seabs135

Veteran Member
  • Content count

    883
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

68 Excellent

4 Followers

About seabs135

Veteran Member

Profile Information

  • Gender Male

Achievements

Silver Poster
Posted at least 500 different posts
20 posts
100 posts
500 posts
2000 posts
No reviews awards
Review at least 1 product
1 product
5 products
10 products
25 products

Recent Profile Visitors

4,539 profile views
  1. Scarless Healing

    No offense Frasier, but I do not want to keep coming to this thread, again and again and again to refute misinformation... The hydrogel has proven scar free healing by the fact it has got rete pegs, scar tissue does not get rete pegs... I could go on and on, and on highlighting that and then other people could go on and on obscuring and then misinforming the scientific information from the consensus in a never ending circle. Where time will be wasted and wasted and wasted...
  2. Scarless Healing

    I was just pointing out that the hydrogel did not scar in the porcine model as the hydrogel got rete pegs. Scars do not have rete pegs.
  3. Scarless Healing

    I have been looking at this since 2011. In 2011 the hydrogel highlighted complete regeneration. Gemstone have indicated the hydrogel for use in diabetic wounds. With regards to the porcine testing. In no paper have they disclosed they got incomplete regeneration. In the paper Acellular hydrogels for regenerative burn wound healing: translation from a porcine model they tested a couple of mechanisms which the hydrogel promoted regeneration, this is highlighted in the introduction... In that paper they highlighted the hydrogel got healing with rete pegs, rete pegs are not found in scarring.
  4. Scarless Healing

    -> http://www.pnas.org/content/108/52/20976
  5. Scarless Healing

    I don't post on here much these days as the thread keeps repeating itself.., Anyway: science does not change... Complete regeneration was proven in 2011.