Acne.org Products
some of the medical devices used to make this gel
a freeze dryer
a 20c medical freezer
nitrogen gas
uv lamp device
macromer
Honestly I would sell everything I own to sort out a way to make it myself. I am tired of waiting and losing time. If I can remove my scars. I will have a much richer life than I do now. Just keep bugging these guys to bring it to the market faster. imagine all the recent burn victims it will save.
This whole board section (scar treatments) I assume would be closed.
As why bother with dermabrasion when you've got scar free healing.
Anyway, do you have a link to the patent? It would be interesting to see.
Here are two more definitions of several. Check it out.
more than a few; an indefinite small number
being more than two but fewer than many in number or kind
So in a small number of years, they'll start testing on people. Should they get the financing. Cool.
Or you could say, that it won't take many years before they start testing on people.
Which doesn't sound too bad either.
PM me your email Lapis
I'll send you the PDF.
2001, can you copy and paste the text? the full text
for all to see
You guys need to stop driving yourself crazy looking for this miracle cure that will completely eradicate your scars. Just look for improvments now and when the ultimate cure comes you'll hear about it, we all will.
2001, the hydrogel does not have anything else added.
In the paper released last december, the paper explains that the hydrogel does not have anything added.
Indeed. Here's an excerpt:
Originally, her team intended to load the gel with stem cells and infuse it with growth factors to trigger and direct the tissue development. Instead, they tested the gel alone. "We were surprised to see such complete regeneration in the absence of any added biological signals," Gerecht said.
Very interesting, it isn't completly relevant.
You would expect them to find some kind of combination that can regrow normal skin tissue. Hydrogel will make a great filler .
I know somewhere in my life the news will come that scarefree healing is available, that is the day I will choke on my cereals.
2001, the hydrogel does not have anything else added.
In the paper released last december, the paper explains that the hydrogel does not have anything added.
Indeed. Here's an excerpt:
Originally, her team intended to load the gel with stem cells and infuse it with growth factors to trigger and direct the tissue development. Instead, they tested the gel alone. "We were surprised to see such complete regeneration in the absence of any added biological signals," Gerecht said.
In the paper, it explains it is a dextran hydrogel in a 80:20 ratio, and as you shown, It has nothing added. The dextran hydrogel is then digested rapidly by the white blood cells, (white blood cells in all mammals rush to the injury site at a similar rate to fight and digest infection), the degrading of the scaffold enables revasculization (a blood network at the site), within 2 weeks the wound is reepithilized( if a wound is reepithilized in under 21days you do not get scar) by the 21st day sebaceous glands etc. are observed.
Yet on the control the control scaffold is not digested, (e.g. neutrophils are stuck at the periphery of the control scaffold as they cant degrade it. To the whiteblood cells the control scaffold is like trying to bite through leather etc. if you like). And after 21days in the control no sebaceous gland are observed etc.
These are the facts.
2001 lets make this hydrogel, dont lose the hope, go for it
IMO someone will, sooner or later.
You guys seem pretty optimistic about this hydrogel stuff, or at least seabs.. well actually he's always optimistic. But regardless, have you guys seen any legit before and afters, which comfirms their claims?
If so.. link please 
Still am rather skeptical of things. If they have trully witnessed the reported results, wouldn't this progression be through the roof by now? Or is it already and I am just late to the party like always.
You guys seem pretty optimistic about this hydrogel stuff, or at least seabs.. well actually he's always optimistic. But regardless, have you guys seen any legit before and afters, which comfirms their claims?
If so.. link please
Still am rather skeptical of things. If they have trully witnessed the reported results, wouldn't this progression be through the roof by now? Or is it already and I am just late to the party like always.
Just B&A shots of a mouse. Seabs said that that after shot showed the reepithilization. I hope I spelled that right... Anyway, they're currently figuring out why it works, I think they told someone who posted here recently. They're doing that before they're testing on people, I guess. Plus they've got financing for further research and development pending.
I think the hydrogel sounds pretty cool and interesting. If they do ever start testing on people I'd be pretty excited about seeing the results. This thing sounds very legit so far. The people who are working on it seem open and genuine which is cool.
You guys seem pretty optimistic about this hydrogel stuff, or at least seabs.. well actually he's always optimistic. But regardless, have you guys seen any legit before and afters, which comfirms their claims?
If so.. link please
Still am rather skeptical of things. If they have trully witnessed the reported results, wouldn't this progression be through the roof by now? Or is it already and I am just late to the party like always.
You mistake optimism for reporting the standards, reporting facts and ignoring chaff. Hopefully you are not trying to smear efforts like ocelot? BTW I'm not optimistic about anything (if I could be bothered I should make a post about this myth), as a skeptic, who always considers the facts myself, I just want to report the facts and get to the obvious facts and validated logic over the noise and spin and go with the reason.
Regarding "optimism", why should I be optimistic when the hydrogel is currently on the shelf and will be, going on precedent for devices, for 3 long years? With regards to being optimistic I have never been optimistic, if I was optimistic about the treatment of scarring I wouldn't stress and come on this thread (I would come on a site for acne research though if say I wanted a regime to stop any future acne etc from coming.) to report the facts. I'd be making appointments to sort my established scars out asap.
I laugh at liquid ocelots naive and seriously ignorant post above though. He/she trys to claim we should just forget about reporting the facts and standards and accept and try to treat our scars now. What are we going to treat them with currently, saline, dog dirt? And at the same time ocelot does not see just how important it is to report the facts and the logic to enable and push standards.
As lapis said with regards to the photos. But here are the facts to deduce your reasoning though, (but please do not be optimistic as it is still on the shelf): The faster a scaffold degrades (the white blood cells digest the scaffold) in a mammal the better the regeneration. In all scaffolds they all degrade at a similar rate in all mammals (they have a similar rate of digestion. The white bloods cells eat through the scaffold similar in all mammals, if the scaffold is hard to digest in one mammal, it is hard to digest in another and so on). If a wound reepithilises in under 21days there will be no scar, forensic fact. If a wound regenerates hair or sweat glands there can be no scar, forensic fact. This dextran scaffold was eaten rapidly by the white blood cells. This stuff reepithilized a wound in 14days (under 21days). Within 21days, various sweat and hair glands were regenerated. These are all facts.
liquid ocelots.. Lol don't bother with him. Anyways I want to know more about this hydrogel stuff, any good papers to read?
Btw where is the literature on the 21 days mark? I've read quite alot about scars, and I don't think I've ever came across that number. How would one prove that.. even if its just anecdotal evidence, you would've had to achieve scar free healing in that period to make that claim. Links 
liquid ocelots.. Lol don't bother with him. Anyways I want to know more about this hydrogel stuff, any good papers to read?
Btw where is the literature on the 21 days mark? I've read quite alot about scars, and I don't think I've ever came across that number. How would one prove that.. even if its just anecdotal evidence, you would've had to achieve scar free healing in that period to make that claim. Links
it mentions it briefly in the paper Dextran hydrogel scaffolds enhance angiogenic responses and promote complete skin regeneration during burn wound healing. There are many other places to see it documented. It is clinically established if sweat glands and hair follicles survive a burn there will be no scar, and that the faster the reepithilization the less scar, and if a wound reepithilizes in three weeks there will be no scar (roughly the period of a second degree burn takes to heal) Here is another two cites, http://www.burnsurgery.com/Modules/BurnWound%201/sect_IX.htm
http://www.skincareguide.ca/articles/general_skin_care/gen_skin_care_art_3.html stolen from wiki.
Hey guys,
First of all, I really hate to be negative, since hope is such an important part in coping with scarring. That said, there's one thing that bothers me about the Gerecht et al hydrogel paper, and it would be interesting to hear what you guys think about it. Here's a quote:
Moreover, we observed a significant increase in the number ofhair follicles (Fig. 7A, iii). Indeed, when the treatment continued
for extended periods, we observed hair growth in the center of
hydrogel-treated wounds (Fig. 7B).
First, notice that they are only talking about an increase in the number of HFs. The fact is that hair follicles are already known to regenerate in mammals given that the wound is large enough. This was recently popularized in a study by Ito et al that is referenced in the Gerecht paper and that has also laid the foundations for a biotech start-up, Follica, that tries to take advantage of this fact to treat various forms of alopecias (hair loss from scarring included.)
However, as it seems, one of the big problems is that the "regenerative response," if you will, is only strong enough to induce new follicle formation in the center of the wound bed. Notice that the quote above explicitly mentions just the center of the hydrogel-treated wounds. This implies that the regenerated skin will be surrounded by a scarred margin if the procedure is carried out as a full thickness excision, as in the pic below (from Follica's most recent patent):
Nevertheless, there's a lot of positives coming from this hydrogel imo. For example, afaik, Follica has never been able to regenerate pigmented hair follicles, so this is clearly a testament to the merits of the hydrogel, whether it accomplishes this by increasing melanocyte SC motility or even by dedifferentiating the wound bed to such a degree that MCSCs are formed anew. It's also possible that the problem with the scarred margin can be solved by dermabrading the surrounding area of the excision so as to enlarge the regenerating zone to include the borders as well, or perhaps by limiting the use of the hydrogel to improving the healing in deeper types of dermabrasion for scars that don't go all the way through the skin.
^ In relation to the above post,
I saw this a while back as well and asked one of Gerecht's researchers about this statement when I contacted them. This was the convo:
......
ME: I was curious, does this mean that while the hydrogel initiated regeneration in the center of the wound of the full thickness excision, there was still a scarred area that encircled the newly regenerated skin?
REPLY: The burn size was 1.2cm in diameter, while we only cut off 0.8cm. So there was a rim left.
ME: Great. So all of the skin that was treated with hydrogel did regenerate then?
REPLY: At least we can say that the hydrogel promoted hair growth.
......
Kind of ambiguous reply there at the end, eh? Ugh. I don't know. It seems only time will tell...
Hey guys,
First of all, I really hate to be negative, since hope is such an important part in coping with scarring. That said, there's one thing that bothers me about the Gerecht et al hydrogel paper, and it would be interesting to hear what you guys think about it. Here's a quote:
Moreover, we observed a significant increase in the number ofhair follicles (Fig. 7A, iii). Indeed, when the treatment continued
for extended periods, we observed hair growth in the center of
hydrogel-treated wounds (Fig. 7B).
First, notice that they are only talking about an increase in the number of HFs. The fact is that hair follicles are already known to regenerate in mammals given that the wound is large enough. This was recently popularized in a study by Ito et al that is referenced in the Gerecht paper and that has also laid the foundations for a biotech start-up, Follica, that tries to take advantage of this fact to treat various forms of alopecias (hair loss from scarring included.)
However, as it seems, one of the big problems is that the "regenerative response," if you will, is only strong enough to induce new follicle formation in the center of the wound bed. Notice that the quote above explicitly mentions just the center of the hydrogel-treated wounds. This implies that the regenerated skin will be surrounded by a scarred margin if the procedure is carried out as a full thickness excision, as in the pic below (from Follica's most recent patent):
Nevertheless, there's a lot of positives coming from this hydrogel imo. For example, afaik, Follica has never been able to regenerate pigmented hair follicles, so this is clearly a testament to the merits of the hydrogel, whether it accomplishes this by increasing melanocyte SC motility or even by dedifferentiating the wound bed to such a degree that MCSCs are formed anew. It's also possible that the problem with the scarred margin can be solved by dermabrading the surrounding area of the excision so as to enlarge the regenerating zone to include the borders as well, or perhaps by limiting the use of the hydrogel to improving the healing in deeper types of dermabrasion for scars that don't go all the way through the skin.
Regarding the hair in the center. If you look at the paper they are highlighting the fact that when a scaffold finds it hard to be degraded/digested (like the control) then the neutrophils can™t digest well at the periphery of the scaffold (like the control) never mind the centre. And as such the centre of the wound is the place least likely to regenerate if the neutrophils cant break the periphery of the scaffold to enable fast reepithilization into the center. So when they are highlighting that hair grew in the middle of the hydrogel they are showing default logical proof that the 80:20 hydrogel was degraded fast to enable complete regeneration. As in the center, through the neutrophils degrading the 8020 hydrogel enabling fast reepithilization there was hair. This is different in the control scaffold were the neutrophils could not digest the periphery.
^ In relation to the above post,
I saw this a while back as well and asked one of Gerecht's researchers about this statement when I contacted them. This was the convo:
......
ME: I was curious, does this mean that while the hydrogel initiated regeneration in the center of the wound of the full thickness excision, there was still a scarred area that encircled the newly regenerated skin?
REPLY: The burn size was 1.2cm in diameter, while we only cut off 0.8cm. So there was a rim left.
ME: Great. So all of the skin that was treated with hydrogel did regenerate then?
REPLY: At least we can say that the hydrogel promoted hair growth.
......
Kind of ambiguous reply there at the end, eh? Ugh. I don't know. It seems only time will tell...
It is not ambiguous. The treated center brought complete regeneration, hair and sweat glands do not grow in scar, and the untreated rim part behaved as an untreated part would.
has anyone read this?
USE OF ERYTHROPOIETIN FOR SCAR-FREE HEALING OF WOUNDS OR TISSUE DEFECTS
http://patentscope.w...ueryString=a61k
is in another language
How would you like to have a face like this:
So that guy has one of the highest positions in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in my country, he was born in 1973 and he is a univesity professor and a columnist in one newspaper and a president of one non-goverment organization, he is on the TV all the time as a political analyst, he has a wife and two children, so he has no problem with his face, here you can see his biography:
http://www.cnp.rs/en/pages/view/24
@ Vladislav: That man could easily have that removed through lasers, I think. Those are "wine marks" right? Can't those be dealt with by laser? If he chooses to keep them regardless then that is kind of interesting. I wouldn't see something like that as a "part of who I am". Some people say stuff like that. That their physical imperfections, if you will, are part of what defines who they are. But I don't see it that way. I'd get lasered, I think. If I was him. But hey, everyone's different.
______________________________________________________________
@ everyone: Hey I understand that it is in and of itself undesireable to have scars. And psychologically and emotionally it's quite something to have to deal with. All that goes without saying. But I was wondering to what extent your environment reacts negatively to your scarring? Do people ever reject you? Or go out of their way to hurt you through making some remark about your scars? Does it negatively affect your love lives? You know, things like that. Let me know, would you? It would be interesting. We could have a little chat about this subject in here. It's a bit off-topic but hey who cares, right? 
@ Vladislav: That man could easily have that removed through lasers, I think. Those are "wine marks" right? Can't those be dealt with by laser? If he chooses to keep them regardless then that is kind of interesting. I wouldn't see something like that as a "part of who I am". Some people say stuff like that. That their physical imperfections, if you will, are part of what defines who they are. But I don't see it that way. I'd get lasered, I think. If I was him. But hey, everyone's different.
______________________________________________________________
@ everyone: Hey I understand that it is in and of itself undesireable to have scars. And psychologically and emotionally it's quite something to have to deal with. All that goes without saying. But I was wondering to what extent your environment reacts negatively to your scarring? Do people ever reject you? Or go out of their way to hurt you through making some remark about your scars? Does it negatively affect your love lives? You know, things like that. Let me know, would you? It would be interesting. We could have a little chat about this subject in here. It's a bit off-topic but hey who cares, right?
The thing that makes it emotionally hard for me isn't that people make remarks. For me it's a identity problem. I don't feel like myself anymore, so no one really sees me for who I am because I have been living in a mental prison. I can be completly self confident at night and feel somewhat myself and the next morning collapse when I see the scarring.
I have anxiety, stress, panic attacks and depression and it doesn't feel like me. There is no flow like there was 6 years ago, this is also the time I havent had a relation.
Except scars on my face I have a lot more damage on my body. When I go on holiday, say Italy no one has scarring and I feel like a freak. Also I have little hope for the future or in a destiny then I used to.
Overal people don't care and are busy with their own lives, they stare sometimes or just see you for how you present yourself and that can be the insecure, stressed, hidden, depressed version of me. I have this weird depressed, stressed stare in my eyes, when in the past my eyes used to smile. Recenlty a psychologist thought I was autistic because of the lack of body movements and self expression, then she came back on that diagnose because I was different in the past.
Emotionally I am a wreck, I try to stay stable with sport and I try not to stress to much. To make things harder two of my family members became very ill when I was 16 and the problems I have had with that has added up. Being somewhat confident and music, a positive additude is the thing that always kept me going. Since I have scars I can't cope with my life very well. I dropped study in the last year, although I really gave it everything.
Now I am stable and still I am very far from being alright. The main problem isn't what people think, it's what I think and my overal identity and quality of life. I am not happy with who I have become and that after a lot of hard work to make something of my life. There is a lot of room for mentally handeling this better.
People don't reject me, maybe some people really care. I have had a long term friend who I don' t see anymore because I have become somewhat a different person.
I have had a year ago with a girl I hadn't seen for some time and I could see here going from "this guy is interesting to - what happened to him and where did the scars come from" Also I notice a difference in women interessted in me. Actually I don't want a gf myself in my mental state and with the scars how they look.
I really hope I get to a point with the scarring that I don't care anymore, recognize myself again and stop being so hard on myself. Maybe get that life enthusiastic smile in my eyes again.