Jump to content

skinregenerator

Member Since 09 Aug 2012
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 01:23 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Scarless Healing

21 February 2015 - 11:11 AM

Are the gerecht lab actually still aiming for scar free healing?

doubt that. No publication on wound healing on their website recently


In Topic: Scarless Healing

19 February 2015 - 08:03 AM

There's been a bit of news about collagen from Tilapia fish accelerating wound healing lately. Thought I'd just share a link as I am often prone to doing:

 

http://www.zmescienc...lagen-18022015/

 

There was actually a study done on it and they demonstrate vastly improved wound healing over the control. They chose marine-based collagen because it doesn't have the possibility of transferring mammalian diseases.

 

They have a rival company that is using soybean based protein for improved wound healing that is a few years ahead in research. But, according to the article, they are both going to attempt FDA approval soon.

 

This seems like it would be a great thing to combine with skin procedures, such as needling, dermarolling or laser.

Collagen may not be a good candidate


In Topic: Scarless Healing

17 February 2015 - 09:59 AM

hi ,

I got over the Great-Fire-Wall and find there. I have some confidence when I read this topic somehow---a topic lasts 7 years with more than 5000 reply,from recell to artificial intelligence,someone leave and someone stay.We all suffers despair,but the discussion(dream,whatever) goes on,And it is the goddamn HOPE.

To be honest,I accept this problem maybe  not solved in 20 years, or the solution comes to late for me , but our insist shows the necessary to solve it.Someone have to take this part ,they just have to,

 Thx for  everyone.

BTW,anyone saw the reply,新年快乐。

I guarantee you that it won't be 20 years long,新年快乐。


In Topic: Scarless Healing

16 February 2015 - 08:22 AM

As I am seeing it, even if there is a way to regenerate skin completely doctors would just not implement it in their standard medical procedure.
Would a doctor risk getting sued by cutting out your whole face and then applying the "scarfree healing" method? What happens if your face did not heal and rather scar even more? Doctors would go for the tried and tested method rather than something else that may work but not replicate success a 100% or 99% of the time.

 

As an example, I read from many blogs that drinking carrot juice solely was able to cure a stage IV cancer patient. There are scientific journals which states that the antioxidants in carrot are effective in destroying cancer cells. But, no doctor is going to say the remedy for cancer is drinking carrot juice. They would recommend going for chemotherapy or other traditional treatments to kill the cancer cells as they cannot guarantee that just by drinking juice you would be cancer-free. Same as scars, they would recommend fraxel /subcision / needling but they would not recommend "scarfree healing" as they cannot risk being sued or have it not work.

 

Well, I don't think the carrot juice analogy is very apt. For one, there are a lot of conflicting studies on its use for cancer and for another a word like "effective" can mean many different things. How many cancer cells does a treatment need to be destroyed to be considered effective? Most of the time it only has to out perform a control (which is why so much of laser treatment for scarring is wrought with subjective issues of analysis) or merely have some effect (i.e. patient had 20% less cancer cells than patient B). With complete regeneration of skin it's either you did get complete regeneration or you didn't.

 

Now, in terms of doctors doing the treatment, I agree with the other poster who made the comment about waivers. Patients go through much more medically dangerous procedures than excisions day in and day out. Would some risk be assumed? Absolutely, but that comes with the role of being a doctor and waivers would be there to protect you against most unfavorable outcomes.

 

In a more realistic/cynical sense...doctors would do it because they could make a lot of money. I mean, a LOT of money. There would literally be no end to the streams of patients that would be fully willing to waive their right to sue in order to fulfill the dream of perfectly regenerated skin. This is yet another reason doctors would never tell someone with cancer, "Go home and drink a bunch of carrot juice." It sounds harsh, but in addition to the potential risks of recommending a controversial treatment there would be no market for such a treatment. Complete regeneration of skin (or heart tissue, muscle tissue etc.) would be a practically limitless market that would never be fully "cured" (since I could get a new scar at any time and need the treatment again).

 

If it works and gets approved for use, it wouldn't be long before dermatologists were using the method.

Any updates?Golfpanther?thanks


In Topic: Scarless Healing

06 February 2015 - 01:21 PM

any of those who contacted the gemstone company get any feedback?


I ve contaced them twice , but no response...

thanks