Acne.org Products
On 3/13/2013 at 5:23 AM, Vladislav said:This group has similar issue:
[edited link out]
So in March there were only 36 people who liked this group (it is a $10 billion project related to nuclear fusion research http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER ) and now there are 7,346 likes!!!???
Hydrogel fb page got from 31 to 3000+ likes in few hours...
The facebook page is too plain. The owner needs to post links and information to all the articles that are out there on the net. Someone should make a youtube channel, and use "scars" "remove scars" as keywords. It might also be wise to join the official JHU facebook page and post/ask questions about Dextran Hydrogel in every new comment section that comes up on the JHU FB page. At this point it's about being proactive. I dont feel like JHU cares about this as much as we do.
Stop being so self defeating.
Someone found/created something that tons of people want. Problem is the people who want it, don't know it's out there.
Remember the saying "Money talks and bullsh*t walks".
The only issues preventing forward momentum with this is money and intellectual ownership issues.
The funding wont happen until the ownership issue is resolved. The other thing is this. The people who want and need this. Well only a few of them know about it.
We have to expose it to the masses. We have to reveal it to the people who are searching for it on the internet. Put more knocking hands on JHU's door until the noise is too loud to ingore of the door breaks down.
There is no conspiracy here. This is a big money invention that could net billions of dollars for it's owners/investors- if it works on humans.
Everything is quiet and it's not good as far as time goes. We are trying to shorten the time as consumers. The news about this invention needs to be too loud to overlook and ignore. It should be the first thing Google and Bing find when you search for the keyword "Scars" it should be the most watched Youtube video for the keyword "Scars" and the Facebook page should come up first when you search for the keyword "Scars".
Again- The news about this invention needs to be loud and in everyones face, so the investors come after it, so the consumers beg for it. We have to force it to exist sooner. It wont take as much effort as everyone assumes.
The facebook page is too plain. The owner needs to post links and information to all the articles that are out there on the net. Someone should make a youtube channel, and use "scars" "remove scars" as keywords. It might also be wise to join the official JHU facebook page and post/ask questions about Dextran Hydrogel in every new comment section that comes up on the JHU FB page. At this point it's about being proactive. I dont feel like JHU cares about this as much as we do.
@2001 i totally agree with you. I created the facebook page because i wanted everyone to know about this. If i was the one in contact with the Doctors at JHU (i tried many times with no luck!) then i would have asked Dr Harmon if he minded me posting updates on the page of the discussions we'd been having. I think this could help us get a large following. If everyone else feels how i do, hearing there is progress keeps your hopes high. I think because we havent heard anything for a while everyone is starting to feel how they did before, hopeless.
Anyhow i did ask chuckstonchew if i could post his updates from Dr Harmon but he thought it best to wait til we got approval for crowd funding. I also wouldnt want Dr Harmon to stop chatting him because he might not want their conversations public yet. Although this forum isnt exactly private.
Some other users suggested keeping the page purely informative at this stage was best.
If you have any ideas on how to get more likers let me know ill give it a go. Maybe we can somehow put together a video of purely facts and text, using photos from the study. Including links to the pnas paper & patent and also the facebook page. If anyone has the ability and the time please do!
keen to hear if youve heard from Dr Harmon!
They have already tried it on pigs http://blogs.nature.com/spoonful/2013/02/injectable-gel-repairs-damage-after-heart-attack-in-pigs.html
So maybe it's time to test it on humans?
First of all we just to need to make this as simple as possible
It is a hydrogel that is being cover with plastic wrap and after days it is eaten by the skin itself promoting
skin growth .
Just this..
And then we should promote the myriad of its practical usage( scarless after breast augmentation!,scarless after
liposuction!,hair regeneration for people with scarring alopecias! , scarless after every surgey!,)
We should also say that scar is not just a cosmetically ugly issue,but also lacks normal skin function)
It is the fail of the body to regenarate completely..
We should make this as simple as possible
I just had a wild thought
Well if almost every disease is caused due to enviroment
what if we could create again and mimick the enviroment
when we were fetus iside our mothers organism and we could heal scarless?
This is the way hydrogel works
True health is universal...Recreating again this enviroment would do things feasible.
We also dont know if the low TGFbeta1-2 and high TGF-beta 3 of the fetus
is just a response of healing due to the positive surrounding enviroment.
We are just a response to enviromental factors
if an organism can heal scarless at a specific enviroment then the same organism could
heal scarless again in a similar enviroment..
if hydrogel promotes scarless healing in humans then it does so cause it recreates a topical embyonic
like enviroment.
We should have immediatley understand that renovo was a scam: renovo concentrated
on TGF that was clearly a response to the fetal enviroment. instead
they were claiming by adding tgfbeta 3 and lowering tgfbeta 1 2 they will promote scarless
healing ( that was a nice butcher approach)
Most of the studies try to create the hormonal profile of the embryo
and not the enviroment that surrounds the embryo!!!!!Maybe hydrogel does so!
I just had a wild thought
Well if almost every disease is caused due to enviroment
what if we could create again and mimick the enviroment
when we were fetus iside our mothers organism and we could heal scarless?
This is the way hydrogel works
True health is universal...Recreating again this enviroment would do things feasible.
We also dont know if the low TGFbeta1-2 and high TGF-beta 3 of the fetus
is just a response of healing due to the positive surrounding enviroment.
We are just a response to enviromental factors
if an organism can heal scarless at a specific enviroment then the same organism could
heal scarless again in a similar enviroment..
if hydrogel promotes scarless healing in humans then it does so cause it recreates a topical embyonic
like enviroment.
We should have immediatley understand that renovo was a scam: renovo concentrated
on TGF that was clearly a response to the fetal enviroment. instead
they were claiming by adding tgfbeta 3 and lowering tgfbeta 1 2 they will promote scarless
healing ( that was a nice butcher approach)
Most of the studies try to create the hormonal profile of the embryo
and not the enviroment that surrounds the embryo!!!!!Maybe hydrogel does so!
interesting?!
Panos the hydrogel just degrades rapidly and is eaten by whitebloodcells. This was also tested with a standardised method against a control used thousands of times before. 7 to10 days after application on a 3rd degree burn, the hydrogel has mostly been degraded and cells are created, therefor the wound is reepithilized. And after 21 days, when the wound was checked again, the hydrogel wounds have healed, with appendages, with complete regeneration; proven results. The control on the otherhand behaved as typical.
I know that seabs ,i was just making an hypothesis about how the hydrogel which is nothing
but a 3d structure consisting of water and sugar could make an enviroment capable of tissue
regeneration= very moisture +anti bacterial+ 3d human cells like behaving enviroment.
You still dont explain the reason why the hydrogel is being eaten by the macrophages
and even JHU team just makes 3 hypothesis about this.......
Panos, your theory is interesting. If I remember things right though, I believe I've seen a study testing that hypothesis by letting a fetus heal outside of the womb. I think the result was that it didn't matter though, i.e. that the fetus healed scarlessly anyway.
My guess would be that the main mechanism of action of the hydrogel is that it promotes cell motility. Without a scaffold to move in, fibroblasts will be restricted to the periphery of the wound. As fibroblasts can't move to the center of the wound, the layout of new collagen fibers will get messed up. The movement of cells are always affected by the extracellular matrix/their surroundings, a phenomenon known as 'contact guidance'.
As for fetuses and why they don't heal with a scar (for some time period), their granulation tissue is different from adults and probably works better as a scaffold.
I wouldnt care so much about studies but user's testimonials...
Testimonials of people i trust in forums. Hydrogel has not been proven to work in humans or
even in mice(we dont know yet the credibility of the study/even if i strongly believe it should work)
What we know for sure though is :
a) extreme moisture enviroment would accelerate and promote healing
b) pathogens will hinder healing
c)deeper regeneration will result in better scar appearance than exfoliation or lighter regeneration
WE KNOW THESE THINGS FOR SURE AND I WOULDNT CARE ABOUT ANY STUDY DISPROVING THEM
Nature shows the way in healing.
Hydrogel should work cause of the extreme enviroment of moisture that as you say promotes cell motility
plus the protection from pathogens...
Lugol's iodine works by killing any bacterial within the scar,shedding the skin so fast that will result in
deeper regeneration from bottom to up
Subcision works by attacking the deep scar tissue promoting deeper regeneration.
I wouldnt care about any study disproving those thing ,studies are just a nice beggining point.
I know that seabs ,i was just making an hypothesis about how the hydrogel which is nothing
but a 3d structure consisting of water and sugar could make an enviroment capable of tissue
regeneration= very moisture +anti bacterial+ 3d human cells like behaving enviroment.
You still dont explain the reason why the hydrogel is being eaten by the macrophages
and even JHU team just makes 3 hypothesis about this.......
Panos, but no one has to explain any non related peripheral theory, over results. There is no onus to overkill to feed any external theory that others have. The only thing that matters in science is results (peer reviewed even better), and results with no confirmation bias and no noise.
E.g. if I proved I could invent a flying car, would I have to explain someone elses non connected theory as to why grass is green too? No, especially because I'd imagine in my paper I would not have made any note on why grass is green. That would be external noise that is not related to the results. The result on a testable paper with no confirmation bias is what matters.
With regards to macrophages. The paper produces a cited fact on the first page that macrophages induce and accelerate angiogenesis. On page three the paper explains that they, quote, "did observe differences between macrophages and neutrophils between the control scaffold and dextran hydrogel (n = 6) because Neutrophil is a normal response to a wound area."
I cant see any hypothesis on macrophages, only cited facts, and even if there was one, that would be peripheral noise distracting from the papers results and pointless to discuss imo. I also cant remember anyone asking anyone to explain a peripheral theory.
The paper does mention that the hydrogel is eaten by neutrophils, which is normal behaviour for neutrophils in any mammal wound as the neutrophils eat bactera and foreign debris.
Its not distracting to ask why something promotes healing.
Yes yes i know results matter that can be repeated over and over
and show factual evidence but still its not distracting at all to ask why
somehting could show the way to scarless healing...
But you are right maybe we will never find this knowledge
but thinking like this can expand the limits and even make new theories an treatments.
Its not distracting to ask why something promotes healing.
Yes yes i know results matter that can be repeated over and over
and show factual evidence but still its not distracting at all to ask why
somehting could show the way to scarless healing...
But you are right maybe we will never find this knowledge
but thinking like this can expand the limits and even make new theories an treatments.
Anything is distracting if it is not described in the process that got the result. If you got hit by a lightning, would you discuss your grand mothers role in that result?
Facts, when the gel is eaten by a neutrophil cells are created, fact. When a cell is created, no fibrosis can appear in its place a fact.
This hydrogel was eaten by the neutrophils in 7 to 10 days, before 14days and 21days a key and crtical period, as if a wound has not reepithilized before 21 days generally a scar forms. On 21days the wound had produced complete regeneration appendages from a 3rd degree burn, the control had not. What has any external theory got to do with that result?
Its funny how you keep on talking about the philosophy of science
but still you completely neglect when i am asking myself ''why would this work'',which
is basically essential for any philosophical statement.
You still contradict yourself.Again your example is poor since it has nothing to do with the lightning
hitting the person...
Its funny how you keep on talking about the philosophy of science
but still you completely neglect when i am asking myself ''why would this work'',which
is basically essential for any philosophical statement.
You still contradict yourself.Again your example is poor since it has nothing to do with the lightning
hitting the person...
I was pointing out a logical fallacy. eg. If you got struck by lightening, would you discuss or debate your theory of your grandmothers role in the process?
A controlled scientific method does not care about any philosophical statement, it just produces results.
I have neglected nothing, and I have not contradicted myself, I have stuck to what is cited in the paper.
DamnLife mean and seabs dont offend each other ,,we dont fight dont worry..
The study is there,and if it works then the information are there .
I dont like to passively wait for any fda approved further studies on mammals and funding..
I am angry cause i dont have the knowledge to take the patent and turn it into something practical...
Also the excision part of the study is a bit harsh.Maybe if we could make it through other ways (still invasive but not that harsh)
then it would be the best treatment.