I just had a thought though.

Say the new gel does in fact work as well/better than the 80/20 and they go through with that.

Since it contains antibiotics (a medicinal component) wouldn't that mean that it could no longer be considered a device?

And therefore would take muuuccchhh longer to gain approval..?

Since it contains antibiotics (a medicinal component) wouldn't that mean that it could no longer be considered a device?

And therefore would take muuuccchhh longer to gain approval..?

 

It would be interesting to know if this would delay anything.

I just had a thought though.

Say the new gel does in fact work as well/better than the 80/20 and they go through with that.

 

Since it contains antibiotics (a medicinal component) wouldn't that mean that it could no longer be considered a device?

And therefore would take muuuccchhh longer to gain approval..?

 

No, I don't think so. The antibiotics themselves are already approved, I would assume...? This is the layman talking, bear in mind.

@Lapis lazuli Ha! I never could spell!

I'm thinking the same on the antibiotics - that they are just adding antibiotics that have already been proved for use - so I don't think the gel would turn from being classified as a device to a drug, but can't be 100%

I still think it's great the army is involved - I've read pieces on regeneration projects by them before - and the one thing they all have in common is that they say they want the projects to be fast-tracked

Yeah, now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure that you guys are correct and it will still be considered a device.

@Mars, the army isn't involved yet... but we'll know if they will be or not by November!

Honestly though, I don't see how they can turn this down with the new self-adhesive and antibiotic properties. It is seemingly now the whole package.

Now that I think about this as well - I can see how without these properties, the army (or whoever else turned them down for funds) may have initially thought the gel was flawed. If you think about it, like seabs has mentioned, a lot of the warriors who could benefit from something of this sort would have larger, harder to treat wounds that were also more prone to possible infection. I really think now that it's self-adhesive (it can easily stick to any size or shape wound) and antibiotic (no infections!) it could be of great use in such a wider variety of applications. And it'll be much easier to use effectively!

The only question is - - - will it have the regenerative capabilities of the 80/20??

Came across this article today about the U.S. army's support for regenerative medicine. Some interesting pieces about skin, muscle and bone regeneration. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/technology/doctors-use-experimental-techniques-to-heal-wounded-soldiers/story-fn5kftjr-1226470648580

It would be cool if you could do a spell like Harry Potter and say "Fibrosis disappearus!" and then *snap* you're scar free. Sorry, this comment isn't very informative.

I'm still looking forward to hearing what will be said in November, finding out if the self-adhering one is any good, and if so how long it will be before it's available to us.

It's nice to see people's dedication to this and it's nice to have this possibly on the horizon.

Just felt like saying that.

It's nice to see people's dedication to this and it's nice to have this possibly on the horizon.

 

Just felt like saying that.

 

Yip, it's a good feeling that it's a possibility! - it might come to nothing - but we can now know something is happening in this area - work is in progress!! 🙂

This is a device that has already proven to degrade in under 7 days in mammal tissue, that could be approved in lets say six month when it gets funding in November. It needs funded...

Yip, it's a good feeling that it's a possibility! - it might come to nothing - but we can now know something is happening in this area - work is in progress!!

 

That's what part of me is still assuming (that it will come to nothing). But there are definately things that indicate it may turn out differently.. Like how they said they were confident that it would work just as well in people and indeed the actual regeneration there has been in the mouse... Here's hoping. It would be something that could change the lives of millions. It would be great. lol

This is a device that has already proven to degrade in under 7 days in mammal tissue, that could be approved in lets say six month when it gets funding in November. It needs funded...

 

Yeah, it's a promising thing. It just depends on how the army sees it. Maybe there are other things that they strangely see as even more promising. Seeing that there are so many different approaches being worked on...

Fingers crossed.

Yeah, it's a promising thing. It just depends on how the army sees it.

 

 

The army invests in projects based on theory and helps out at an early stage, and then guides them through. This is way past the early stage and has clear results... This only needs lets say six month or so of tests, it just needs funding.

 

Yeah, it's a promising thing. It just depends on how the army sees it.

 

 

 

The army invests in projects based on theory and helps out at an early stage, and then guides them through. This is way past the early stage and has clear results... This only needs lets say six month or so of tests, it just needs funding.

 

Thanks for shedding some light on that/reminding me. So basically it would be confounding if they didn't fund it. That's cool then.

 

 

Yeah, it's a promising thing. It just depends on how the army sees it.

 

 

 

The army invests in projects based on theory and helps out at an early stage, and then guides them through. This is way past the early stage and has clear results... This only needs lets say six month or so of tests, it just needs funding.

 

 

Thanks for shedding some light on that/reminding me. So basically it would be confounding if they didn't fund it. That's cool then.

 

Maybe they could fund the final stage, I dont know, but it clearly doesn't need guidence, its at a final stage and imo Sun, Gerecht, Harmon et al all look competent to me.

 

 

 

Yeah, it's a promising thing. It just depends on how the army sees it.

 

 

 

The army invests in projects based on theory and helps out at an early stage, and then guides them through. This is way past the early stage and has clear results... This only needs lets say six month or so of tests, it just needs funding.

 

 

Thanks for shedding some light on that/reminding me. So basically it would be confounding if they didn't fund it. That's cool then.

 

 

Maybe they could fund the final stage, I dont know about funding, but it doesn't need guidence, its at a final stage and imo Sun, Gerecht, Harmon et al all look competent to me.

 

I was thinking the same thing when it comes to Sun, Gerecht and Harmon.

Anyway, knowing the whole project concerning the gel has so much going for it is "hope inspiring" as I think it's called.

Thanks again, Seabs.

200+ interesting comments about Mark Ferguson:

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/102011?userlanguage=ga&save_prefs=true#comment292307

I guess that scum is prepairing something big, his next scam, the next victim will be Science Foundation of Ireland.

ht http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/26/spiny-mice-flaying-skin-healing-factor/

^nothing that'll translate to any thing clinically in the near future, but interesting nonetheless.

This could be interesting, they claim their drug is able to regenerate hair follicles!? Seabs and others what do you think about this drug?

http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/sirnaomics-wins-sbir-award-to-develop-wound-healing-product/81246952/

Sirnaomics said its research to date has demonstrated that accelerated wound closure with a topically applied siRNA mixture results in wound repair and a return of normal skin morphology without a scar and with return of folliclesa therapeutic benefit superior to existing standard treatment.

We shouldn't be paranoid about drugs like this just because of Juvista failure/scam, Juvista was based on recombinant DNA technology that was discovered in 1973 and approved by the FDA in 1982 (recombinant DNA insulin for diabetes), so that drug was based on 30 years old technology, RXi-109 and STP705 are based on RNA interference technology which is much newer concept than recombinant DNA, so there are over 1000 drugs that are currently in clinical trials that are based on RNAi technology and yet none has been approved by the FDA, and they claim that they have some special delivery system for that drug based on nanoparticles. And clinical trials will be conducted in China, so most probably it will be approved in China much earlier than in the United States.

http://a216530356.oinsite.yh.mynet.cn/_d275057937.htm

Sirnaomics could begin phase I testing of its siRNA-based wound-healing drug candidate STP-705 as soon as next year and expects to run the trial in China, a company official told Gene Silencing News this week.

This could be interesting, they claim their drug is able to regenerate hair follicles!? Seabs and others what do you think about this drug?

 

I've just scanned it and imo it seems vague.

TBH I'm only interested in scar free healing with the 8020 rapidly digested hydrogel that has been proven; where the theory:results ratio is weighted in the results. The hydrogel gets funding and they remove procrastination, we could all be using this soon.

I've read some stuff about Cutasil two or so years ago. I'm not really excited about it. It's not going to come to fruition while we're still young if ever. Anyway, I'm not very interested in Cutasil.

ht http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/26/spiny-mice-flaying-skin-healing-factor/

 

^nothing that'll translate to any thing clinically in the near future, but interesting nonetheless.

 

"Although many scienctists are trying to speed up the healing process, our studies on spiny mice and salamanders show that slowing things down is the path towards regeneration."

That's so strange, the fact that they're saying the opposite.

Some of these statements, by the way, that they're making are so standard. We've all heard it 1000.000.000 times before. Like they're saying anything new.

I'm not criticizing you, chuckstonchew, I'm just kind of baffled by the fact that some of these doctors/researchers seemingly make discoveries that are yesterday's news.

 

ht http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/26/spiny-mice-flaying-skin-healing-factor/

 

^nothing that'll translate to any thing clinically in the near future, but interesting nonetheless.

 

 

"Although many scienctists are trying to speed up the healing process, our studies on spiny mice and salamanders show that slowing things down is the path towards regeneration."

 

That's so strange, the fact that they're saying the opposite.

 

Some of these statements, by the way, that they're making are so standard. We've all heard it 1000.000.000 times before. Like they're saying anything new.

 

I'm not criticizing you, chuckstonchew, I'm just kind of baffled by the fact that some of these doctors/researchers seemingly make discoveries that are yesterday's news.

 

(Shrugs) Yeah - I don't know. I've never read anything about a mouse being able to regenerate skin like that. I mean, the ear holes, yeah. But the full thickness wounds on their back - That's pretty remarkable.

But, although that's interesting, I'm kind of agreeing with seabs at this point...

TBH I'm only interested in scar free healing with the 8020 rapidly digested hydrogel that has been proven; where the theory:results ratio is weighted in the results. The hydrogel gets funding and they remove procrastination, we could all be using this soon.

 

Ahhh, come on November! I'm growing impatient of being patient.

I'm looking forward to November too. I'm very curious to find out if the funding will come through or not. Should be interesting to see how it all develops if it does.

 

 

ht http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/26/spiny-mice-flaying-skin-healing-factor/

 

^nothing that'll translate to any thing clinically in the near future, but interesting nonetheless.

 

 

"Although many scienctists are trying to speed up the healing process, our studies on spiny mice and salamanders show that slowing things down is the path towards regeneration."

 

That's so strange, the fact that they're saying the opposite.

 

Some of these statements, by the way, that they're making are so standard. We've all heard it 1000.000.000 times before. Like they're saying anything new.

 

I'm not criticizing you, chuckstonchew, I'm just kind of baffled by the fact that some of these doctors/researchers seemingly make discoveries that are yesterday's news.

 

 

(Shrugs) Yeah - I don't know. I've never read anything about a mouse being able to regenerate skin like that. I mean, the ear holes, yeah. But the full thickness wounds on their back - That's pretty remarkable.

 

 

But, although that's interesting, I'm kind of agreeing with seabs at this point...

 

 

TBH I'm only interested in scar free healing with the 8020 rapidly digested hydrogel that has been proven; where the theory:results ratio is weighted in the results. The hydrogel gets funding and they remove procrastination, we could all be using this soon.

 

 

Ahhh, come on November! I'm growing impatient of being patient.

 

There is one way to scar free healing and that is to make sure the wound re-epithilizes before the scar response, so it cuts out the scar loop. As once the scar is there, it is there. Regarding the 8020 hydrogel and the control. And the standard control matrix behaved like it always does in other mammals, it was slowly degraded and brought scar tissue, the neutrophils couldn't digest it fast. The 8020 on the other hand was digested in 7 days by the neutrophils, this brought cell growth, bringing a fast reepithilization in under 14 days (under the 21days) and scar free healing.

 

 

ht http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/26/spiny-mice-flaying-skin-healing-factor/

 

^nothing that'll translate to any thing clinically in the near future, but interesting nonetheless.

 

 

"Although many scienctists are trying to speed up the healing process, our studies on spiny mice and salamanders show that slowing things down is the path towards regeneration."

 

That's so strange, the fact that they're saying the opposite.

 

Some of these statements, by the way, that they're making are so standard. We've all heard it 1000.000.000 times before. Like they're saying anything new.

 

I'm not criticizing you, chuckstonchew, I'm just kind of baffled by the fact that some of these doctors/researchers seemingly make discoveries that are yesterday's news.

 

 

(Shrugs) Yeah - I don't know. I've never read anything about a mouse being able to regenerate skin like that. I mean, the ear holes, yeah. But the full thickness wounds on their back - That's pretty remarkable.

 

 

But, although that's interesting, I'm kind of agreeing with seabs at this point...

 

 

TBH I'm only interested in scar free healing with the 8020 rapidly digested hydrogel that has been proven; where the theory:results ratio is weighted in the results. The hydrogel gets funding and they remove procrastination, we could all be using this soon.

 

 

Ahhh, come on November! I'm growing impatient of being patient.

 

Here's a neat comment on this discovery by a regenerative biologist:

http://www.reddit.co...derlike/c6ejhd7

If the hydrogel doesn't prove to be as good as it has shown in tests, then surely modifying our own DNA to activate the ability to regenerate skin with all of its components will be a definite cure. It might take a decade or two, but it's kind of a sure thing.

Another article on the topic:

http://www.labspaces.net/123906/Biologist_discovers_mammal_with_salamander_like_regenerative_abilities

has this quote:

"The results were astonishing," he said. "The various tissues in the ear grew back through formation of blastema-like structures -- the same sort of biological process that a salamander uses to regenerate a severed limb."

BTW this study on this new mouse model was actually done on the 27th November 2011, it is not new. http://www.nature.co...ature11499.html