Jump to content

Photo

Scarless Healing


5699 replies to this topic

#5181 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 21 March 2014 - 06:14 PM

http://www.scar-club...nnas edited.pdf

http://www.uphs.upen.../06/cotsarelis/

http://indianapublic...-hair-on-scars/


http://www.nytimes.c...-loss.html?_r=0
http://www.forbes.co...-for-hair-loss/

#5182 seabs135

seabs135

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 54
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 21 March 2014 - 10:08 PM

Repola, I’m not being rude here, but if you show me your sources at least quote what you are looking at, so I don’t have to CTRL + F hair, and so I can cut the work load. This is like shoving a massive 1000 page document on someone’s desk. And this is going to produce a needlessly long post.

Anyway, the sources you have provided here do not back up what you originally stated, what you have done is here is lazy, you are also hoping that I say f... this work load... And then you can claim some image of credibility? Also more importantly and sadly though all this does is just distracts away from quality genuine cited information in the thread imo.  So this is my last post on this.

 

Your premise I think you are trying to validate: Without human intervention and without further wounding bringing a wounded pocked (an injection wound, or a bigger wound) mice can regenerate hair naturally and spontaneously in scars; humans on the other hand can’t.

Below is your sourced evidence. All these sources also vary in what they are highlighting. Which makes me think wtf at the ambiguous choices you have given yourself. I could also just fairly end the response hear at that ambiguity. But out of respect I’ll go on.

 

Your first cite and second does not reference your premise that hairs grow naturally in scars in mice:

http://www.scar-club...nnas edited.pdf

Nothing in the above about hair growing on scars, in fact it is a cite that highlights hair only grows in regenerated skin…. This is opposite to your premise.

Ctrl + f reveals only one mention of ‘hair’, it would have been nice to quote this too, It mentions ‘partial regeneration of skin’ and goes on to state partial regenerated skin differs from physiological skin in the absence of skin appendages.( hair follicles, sweat glands, etc).  

Quote, “DRT is a macromolecular network synthesized as a highly porous analog of ECM with highly specific structure that degrades in vivo at a controlled rate. Among other morphological and functional characteristics, partially regenerated skin is mechanically competent, fully vascularized 6 and sensitive to touch as well as heat or cold. The regenerated dermal-epidermal junction, with its extensive formations of rete ridges and capillary loops (Fig. 2), leaves no doubt that de novo partially regenerated skin organ is clearly not scar. However, partially regenerated skin differs from physiological skin in the absence of skin appendages (hair follicles, sweat glands, etc.).”

 

Your second cite:

http://www.uphs.upen.../06/cotsarelis/

This cite from where I’m looking states Fgf9, turns the healing process towards regeneration and therefore hair follicle regeneration. It does not say hair grows spontaneously in scars. Quote “Importantly, when the investigators added Fgf9 back to the wounds that do not normally regenerate, FGF9 triggered the molecular cascade of events necessary for skin and hair regeneration; thus, leaving the door open for using Fgf9 to treat wounds and hair loss in people.”

This cite should not have been used.

 

Your third cite is also wrong:

http://indianapublic...-hair-on-scars/

This source, which doesn’t reference its sources, it loosely claims hairs grew in scars after human intervention with regards to a human creating a micro wound pocket and injecting stemcells and wnt. It basically states an injection (a new wound) injected with wnt in the healing process that followed created hair.

You claimed that mice ‘grow hair on scars spontaneously without human intervention.  The reference is invalid like the other two.

The next source which you have left vague:

http://www.nytimes.c...loss.html?_r=1

This is actually about transplanting grafts into scar tissue, which is also more human intervention, and has nothing to do with hair growing spontaneously into scars. 

This also should have not been used

 

The next cite is here and my eyes are hurting:

http://www.forbes.co...-for-hair-loss/

And this is the same info as the information previous, it is about grafting human hair into mice. Hence transplanting hair. It has nothing to do with hair spontaneously growing into scars.

I could go on but I’ll leave it.

Just stick to the facts.


Edited by seabs135, 21 March 2014 - 10:47 PM.


#5183 foreverdawning

foreverdawning

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 6
    Likes: 1
About Me
  • Joined: 31-October 12

Posted 22 March 2014 - 12:35 AM

I was once an active member on the skinbiology website, and I remembered someone asking Dr Pickart if hair will grow in scar tissue and his reply was "no". 

 



#5184 Lapis lazuli

Lapis lazuli

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 1,740
    Likes: 185
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Joined: 25-February 08

Posted 22 March 2014 - 06:43 AM

From Wikipedia:

 

Sweat glands and hair follicles do not grow back within scar tissues.

 

From Yahoo answers:

 

Does hair grow back over a scar?

 

No it doesn't. Sweat glands and hair follicles do not grow back within scar tissue. Sometimes hair growing from hair follicles on the surrounding healthy skin, close to the scarred area, gives the impression that the hair is actually growing from the scar tissue itself. This is especially the case in strangely shaped scars(where there may be a very tiny patch of healthy skin, surrounded by scar tissue). But to repeat: It is impossible for hair to grow on scar tissue.



From this website:

 

http://indianapublic...-hair-on-scars/

 

There is some good news. Scientists noticed that in some mice, if the scar met a minimum size, hair grew back after all. This meant that new hair follicles were being generated in these mice. The only cell type that can pull off such a feat is a stem cell.

 

Scientists studied the mice to figure out how this was happening, and found that the source of the new hair follicles wasn’t hair follicle stem cells, as expected, but epidermal stem cells. This is surprising because adult stem cells are typically more limited in the types of cells they can produce. Only a hair follicle stem cell would be expected to be able to generate all the cell types needed to build a hair follicle.

 

Upon further study, scientists discovered that a protein important in hair follicle development, Wnt, was present in mice that grew hair in their wounds, and not present in mice that did not. This is useful information for people suffering unwanted bald patches from scars.

 

Scientists may be able to use this protein to help people grow new hair follicles. The one downside is that the new hair follicles in mice lack melanocytes, the cells that give hair its color. Then again, if scientists can manage to help people grow new hair follicles, adding pigment may be small potatoes.



From this article by (among others) Dr. Sun:

 

http://www.jscimedce...tive-2-1007.pdf

 

Our recent study has demonstrated that a dextran-based hydrogel devoid of growth factors and stem cells promoted dermal regeneration with complete skin appendages on a third degree burn injury. The dextran hydrogel might have induced signaling molecules and activated stem cells that helped reconstruct the embryonic skin niche for intact skin regeneration. Although much is still unknown about how dextran scaffold coordinates cell lineages to regenerate complete skin structures, it provides us a rare opportunity to understand how to improve our design of hydrogel scaffolds for deep dermal wound healing. On the basis of our findings, more efficient and personalized hydrogel scaffolds may be developed to further translational medicine.


Edited by Lapis lazuli, 22 March 2014 - 06:43 AM.


#5185 seabs135

seabs135

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 54
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 22 March 2014 - 11:31 AM

Yep, I've yet to see any source that shows hair grows in any scar in a mouse or any mammal spontaneously... The only time hair grows back is with the process of regeneration near the appendage, not scarring. I have nothing against errors, we all make them, but the premise that hair grows in scarring spontaneously, without human intervention, is clearly misinformation which harms accurate information.

I would have brought up your last Sun source if I had it http://www.jscimedce...tive-2-1007.pdf in it another point is brought up that explains collagen 1 in scarring antagonises appendage growth...

The only time appendages have ever regenerated back is through wounding and then regeneration, where a human intervention into a wound has promoted regeneration around a hair, not scarring.. Or from grafting and transplantation of hairs and tissue which is more human intervention. (This has been done since 1959 in humans)

 

 

From Wikipedia:

 

Sweat glands and hair follicles do not grow back within scar tissues.

 

From Yahoo answers:

 

Does hair grow back over a scar?

 

No it doesn't. Sweat glands and hair follicles do not grow back within scar tissue. Sometimes hair growing from hair follicles on the surrounding healthy skin, close to the scarred area, gives the impression that the hair is actually growing from the scar tissue itself. This is especially the case in strangely shaped scars(where there may be a very tiny patch of healthy skin, surrounded by scar tissue). But to repeat: It is impossible for hair to grow on scar tissue.



From this website:

 

http://indianapublic...-hair-on-scars/

 

There is some good news. Scientists noticed that in some mice, if the scar met a minimum size, hair grew back after all. This meant that new hair follicles were being generated in these mice. The only cell type that can pull off such a feat is a stem cell.

 

Scientists studied the mice to figure out how this was happening, and found that the source of the new hair follicles wasn’t hair follicle stem cells, as expected, but epidermal stem cells. This is surprising because adult stem cells are typically more limited in the types of cells they can produce. Only a hair follicle stem cell would be expected to be able to generate all the cell types needed to build a hair follicle.

 

Upon further study, scientists discovered that a protein important in hair follicle development, Wnt, was present in mice that grew hair in their wounds, and not present in mice that did not. This is useful information for people suffering unwanted bald patches from scars.

 

Scientists may be able to use this protein to help people grow new hair follicles. The one downside is that the new hair follicles in mice lack melanocytes, the cells that give hair its color. Then again, if scientists can manage to help people grow new hair follicles, adding pigment may be small potatoes.



From this article by (among others) Dr. Sun:

 

http://www.jscimedce...tive-2-1007.pdf

 

Our recent study has demonstrated that a dextran-based hydrogel devoid of growth factors and stem cells promoted dermal regeneration with complete skin appendages on a third degree burn injury. The dextran hydrogel might have induced signaling molecules and activated stem cells that helped reconstruct the embryonic skin niche for intact skin regeneration. Although much is still unknown about how dextran scaffold coordinates cell lineages to regenerate complete skin structures, it provides us a rare opportunity to understand how to improve our design of hydrogel scaffolds for deep dermal wound healing. On the basis of our findings, more efficient and personalized hydrogel scaffolds may be developed to further translational medicine.


Edited by seabs135, 22 March 2014 - 02:12 PM.


#5186 CollegeKidd

CollegeKidd

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 60
    Likes: 6
About Me
  • Joined: 02-September 13

Posted 22 March 2014 - 02:06 PM

Debating about whether or not the hydrogel will work is ridiculous because no one knows for sure. It could work, or it could not work. Who knows?

 

I'm more interested in opinions on when everyone thinks the human trials will begin.

 

Also, I posted an article about electric fields ablating scar tissue and ending up with complete regeneration, the same as with the hydrogel. This would be helpful for people not willing to remove chunks of skin for regeneration.

 

Here's the official scientific paper: 

https://www.academia...in_regeneration

 

I'm just happy to know the world is headed towards a scar-free future. I hope it happens soon though I mean it's 2014 already. 



#5187 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 22 March 2014 - 02:45 PM

Seabs135
Lazy what? I have been Reading all the cites Word by Word several times,so do your homework same as I do,
In the first one, you can see that mice heal mainly by contracion (scarless) than humans,
in the others you can see that mice have better ability to regrow hair tan humans.
Did I mention any hair regrow naturally and spontaneously in scars? Of course no, so do you think that make a third degree burn on a mouse and then put the hydrogel over the wound is hair regrow spontaneously,
This is what they did with the hydrogel, scarless with some hair regrow that is all.
I repeat, how many times the hydrogel has been tested? one, has been tested in humans? no, has been tested by independent researchers? no.
As far as I know Dr Sun was part of the researchers group actually I have been in contact with him by email
So he is not a independent researcher.
Why the researchers are so cautious? because they are not sure, meanwhile the hydrogel can be a good candidate for skin scarless?, scarfree? will see.
Seabs135 Please read carefully, and do your homework before post. You have nothing to refute me.

#5188 cycloverid

cycloverid

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 69
    Likes: 11
About Me
  • Joined: 09-August 13

Posted 22 March 2014 - 02:57 PM

Debating about whether or not the hydrogel will work is ridiculous because no one knows for sure. It could work, or it could not work. Who knows?

 

I'm more interested in opinions on when everyone thinks the human trials will begin.

 

Also, I posted an article about electric fields ablating scar tissue and ending up with complete regeneration, the same as with the hydrogel. This would be helpful for people not willing to remove chunks of skin for regeneration.

 

Here's the official scientific paper: 

https://www.academia...in_regeneration

 

I'm just happy to know the world is headed towards a scar-free future. I hope it happens soon though I mean it's 2014 already. 

 

Whoever is running the Scarless Healing/Dextran Hydrogel facebook page said human trials will likely begin late 2014. But it's probably all speculation at this point. I'm still going to hope that he/she chose that date because of inside intel.

 

Even so, the trials will probably be confined to recent burn victims and other catastrophes rather than acne scar sufferers sad.png

 

ARG, I DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANY LONGER!!!


Edited by cycloverid, 22 March 2014 - 03:06 PM.


#5189 CollegeKidd

CollegeKidd

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 60
    Likes: 6
About Me
  • Joined: 02-September 13

Posted 22 March 2014 - 03:25 PM

I know scarring has been such a traumatic part of everyone's life on this forum, but I can speak for myself and say that I've learned so much about myself. This whole ordeal has only made me a stronger person and I'm sure it's done the same for all of you. Think positive and great things will happen. I truly believe that. 



#5190 seabs135

seabs135

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 54
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 22 March 2014 - 04:24 PM

I should take a break from this thread…

Repola, to save time I’m going to go through what you have just stated.

This all goes back to here

http://www.acne.org/...ling/?p=3421553

In this post you posted

“Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.” (<<<check that as that is the premise)

The premise here is “Mice can sometimes regrow hair over scar tissue, and humans can't.” (<<<This premise is fixed)

I’ll go through your reply:

 

First you state, “I have been Reading all the cites Word by Word several times,so do your homework same as I do,”

But you have not done your homework. All your citations clearly do not validate the premise on post 5176. Just to remind you of the premise, “Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.” Therefore your sources have to validate the premise, if they don’t you clearly have not done your homework.

 

Next you stated “In the first one, you can see that mice heal mainly by contracion (scarless) than humans,”

The above has got nothing to do with the premise “Mice can in sometimes can regrow hair over scar tissue, and humans cant.”

 

Also, contraction, is NOT related to something without a scar. Contraction when it goes on to long can be a serious problem in burns leading to contracture.

Contraction comes about with scarring, and contraction brings varying gradations of inflexibility and deformities to the patient with a scar. In wound healing, in wounds that heal with complete regeneration contracture does not happen.

I was going highlight this error, in my original post, but I decided against it out of respect and to cut the flaming, (you may have thought I was being funny?) and to stick to the conveyed premise you STILL have not proven.

 

Next you state “in the others you can see that mice have better ability to regrow hair tan humans.”

I honestly think you are trolling here.  There is absolutely no evidence presented for that claim you have now just made. Basically what you have presented some mice studies on mice which has nothing to do with your premise, and a reinventing the wheel with regards to transplant grafting (first out in 1959 which also has nothing to do with the original premise)

Back on to the original premise, this also does not address the premise of “Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.”

 

Next you stated, Did I mention any hair regrow naturally and spontaneously in scars? Of course no, so do you think that make a third degree burn on a mouse and then put the hydrogel over the wound is hair regrow spontaneously,

Yes you did. Have a look at your premise: “Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.” You explained that mice can regrow hair over scar tissue.

Btw, with the hydrogel, this is not what you believe. It is what the paper states or concludes.

 

Next you stated “This is what they did with the hydrogel, scarless with some hair regrow that is all.”

Again you are moving away from the premise.

The paper clearly states complete skin regeneration with appendages.

 

Next you state “I repeat, how many times the hydrogel has been tested? one, has been tested in humans? no, has been tested by independent researchers? no.”

Again you are moving away from the premise.

And you don’t say. However it got complete regeneration against a state of the art control. I give up.

 

Next you stated: “As far as I know Dr Sun was part of the researchers group actually I have been in contact with him by email So he is not an independent researcher.”

Again you are moving away from the premise.

And you don’t say. The paper was independently reviewed.

 

Next you state, “Why the researchers are so cautious? because they are not sure, meanwhile the hydrogel can be a good candidate for skin scarless?, scarfree? will see.”

Again you are moving away from the premise.

And if you could translate English you would see it has advanced under current standards and protocol set out by the FDA. With angel investors. And it is expected to be a parallel process.  

 

Next you stated, Seabs135 Please read carefully, and do your homework before post. You have nothing to refute me.

Are you serious?. You have walked away from the premise on every statement.  


Edited by seabs135, 22 March 2014 - 07:42 PM.


#5191 skinregenerator

skinregenerator

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 71
    Likes: 4
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 09-August 12

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:47 PM

Seabs135
Lazy what? I have been Reading all the cites Word by Word several times,so do your homework same as I do,
In the first one, you can see that mice heal mainly by contracion (scarless) than humans,
in the others you can see that mice have better ability to regrow hair tan humans.
Did I mention any hair regrow naturally and spontaneously in scars? Of course no, so do you think that make a third degree burn on a mouse and then put the hydrogel over the wound is hair regrow spontaneously,
This is what they did with the hydrogel, scarless with some hair regrow that is all.
I repeat, how many times the hydrogel has been tested? one, has been tested in humans? no, has been tested by independent researchers? no.
As far as I know Dr Sun was part of the researchers group actually I have been in contact with him by email
So he is not a independent researcher.
Why the researchers are so cautious? because they are not sure, meanwhile the hydrogel can be a good candidate for skin scarless?, scarfree? will see.
Seabs135 Please read carefully, and do your homework before post. You have nothing to refute me.

Dr Sun is no longer involved in the project and has left JHU and Columbia...


Edited by skinregenerator, 23 March 2014 - 12:48 PM.


#5192 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 23 March 2014 - 02:39 PM

I repeat how many times the hydrogel has been tested? one, Has been tested in humans?no, has been tested by independent researchers? no

I have been following your answers to the people and you are always trying to attack in the fórum, you can not answer any of my questions.

You are 100% sure the hydrogel is going to work, I am happy for you, what are you doin in here? trying to convince people like a politician,

But if you want to convince somebody why don´t you burn your fucking face with some petrol then I will be 100% sure.

I am not going to reply to you any more, I use to reply to asholes but no more thanks.



#5193 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 23 March 2014 - 02:58 PM

jajajajjajajajajjajajajjajajajajajajajajaja The paper was independently reviewed by the same person. Dr Sun, ok,

Dr Sun 1 and Dr Sun 2.

 This fórum is not serious, bye bye



#5194 seabs135

seabs135

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 54
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 23 March 2014 - 03:19 PM

Repola, I'm not fighting anyone. You brought up a premise and gave misleading sources to validate a premise.  I have pointed it out because it is misinformation. You also brought forward a mistake that contraction was less scar, which I left alone, as I suspected that could flame something.

With regards to me answering questions, I answer via what has been quoted, or what the science states. With regards to me attacking anyone. How can I attack someone if I quote off a paper, or from an article?


Edited by seabs135, 23 March 2014 - 03:33 PM.


#5195 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 25 March 2014 - 02:07 PM






How to re-grow hair

Recently, scientists stumbled onto the finding that, at least in mice, hair will sometimes re-grow after wounding. They were studying how wounds heal in mice and noticed that sometimes hair grew back. And sometimes not.

This was surprising. Why? Because scientists thought that losing hair because of scarring was permanent.

Hair grows out of hair follicles. Since hair follicles are like "mini organs," scientists thought they only formed when a fetus grows in the womb. Like how your liver or your lungs only form as a fetus.

So hair re-growing in the wounds was completely unexpected. To figure out what was going on, the scientists wounded adult mice by cutting away some of the back skin.

The wounds needed to be at least half the size of the mouse's back to form new hairs. Any smaller and hair follicles didn't form.

They weren't sure why the wound had to be that big. But they wanted to learn more about how the hair grew back in. And if the process was similar to what happens when we're in the womb.

How could the scientists answer these questions? First off, they needed to understand how hair forms in an embryo.

Turns out, we already know a lot of what is going on there. We know some of the key genes and proteins that cause hair growth.

So they looked to see if one of the key players in hair development, KRT17, was involved in growing hair after wounding. And it was.

KRT17 showed up in the new hair follicles at about the same time it would be expressed in embryonic hair follicles. So these hair follicles developed similar to embryonic hair follicles.

provide insights to the
relative importance of these processes in wound closure. In rodents, which have a
mobile integument, contraction accounts for almost all of wound closure; in the human,
where the skin is tethered to subcutaneous tissues, contraction accounts for little more
than a third of the closure process.
(Contraction in rodents mean less scar) in humans mean deformation) why because in humans the skin is tethered to the subcutaneous tissues.

http://www.scar-club...df/journal/SCAR Journal Vol 1_Yannas edited.pdf
http://genetics.thet...nal_news/news58

The way of healing in mice and humans is different so be cautious with the hydrogel.

#5196 seabs135

seabs135

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 54
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 25 March 2014 - 04:34 PM

“Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.” (<<<check that as that is the premise you stated)

The premise here is “Mice can sometimes regrow hair over scar tissue, and humans can't.” (<<<This premise is fixed)

 

The premise has NOT been changed and it is now NOT (hence the goal posts have not been moved): “Mice can regrow hair in and around scar tissue, after human intervention brings some regenerative and support tissue inside a wound. Example a human wounding and applying a product or tissue that bring regeneration to create a hair” (<<<This is NOT your original premise).

 

1. again none of the sources prove “Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.” like you stated instead >>> they show a human created a wound, and there was a small regeneration response after human intervention.

2. Contraction, has nothing whatsoever to do with less scar. Stating that is ignorance. And using your latest source that actually contradicts what you are saying, to state that contraction means something it is not, is serious ignorance.

I know what contraction is. Contraction comes with scar tissue and is the result of contraction of scar tissue; or scarring is secondary to contraction, btw this is actually stated in your source, (do you now still believe contraction means less scar?)...  Usually contraction leaves the wound, however If contraction goes on and is on a big area wound, you get contracture, a serious problem. Contraction brings mechanical deformation (this is stated in one of your sources btw).

 

Anyway for the last time, let’s look at your sources, even though you have misinformed, on every source you have brought up:

First lets look at your second source. Your second source here http://genetics.thet...nal_news/news58 shows nothing about contraction, or anything about hair growing out of scar without human intervention. It does not prove: “Mice in some cases can regrow hair over the scar tissue, humans can`t.”. It is invalid and should not have been used.

It has hair regeneration in mice after wounding and the application of a product (human intervention).

 

Your first source was left dead. However, looking at the url it roughly matches what you posted before.

I think this is your first source in post 5195: http://www.scar-club...nnas edited.pdf and this addresses contraction. But get this: it completely contradicts everything you are saying.

I’m going to keep this short as possible. You are misinformed.

Now you state, "Contraction in rodents mean less scar", the paper also does not back that up. The paper argues that scarring happens because of contraction and in the summary it states treatments that limit contraction reduce scarring.

Here is what it states in your document on the first paragraph. Quote, ”Healing of deep skin wounds in the adult mammal takes place by the processes of wound contraction and scar formation. There is evidence that scar formation is secondary to contraction. Efforts to block scar formation can therefore benefit from strategies for blocking contraction.”<<< Please, please read that (on the first paragraph), this contradicts everything you state about contraction being less scar (and I wont shout, but I cannot believe you are actually using this document).  The paragraph states stopping contraction on ALL 'mammals' could stop scarring; it does not state contraction is less scar tissue, therefor we need contraction.

 

But more importantly in the summary it quotes: “Wound contraction establishes a plane tensile stress field in a skin wound which appears to be required for scar formation. Blocking of wound contraction by biologically active scaffolds leads to induced regeneration.” Again this source does not back up what you state. Where does it summarize contraction means less scar? It will only take you a few sentences. This source should have not been used.


Edited by seabs135, 25 March 2014 - 10:52 PM.


#5197 HeroicNymph

HeroicNymph

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 6
    Likes: 1
About Me
  • Joined: 19-January 14

Posted 26 March 2014 - 01:53 AM

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but would anyone with acne scars believe me if I said they had nothing to worry about? Because you don't!



#5198 golfpanther

golfpanther

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 167
    Likes: 64
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 04-May 11

Posted 26 March 2014 - 12:19 PM

Debating about whether or not the hydrogel will work is ridiculous because no one knows for sure. It could work, or it could not work. Who knows?

 

I'm more interested in opinions on when everyone thinks the human trials will begin.

 

Also, I posted an article about electric fields ablating scar tissue and ending up with complete regeneration, the same as with the hydrogel. This would be helpful for people not willing to remove chunks of skin for regeneration.

 

Here's the official scientific paper: 

https://www.academia...in_regeneration

 

I'm just happy to know the world is headed towards a scar-free future. I hope it happens soon though I mean it's 2014 already. 

 

Great post! Thanks for the link, it's definitely something to keep our eyes on!

 

You know what's funny about all these researchers? They must not talk or read up on one another at all! I found an article about this study and this is a quote from the senior author of the paper, Martin Yarmush:

 

“Previously, scarless regeneration has only been observed in adult amphibians and early in mammalian fetuses, both of which do not have an adaptive immune response. Even though our rodents had an intact adaptive immune system, we were able to generate scarless skin regeneration in these adult mammals.  Further study of this technique will help us better understand the mechanism of scarring.“ - Martin Yarmush

 

This study was published almost 2 years after the dextran hydrogel paper and yet he claims that the regenerative results they achieved were a first! I'm not saying he's lying or ignoring the other data, I think it's just that he doesn't know it exists at all. It's baffling to me that people working in the same sphere of research can be so ignorant about what others are doing. I guess their myopia probably serves them well in terms of accomplishing their own goals, but you have to wonder if a more collaborative approach would bring results more quickly.

 

Regardless, thanks again!



#5199 REPOLA

REPOLA

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 53
    Likes: 9
About Me
  • Joined: 30-August 13

Posted 26 March 2014 - 01:33 PM

I agree with Golfpanther, collegekidd goof post

good post

#5200 Vladislav

Vladislav

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 230
    Gallery Images: 3
    Likes: 36
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Novi Sad
  • Interests:regenerative medicine
  • Joined: 14-April 12

Posted 28 March 2014 - 10:23 AM

This hour long video is really worth a watch, It really shows you a lot about what's going on currently in the quest for obtaining a way to regenerate instead of scar. Which is a lot.

 

http://vimeo.com/16378142

 

One thing that is said by the way, is that animals in general scar less than people which reminded me of the scarless results in the mouse using the hydrogel.

 

Another thing is that it is estimated that it will take at least another 40+ years before people can regenerate completely. That is, if it is possible in the first place.

 

Nonsense! 40 years from now we will have artificial lab-grown organs (all exepct the brain), the 'human body shop' and life extension therapies so we can live 150 years, people will not die from cancer, heart disease and organ failures, and generally speaking new technologies such as 3D printing, targeted drug deliveries, brain computer interface, tissue engineering and stem cells will reach the stage of almost total perfection, I believe that genomic medicine probably won't reach the stage of total perfection in 40 years, however it will be much more advanced than it is now. And scars will be an ancient history.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users