Scarless Healing

6,766 posts in this topic

Lets bet how many page will this thread carry us toward scarfree healing

I bet it will be the 486th page

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in the sense that it aims to address scar tissue of some type.

However, these injections are only meant to provide (at best) improvement for existing scars and against the control for the experiment.

The hydrogel's aim (and results in mice) are aimed at providing complete regeneration. For example, the treatment you linked to it would not be able to restore appendages (hair for example) or completely healthy skin whereas the hydrogel is intended to provide both. Of course, no one knows with any certainty that it will work on humans the same as it did on mice, but that is the hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in the sense that it aims to address scar tissue of some type.

However, these injections are only meant to provide (at best) improvement for existing scars and against the control for the experiment.

The hydrogel's aim (and results in mice) are aimed at providing complete regeneration. For example, the treatment you linked to it would not be able to restore appendages (hair for example) or completely healthy skin whereas the hydrogel is intended to provide both. Of course, no one knows with any certainty that it will work on humans the same as it did on mice, but that is the hope.

Where did you hear that hydrogel aimed at providing complete regeneration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why cant they just release 2 versions:

1. Version A : up to moderate scarring(acne sacrring, surgical scarring) which can be released now

2. Version B : for deep scarring (3rd degree burns) to be scheduled 2017

So acne scarring can be cured now instead

I dont care about 3rd degree burn, its their fate to be cured later. More importantly acne scarring is done...

Edited by rudy1986

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has to be research to be done. It can't be released now because there needs to be testing to see if it works on humans. This takes time.

Btw, 3rd degree burns being completed healed is pretty cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well u can thank the fda, they;;re apparently watching out for us

this is the rigorous testing any drug/treatment has to go through til it reaches us…it takes decades sometimes

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/01/03/the-drug-development-process-9-steps-from-the-labo.aspx

Edited by waitingforacure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Gemstone recognizes the importance of human trials to confirm the successful results from our animal studies and begin moving toward FDA approval. We are currently finalizing plans for a first in-human trial for mid-to-late 2016."

See the word successful result in that paragraph

"Our primary development studies are centered on our novel dextran-based hydrogel for scar-free wound healing"

They are pretty confidence from what i saw...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Gemstone recognizes the importance of human trials to confirm the successful results from our animal studies and begin moving toward FDA approval. We are currently finalizing plans for a first in-human trial for mid-to-late 2016."

See the word successful result in that paragraph

"Our primary development studies are centered on our novel dextran-based hydrogel for scar-free wound healing"

They are pretty confidence from what i saw...

Their results are not scar-free healing , but a lessened scars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Gemstone recognizes the importance of human trials to confirm the successful results from our animal studies and begin moving toward FDA approval. We are currently finalizing plans for a first in-human trial for mid-to-late 2016."

See the word successful result in that paragraph

"Our primary development studies are centered on our novel dextran-based hydrogel for scar-free wound healing"

They are pretty confidence from what i saw...

Their results are not scar-free healing , but a lessened scars.
where can you say about lessened scar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in the sense that it aims to address scar tissue of some type.

However, these injections are only meant to provide (at best) improvement for existing scars and against the control for the experiment.

The hydrogel's aim (and results in mice) are aimed at providing complete regeneration. For example, the treatment you linked to it would not be able to restore appendages (hair for example) or completely healthy skin whereas the hydrogel is intended to provide both. Of course, no one knows with any certainty that it will work on humans the same as it did on mice, but that is the hope.

Where did you hear that hydrogel aimed at providing complete regeneration?

"Gemstone recognizes the importance of human trials to confirm the successful results from our animal studies and begin moving toward FDA approval. We are currently finalizing plans for a first in-human trial for mid-to-late 2016."

See the word successful result in that paragraph

"Our primary development studies are centered on our novel dextran-based hydrogel for scar-free wound healing"

They are pretty confidence from what i saw...

Their results are not scar-free healing , but a lessened scars.

Can we all stop with the posting of unverified and misleading information?

Bloodwar44, at no point has Gemstone or Gerecht's lab stated that their results and aim with the dextran hydrogel are a lessening of scars. The whole reason most on this board got so excited about the hydrogel was that it resulted in complete regeneration in mice. Not marginal improvement, but complete regeneration with even the skin appendages returning.

If either Gemstone or Gerecht came out and said they'd pivoted to scar reduction, I'd be all ears, but they haven't to this point so stop cluttering the board with what are at this point, falsehoods.

Rudy1986, I think you're pretty new to the board so I'm not sure you've actually gotten a chance to look over the original research paper. Here's a link:

Dextran Hydrogel Paper

As you can see from reading it, complete regeneration was the result of using the dextran hydrogel on burn wounds in mice. I've also exchanged emails with Dr. Sun (one the chief authors of the paper) and he confirmed the results and, although he is no longer at Hopkins, believed the dextran hydrogel was a strong candidate to achieve the same results in humans.

Really though, we all just have to wait and see at this point but at least things are moving forward. Gerecht managed to find an investor that also wants to have a business that can commercialize the product. That's great news at this point.

Edited by golfpanther

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what ive learned all stuff like those, applied to our skin, will result in its own rejection by our skin, or devoured by our skin totally.

If it really regenerate mouse skin, then its hard to believe it wont have the same result in human

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is circular. The results were complete regeneration; hence scar free healing. The paper GolfPanther referrered to was also published in the PNAS.

Edited by seabs135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seabs, if it completly regenerate skin, will it somehow leaving a differen color than surrounding normal skin? Or even though it completely regenerate, its structure is somewhat disoriented up and down? Is it possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I cannot believe I ever wasted so much time anticipating news on this thread. Do any of you know how long this thread has been active and peppered with "news" about when something might be released to the public? Like well over 8 years now! LOLOLOL And guess what? There has been NO IMPROVEMENT. Not ONE PIECE OF IMPROVEMENT with regards to acne scars. The same shit is all still here and NONE OF IT WORKS. Lasers do not work. Trust me. I've explored it all.

Now what you kids don't understand, and I'm assuming you're all really young cause you're all so incredibly STUPID is that all the language of these scientific papers is BS. It's simply code words to get more funding for their various research labs. It doesn't mean SHIT with regards to something being on the market. Anyway, I've explained this all before. Just think about it. What do you idiots think this dextran hydrogel is even going to do? Acne scars lead to major tissue loss. The gel doesn't fucking create new tissue! Scars aren't uniform tissue, they're made of up of several different sorts of tissue from skin, to the underlying layers of the dermis, etc. etc. You guys are just too stupid to even believe --and guess what? I'm a scientist. And I've read the papers, and they don't mean anything is soon coming down the pipeline. Oh well, see you guys in another year when I'll see how things have moved along! lol Stop wasting all your time on this thread, trust me, I regret it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seabs, if it completly regenerate skin, will it somehow leaving a differen color than surrounding normal skin? Or even though it completely regenerate, its structure is somewhat disoriented up and down? Is it possible?

Rudy, complete regeneration means complete regeneration. If something resulted with 'differences,' then that would be incomplete regeneration. Here is a source: http://pathol.med.stu.edu.cn/pathol/listEngContent2.aspx?ContentID=492

Edited by seabs135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seabs, what do you think they are currently researching at? Didnt it completely regenerate skin already? Whats with more research?

Do they really aim for complete regeneration? Or is it only a mitigation of scars and superior healing only?

What i saw in the website is this hydrogel really aim for scar free healing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rudy1986,

On their website they explain that human usage will be in 2016; and that is where I think they are at. The hydrogel got complete regeneration in the paper linked above in another post. They have to follow the procedures put in place for devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they are quite positive about pig test result thats why they say human trial?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I cannot believe I ever wasted so much time anticipating news on this thread. Do any of you know how long this thread has been active and peppered with "news" about when something might be released to the public? Like well over 8 years now! LOLOLOL And guess what? There has been NO IMPROVEMENT. Not ONE PIECE OF IMPROVEMENT with regards to acne scars. The same shit is all still here and NONE OF IT WORKS. Lasers do not work. Trust me. I've explored it all.

Now what you kids don't understand, and I'm assuming you're all really young cause you're all so incredibly STUPID is that all the language of these scientific papers is BS. It's simply code words to get more funding for their various research labs. It doesn't mean SHIT with regards to something being on the market. Anyway, I've explained this all before. Just think about it. What do you idiots think this dextran hydrogel is even going to do? Acne scars lead to major tissue loss. The gel doesn't fucking create new tissue! Scars aren't uniform tissue, they're made of up of several different sorts of tissue from skin, to the underlying layers of the dermis, etc. etc. You guys are just too stupid to even believe --and guess what? I'm a scientist. And I've read the papers, and they don't mean anything is soon coming down the pipeline. Oh well, see you guys in another year when I'll see how things have moved along! lol Stop wasting all your time on this thread, trust me, I regret it myself.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you're a scientist given your incredibly juvenile and illogical post. Using phrases like "just think about it" doesn't scream scientist to me, but rather someone who is upset because research takes time. A scientist doesn't sit around and just think about things; they take those thoughts and test them.

In terms of papers using "code words" to secure more funding, I'm not sure what you even mean. Of course increased funding is the goal, but you can't fake results and if you do (as was the case recently with some Japanese scientists) you quickly get ferreted out and exposed. With increased funding comes more research and improved odds that your idea will be commercialized if that is your aim (as it is with Gerecht's lab). This isn't some grand revelation you've discovered, but simply a byproduct of the systems that are in place. It might not be ideal, but this is how research is done, at least in America, and results do come from it. They may take longer than you or others may like, but that doesn't mean every research paper is bogus and aiming to keep a research lab afloat.

Gerecht's paper was vetted and deemed legit. I don't think anyone on here was making the claim that the hydrogel created new tissue. Rather, as the paper illustrates, it like other hydrogels served as a scaffold that directed the body toward complete regeneration rather than a scar. That's it, it just interacts with what the body does naturally and changes the outcome; at least in mice up to this point.

I agree that not all papers are meant to lead to a product, but we're not talking about all papers, we're talking about one and what's come of it. There is no doubt that Gerecht and her team are very interested in commercializing the dextran hydrogel as it's already garnered them an investor who has a company with that exact aim.

Look, do I wish the problem of scars was already solved? Absolutely! But things take time. I understand frustration, but using that frustration to make baseless claims is pointless. And calling everyone stupid is even worse. I hope you're feeling better and that we all get scar free healing sooner rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's different in health care. Have you read any of the peer reviewed journal articles, even ones submitted to prestigious dermatology journals? I can show you dozens of journal articles that have been "vetted" that demonstrate how various laser technologies can lead to up to 50 percent or greater improvement in reducing acne scars. But this simply is not true. The assessment of improvement is completely subjective and the "after" photographs are clearly taken with different lighting or angles or shot scale. Just google Journal of Dermatology or several other publications on lasers and acne scarring. Or, for example, the research literature published on a-cell etc. You have a very idealistic view of science. Real scientists know that there's a lot of murky areas and things aren't black and white when it comes to the application of scientific TECHNOLOGIES for COMMERCIAL interest. These labs are publishing with an eye towards securing funding for up to the next decade!! Do you not understand that? Us inferring from these papers that this will EVENTUALLY help acne scar victims is friggin preposterous. In any case, I'm not interested in further educating you about the real world sociology of scientific communities. I know for a fact that the application of hydrogel with or without laser treatment will not be enough to solve ACNE SCARS, and I don't give a shit what it did for mice who were induced with lesions in this study. It's all fucking irrelevant. Just make peace with your scars and move on with your life. This thread is beyond hopeless and depressing. The technologies for such manipulation of scar tissue are at least two decades away. Goodbye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rez77, I understand where you are coming from. It's not easy to live day in and day out with only hope to carry you through. The anguish of waiting can make one want to just give up hoping so that you don't have to feel let down when nothing happens.

You have to do whatever gets you through each day. If that means abandoning hope, then I have nothing against it.

Even if it takes two decades like you say, it won't just be one day nothing and then finally something. Improvements will come over time. Most importantly, the internet will keep us informed. In 2016, we can see if DH works out. If it doesn't, there is research being done all the time. I look forward to reading about all the scientific advancements that our species achieves in my lifetime.

Also, to address your criticism with a wound scaffold, the point is to provide a modifiable structure to promote regeneration. Cells are assisted by having a protective barrier as well as being provided a matrix that they can directly adhere to and fill in the "gap". With the scaffold, cells are guided to the right place unlike a bare wound bed that provides no information about the tissue that was lost. Wound scaffolds today are already pretty good about accelerating and improving wound healing. What makes you think that a better scaffold won't be almost perfect?

Edited by cycloverid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a New Account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now