Acne.org Products
Hey uncut, this post is probably longer than it needs to be, my apologies,
You mention the word hype. It looks like you have interchanged it with science. Hype and a usable scientific method are not the same thing. Hype or marketing is built to play on subjective and common human, needs, beliefs, prejudices and preferences to give something status. Hype does not have to rely on reason. Science just gives an objective truth and has to rely on reason, if not, its clearly not scientific. Or do you disagree? Anyway a scientific method couldnt give a crap about hype, needs, beliefs, prejudices, preferences or status. <<<It couldnt give a crap, its cold as fuck. All science does is bring out an objective result from a controlled method. Though hype might grab onto objective truths from science, and it may hype the objective truths up good, or hype objective truths up bad (an example of bad hype would be when science found the world was flat, people hyped up or sensationalised that this reasoned fact was not the case and it was blasphemous to state that), also good hype or bad hype does this on subjective truths that come outside of science. Hype doesnt care for scientific method or reason, and scientific method doesnt care for hype but needs reason. I had to get that association out of the way.
Anyway on to scaffolds. Scaffolds do not behave differently in mammals; they cannot discriminate, they either: just get digested or do not get digested. And when they degrade they create cells. Again there is also reliable scientific method here. An established control scaffold that has been tested on thousands of mammals behaved typically, and on the other hand the hydrogel scaffold degraded in 7 to 10 days and got complete regeneration. A quality comparison is here. There is a very reliable comparison control here as a standard. Looking at that, this is scientific method; and when this is scientific method then the facts do not change and this is reality. This is a testable and tangible scientific method that can be tested and tested in reality. And the comparison control here in this method gives this even more reliability. To me the likely hood of the hydrogel then being the first scaffold to say I do not like chicken, and Im going to behave like a slower degradable scaffold and degrade like the slower degradable control I was compared against, is small, unless the scaffold has a brain. All that will happen is the hydrogel will degrade, and degrade very fast. And to me looking at that paper the only way this would not work, using reason and logic from the paper, would be if the gel was somehow the control, or the mammal neutrophil response was impaired. And as a consequence the gel digested slower.
Now to answer your question. Lets say you had a full thickness wound and instead you cant use a fast degradable gel, and you used the control or another slower degrading scaffold, or lets say you had an impaired neutrophil response, and because of this you got slower digestion and incomplete regeneration anyway that made your healing take more than 3 weeks to re-epithelize. And you now want to add some spray gun to a slow degradable scaffold (like the control) to make it better?
Well I have seen no data here regarding spray added on to scaffolds, so this is just an opinion. And note as there is nothing backing this up, then take my opinion or anyone elses following from here with a pinch of salt, but imo, I reckon logically your spray in your theory might be wasted after you have sprayed the spray on to the top of some slower digested scaffold. Heres why: the spray is designed to be used on impact with tissue, usually second degree burns with tissue layers? And your spray that is designed to be used on impact, over the next 7 days of digesting, will be lying on top of a slower degrading scaffold waiting for impact with a layer in order to be consumed by the body. I reckon the spray would perish before it was consumed, the spray would waste waiting on top of the scaffold before it was used by the body; or your spray may be eaten by the neutrophils before it was used by the body?
Do you still believe in opinionated testimonials from anonymous individuals on the internet are more reliable than a tangible testable scientific paper Panos? Btw you have the right to do that, but I just want to know how you balance reason. Anyway if this is a baseless opinion, then something must have went outside of some cited document somewhere, or used some intangible logic, or listened to a testimonial on some forum??? Where is this the case? Everything is cited and tangible and it comes from research. Anyway a rodent is a mammal. Scaffolds are not like drugs, they just degrade in mammals, the white bloodcells do the work, this is not a human manipulating some mechanism like you do with a drug. All scaffolds do, like the control, is behave similar in all tissues in all mammals, they degrade. They have been tested literally thousands of times on almost every mammal. This is not someone testing something, and testing it again getting a different result. Therefor the control scaffold is reliable. <<<Get that. Its tangible ratios and relationship with all mammals are understood, this data is also known with all scaffolds. The state of the art control scaffold here is telling... The tangible bit, now if a control scaffold degrades at 1unit per second in all mammals and the tested scaffold degrades at roughly 1.2 units per second, or what ever, in a mammal. Then the tangible likelyhood here is that the scaffold degrades in mammals at 1.2. There is nothing baseless at all.
seabss,what you are saying its also an opinion,
cause you forgot the word,''mice''.
http://www.pharmafocusasia.com/knowledge_bank/articles/healing-burns.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_oil
I'm tired of waiting for the Dextran Hydrogel.
This egg oil stuff seems legit. It's not hard to find (you can't make it yourself, you need purified or pharma grade that is hexan/solvent free) it sounds like it works just like Dextran Hydrogel.
I'm very mad with JHU and the team that discovered the DH. They could move forward so quickly with this discovery- even if it's only known to work on mice right now. A pig would be the next logical step. Unfortunately a few people in this team know what the finding might be worth, and that made them greedy. Now it's about who legally owns it before it can even be tested further/funded or put through the trial phases.
Lets fool around with this egg oil, shall we.
http://www.pharmafocusasia.com/knowledge_bank/articles/healing-burns.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_oil
I'm tired of waiting for the Dextran Hydrogel.
This egg oil stuff seems legit. It's not hard to find (you can't make it yourself, you need purified or pharma grade that is hexan/solvent free) it sounds like it works just like Dextran Hydrogel.
I'm very mad with JHU and the team that discovered the DH. They could move forward so quickly with this discovery- even if it's only known to work on mice right now. A pig would be the next logical step. Unfortunately a few people in this team know what the finding might be worth, and that made them greedy. Now it's about who legally owns it before it can even be tested further/funded or put through the trial phases.
Lets fool around with this egg oil, shall we.
i
it looks promising but we'd have to first burn our scars, right? So we'd need a dermatologist willing to laser resurface the car to a deep level and then we could slather on this stuff for several weeks and see the results. Anyone have the wherewithal to do this?
I'm not burning away any scars. I'd cut them out, or sand them off with dry wall sanding screens. If I did use heat to remove a scar. I would make a homemade dermal stamp out of sewing needles wire wrapped/ or pipe clamped around a wood burner tip- hooked up to potentiometer/light dimmer to make the heat temps adjustable. I'd stamp over the scar to burn off/destroy the tissue. Better to cut out a small scar first to treat with the egg oil to see what kind of result happens. I have tons of scars on my fingers from using razors to make things. I could cut one out using a pair of flat nail clippers.
I was thinking that one would spray the stem cells over the wounded area first then apply the hydrogel scaffold. I don't know if it would hinder the hydrogel or not but would the hydrogel facilitate the work the stem cells are doing. All else being equal if I had applied stem cells over a wounded area I should see faster healing than not applying anything correct? So if I then applied hydrogel after a stem cell treatment, by logic the stem cells acts immediately to rebuild new tissue etc while the hydrogel will degrade to create new cells a bit later on.
I can't see why stem cells will interfere with the hydrogel since the link I had posted above said 3-d patterning can help stem cells create the designated tissues faster.
If hydrogel can completely regenerate skin that would be amazing but if we could some how speed that process up even by a day or two would it not be an improvement since it would cut down the chances of complications.
I'm just throwing ideas around I studied accounting so I don't have any biology background. Just wanted to hear some opinions.
I'm not burning away any scars. I'd cut them out, or sand them off with dry wall sanding screens. If I did use heat to remove a scar. I would make a homemade dermal stamp out of sewing needles wire wrapped/ or pipe clamped around a wood burner tip- hooked up to potentiometer/light dimmer to make the heat temps adjustable. I'd stamp over the scar to burn off/destroy the tissue. Better to cut out a small scar first to treat with the egg oil to see what kind of result happens. I have tons of scars on my fingers from using razors to make things. I could cut one out using a pair of flat nail clippers.
"CUT ONE OUT USING A PAIR OF FLAT NAIL CLIPPERS"!!!!!! Dude have you lost your friggin mind!? Don't do that, you're just going to destroy yourself.
egg oil: scar free healing? juajuajua
yeah, i mean my thoughts exactly, but i was trying to be encouraging and positive lololol we should probably just get back to the hydrogel....
Hey Uncut, I do not know if it would work on slower degrading scaffolds. Would the stem cells distract the white blood cells from digesting the gel? Would the stem cells get seen as baggage by the white blood cells, and would the white blood cells would digest them as they are not yet needed, kind of like electricians who have turned up when the ground is being cleared before the foundations are being put in? But that's just thinking. To me the only important thing is results, and if something degrades and creates tissue, then it creates tissue.
I have seen your link. I reckon internal injuries will have different engineering needs to external injuries. With external injuries you can use a dressing and observe a dressing, to see if you need to change the dressing. With internal injures Id imagine you would need the gel to be more rigid and sticky, as you cannot observe to see if a dressing has loosened.
I was thinking that one would spray the stem cells over the wounded area first then apply the hydrogel scaffold. I don't know if it would hinder the hydrogel or not but would the hydrogel facilitate the work the stem cells are doing. All else being equal if I had applied stem cells over a wounded area I should see faster healing than not applying anything correct? So if I then applied hydrogel after a stem cell treatment, by logic the stem cells acts immediately to rebuild new tissue etc while the hydrogel will degrade to create new cells a bit later on.
I can't see why stem cells will interfere with the hydrogel since the link I had posted above said 3-d patterning can help stem cells create the designated tissues faster.
If hydrogel can completely regenerate skin that would be amazing but if we could some how speed that process up even by a day or two would it not be an improvement since it would cut down the chances of complications.
I'm just throwing ideas around I studied accounting so I don't have any biology background. Just wanted to hear some opinions.
The kidney is one of the most complicated organ in the body, far more complicated than the windpipe, bladder or liver:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22123386
From Wikipedia:
Egg oil was traditionally used in treating wounds and injuries. Ambroise Pare used a solution of egg yolk, oil of roses, and turpentine for war wounds, an old method that the Romans had discovered 1000 years before him. He published his first book 'The method of curing wounds caused by arquebus and firearms' in 1545.
That's cool.
So much energy for nothing? question is why? do you actually believe there is a magical trick to scar-less healing? if there were methods to scar free healing why wouldn't surgeons and dermatologists use them? please don't tell me your conspiracy theories and all that bullshit. What is the purpose of healing your scar anyway? do you think you look bad cuz of your scars? NO! you can fix with various treatments scars and that's enough, I have an oily skin and some marks but I just don't give a fuck.
On the other hand and in my damn opinion there's no need to eliminate a scar causing no pain and restriction of movement, yes fix it, but why in the blue hell you want to get rid of your body's natural reaction? it's not fucking cancer and you won't die from it! I have learnt to live with my scars and yes I will improve them as much as I can but when they'll look normal (not raised) that's it I won't even think of them as a bad thing again.
