Yes, I know that one guy used it for months and grew nothing that would
ť give him any useful coverage. He says he grew some hair. But then, no
ť pictures, and that means that it probably was not thick terminal hair.

So what?? Did I say that putting lithium on your head will give you a head full of hair? What I'm talking about is that WNT signalling has been Scientifically proven to be linked with increase in hair follicles. And that's what we are discussing here.

NOTE THE TITLE OF THE FORUM: It has "RESEARCH" in it, we're just dicussing latest research and how could it be used to regrow hair, but NO ONE is making any bold claims. If you think it's all daydreaming, then tell me why do you come to these forums & post one-liner comments?

ť The day someone grows real results wll be the day he posts the pictures to
ť scream it aloud to the whole world.

Guess what...non-balding people don't effin' care...they are living their lives happily, so a cure for baldness won't make any headlines. Did you know about the cancer guy who regrow a good amount of hair from gefitinib? Were there any pics all over the hairloss forums?? No! It's 3 years old and I just came across it few days ago while doing research on EGF inhibition.

ť PS: There were dozens of very respected scientists before. Dozen of
ť papers, Tons ov research that shows growth of hair stimulated by almost
ť every single substance you can think of. Yet none of it works for male
ť pattern baldness.

Just because there isn't a cure for cancer doesn't mean there never would be. As I mentioned ealier, these very same scientists debunkd hair growth after abrasion/wounds 50 years ago! A lot of advancements have been made since then. Plus, what we're talking about here is new hair growth NOT rejuvenation of existing hair.

NOTE: Do everyone a favor and just watch that Elaine Fuchs video, may give you some insight!

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

Baccy

22.06.2008, 13:59

@ debris
RIGHT
Post reply

The guy's name is Hatchet and he's currently conducting his experiment but had got a number of thick terminal hairs popped up. He said that he will post pictures if and when the results are dramatic enough to warrant it. Pretty much my own stance on the matter.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 13:42
(edited by debris, 22.06.2008, 13:48)

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

Yes, I know that one guy used it for months and grew nothing that would give him any useful coverage. He says he grew some hair. But then, no pictures, and that means that it probably was not thick terminal hair.

The day someone grows real results wll be the day he posts the pictures to scream it aloud to the whole world.

Of course maybe that guy is not a responder. But seriously, who are we kidding here?

But again. Kuddos to Baccy for trying.

PS: There were dozens of very respected scientists before. Dozen of papers, Tons ov research that shows growth of hair stimulated by almost every single substance you can think of. Yet none of it works for male pattern baldness.

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 13:40

@ Baccy
RIGHT
Post reply

Does he have photos?

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Sceptic

22.06.2008, 13:23

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť You ARE stupid

very very disgusting

ť...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't
ť work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??

do you have some study to prove that applying coca-cola over one's head don't work ? Yes, what you must prove is that something works, something isn't true just because it hasn't been proved false ( logical fallacy )

ť On the other hand, Elaine Fuchs is a very respected scientist and she has
ť shown that WNT signalling leads to more follicles. Also, now she is working
ť with Follica to take it to a commercial level. These guys obviously know
ť what they are talking about, and you're just a stupid online troll who is
ť discrediting their research without any evidence.

I see that you want to believe, and I have nothing against that, I really don't care, but it looks that you have read a couple of patents, some study abstracts, read some forums and you pretend that you know something, are you a doctor, a biologist ... ? do you know the fundamentals of hair growth and hair loss at "deep level" ? If you think that just because Fuchs is a respected scientist then follica will work, well, it's what you think, but don't insult people just because they don't agree with you, because as it hasn't still be proven to work on a human scalp hair, we are not obliged to believe that it works ... capisce ?

Sceptic is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

22.06.2008, 12:50

@ TAGOHL
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť I've tried many stupider things over the years. In fact, I'm too
ť embarassed to admit some of the dumb things I've tried.

I think the forum members would really appreciate if you go over the list of embarrasing things you've tried. That way we don't have to try that stuff

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

TAGOHL

22.06.2008, 12:46

@ cal
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť Lithium might not work but it also might. I can think of plenty of
ť stupider things to try.

I've tried many stupider things over the years. In fact, I'm too embarassed to admit some of the dumb things I've tried.

Anyway, I think it's good that some people are willing to try this.

TAGOHL is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

TAGOHL

22.06.2008, 12:37

@ debris
I would not worry about hair that prevents you from using this method
Post reply

ť lithium wont grow him any useful coverage. If you believe otherwise, you
ť are dreaming.

I have no idea if lithium + the scalp sanding will work.

ť IF it was so simple follica would not need 3 years for IND.

Well, it pretty much is that simple, which is the beauty of what Follica is doing. Wound the scalp, and then apply and already approved drug. We'll see what kind of results they get.

BTW, they would need an IND before they start trials, not after. The person who wrote that article in January has his facts mixed up.

TAGOHL is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 12:10

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

ť ť We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon lithium for
ť ť some other silly thing
ť
ť You ARE stupid...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't
ť work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??
ť
ť On the other hand, Elaine Fuchs is a very respected scientist and she has
ť shown that WNT signalling leads to more follicles. Also, now she is working
ť with Follica to take it to a commercial level. These guys obviously know
ť what they are talking about, and you're just a stupid online troll who is
ť discrediting their research without any evidence.

There's a guy on another site having great success with lithium and wounding.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 11:41

@ Baccy
Follica pictures
Post reply

Also, remember guys. I don't actually want thick dense hair. In fact, what you guys consider a problem, I would be happy with. A vague shadow to break up the desert of scalp would suffice. I suit a bald head as the shape of my face and head are great. So a crop, buzzed down to number one would make me ecstatic.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

cal

22.06.2008, 11:35

@ Baccy
Been Experimenting
Post reply

Debris, give it a rest, huh? Lithium has made a real difference in some tests so they're experimenting with it. Big deal.

Look at the Gentifib regrowth on that cancer patient in the picture: Freak thing or not, I'll bet 2 weeks ago you would have said it was crazy to even think of getting notable regrowth from oral Gentifib pills.

Lithium might not work but it also might. I can think of plenty of stupider things to try.

cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 11:32

@ cal
Follica pictures
Post reply

ť Baccy -
ť
ť I'm glad you're trying this and grateful that you're gonna keep us posted.
ť
ť
ť But I really think you should have waited to get one of the EGF-R
ť inhibition drugs involved. It seems like you're going to end up having
ť done everything right except for omitting the main ingredient. (And in
ť terms of risk, just the WNT-signalling of the Lithium seems to be provoking
ť more serious concerns than the EGF-R inhibition itself. Established
ť science has passed G&F through the FDA trials a long time ago.)
ť
ť I'm not sure about what the kinease inhibtion angle will bring to the
ť table. Maybe it'll replace the Gentifib/Leflunomide, I'm not informed
ť enough to know.

The drugs are quite expensive. I feel that a cheaper alternative can be tried first as the patent mentions other EGF inhibitors but stipulates that the list they have provided is by no means exhaustive. That's more of a para-phrasing than a quote by the way.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

22.06.2008, 11:32

@ debris
RIGHT
Post reply

ť We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon lithium for
ť some other silly thing

You ARE stupid...basically what you're saying is that lithium won't work...Do you have any proof for that??? any study to back it up??

On the other hand, Elaine Fuchs is a very respected scientist and she has shown that WNT signalling leads to more follicles. Also, now she is working with Follica to take it to a commercial level. These guys obviously know what they are talking about, and you're just a stupid online troll who is discrediting their research without any evidence.

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

Baccy

22.06.2008, 11:27

@ baldbaby
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť
ť baccy - funny that they turned down two guys who we know post on this
ť forum. is it possble that they know you post here, that they have some
ť connection between your true identity and your hairsite handle?
ť
ť maybe they want to rule out anyone who might come on the internet and
ť start discussing the trials...
ť
ť it's possible that they are reading this forum and have picked up clues
ť about people in manchester who post here and then contact them - ie, date
ť and time of calls, what you talked about, etc.
ť
ť unless you are out and out telling them you're posting here... probably
ť not a good idea!

I didn't tell them I post here. I don't post often anyway. But your theory had actually occurred to me. Basically, I now look at it as their loss. I would have pursued the trial to the end.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Baccy

22.06.2008, 11:24

@ MPB
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť
ť
ť Baccy- where do you get your lithium and how often and in what dosage are
ť you taking? Is this oral or topical? Thanx.

http://www.seeknatural.co.uk/product-208.html

Quantity wise, I'm flying blind. I split 5 or 6 of the 120mg capsules into a 60ml bottle of minoxidil, along with the other ingredients. See earlier posts in this thread for ingredients I'm using. You've got to remember guys. I have nothing to lose as I'm totally bald anyway. So I'm going for this.

Baccy has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
Baccy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

debris

22.06.2008, 11:11

@ goata007
RIGHT
Post reply

We'll see who was stupid in few months when ppl will abandon lithium for some other silly thing

debris has 1 Personal Journal(s). Click here to view
debris is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

goata007

22.06.2008, 10:59

@ cal
RIGHT
Post reply

ť Wait a minute, Baldbaby . . .
ť
ť How would the existing follicles be a much different depth into the skin
ť depending on what phase of the hair cycle they're in? That doesn't make
ť sense to me.

He has no idea what he's talking about!

Follica patent & all the anecdotal evidence talks about disrupting the scalp. Follica patent specifically mentions stratum corneum - NOTE: That is the top most layer of the upper layer (epidermis) of the skin. NOT even minitaurized telogen follicle sits close to it. So carefully, removing stratum corneum won't kill any follicles!

baldbaby, why don't you do some research before derailing all the threads with stupid posts??

goata007 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO
---
"If we knew what it was that we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

baldbaby

22.06.2008, 10:51

@ Baccy
Been Experimenting
Post reply

ť ICX let me down. Basically they were that short on trialists they were
ť forced to put an ad in a local Manchester newspaper. After all this, they
ť did not even call me (or Baldie42 for that matter) in for screening. I
ť telephoned them at least twice reiterating my desire to be a trialist and
ť they insisted I would be contacted. I'm an ideal trialist. If they can put
ť hair on MY head then they can regrow hair on every bald bastard under God's
ť sun. And I would have stuck with it. Anybody on this board would have stuck
ť with it because we have more than a passing interest in our rapidly
ť disappearing hair.
ť Instead, they chose some guys that were probably indifferent to their
ť hairloss. Result...they walked out when the process hit the first bump in
ť the road. Well that's MY take on it anyway.
ť
ť All the chemicals I'm using in my experiment have a reason for their
ť inclusion. However, I DO believe that the long-winded patent from Follica
ť is deliberately including chemicals that are not needed. Maybe to blow
ť smoke up our collective arses. Maybe just to make it seem more complicated
ť than it is.
ť One good thing is that the lithium appears to have almost entirely
ť de-oiled my scalp which was quite shiny before due to excessive sebum
ť secretion. I can basically see the indentations where all my follicles
ť SHOULD be but there are no black dots in there. On another forum, a guy