Acne.org Products
Well I do agree that there IS missing tissue, I just believe that if you didn't have the scar tissue which acts like a brick wall you'd be able to repair/get the missing tissue( that died off because of the scar tissue formation) back into these sites.
I think even if you got into the situation where you could remove the scar tissue and you basically had an area that had no scar tissue, but was missing regular tissue (a soft hole?) you could easily transplant the structures that were missing! You can't do this now because the scar tissue will not allow these structures to function.
Well I do agree that there IS missing tissue, I just believe that if you didn't have the scar tissue which acts like a brick wall you'd be able to repair/get the missing tissue( that died off because of the scar tissue formation) back into these sites.
I think even if you got into the situation where you could remove the scar tissue and you basically had an area that had no scar tissue, but was missing regular tissue (a soft hole?) you could easily transplant the structures that were missing! You can't do this now because the scar tissue will not allow these structures to function.
I get what you mean about having missing tissue, without the scar tissue as a brick wall, the skin would be able to completely regenerate itself. The reason is simply because the scar tissue is pulling the normal tissues down, thus causing the depressions.
But, what about scarred/open pores? I know they are not considered as "scars". But, thinking about it, they have no apparent aesthetic difference from scars as they are equally hard to remove, if not even harder to remove then scars. I have loads of them, so im equally concerned about them. I know that for scars, the scar tissue is hindering the regeneration of the skin. However, for open pores, what is it preventing them from closing? I thought that the skin has an amazing ability to withstand strecthing, so whats up with a little tiny hole? This is something that I dont really understand, can someone enlighten me please...
Scientists have found out molecule behind newt limb regeneration.
The configuration of the scar tissue and the way that it is laid down creates odd shapes and tethers the skin in various ways creating what we visually see as depressions.
Scarcrash,
Are you saying that the mass of skin (cell quanitity) in atrophic scars is the same to that of healthy tissue and it is just compressed and distorted?
Thanks, Anna
Are you saying that the mass of skin (cell quanitity) in atrophic scars is the same to that of healthy tissue and it is just compressed and distorted?
Hey Anna...
People undergoing subscision have the scar tendrils that are tethering down their scars cut and released and most have had substantial results. The reason why their scars are then still visible is the fact that although the scar tissue has been cut from the subcutaneous structures, the distorted structure of the scar tissue itself remains, nonetheless.
People talk about about needling and TCA "stimulating" collagen. I'm sure that is true to a degree, but I think that the therapeutic effect is truly created through the disruption (breaking up or dissolving, respectively) of the scar tissue. When I was needled, the skin all around my scars was needled as well, yet I did not develop any raised tissue. If the stimulation of collagen (to replace missing tissue) is the primary effect, then why doesn't needling on healthy skin produced new and extra collagen growth there. As we all know, needling healthy skin produces no change whatsoever to that skin. I asked the person who needled my skin if needling can alter normal skin in any way and he said no. It seems more likely that the improvement from needling is gained through breaking up of the distorted configuration of the scar tissue and allow the natural elasticity of the skin to revert back to a more normal structure.
TCA also is said to stimulate new collagen. If this is true and I TCA cross normal tissue, then I should have new extra collagen on top of the healthy tissue. People actually talk about TCA eating away at healthy tissue (true, it may caused raised scars in those prone to keloid scarring). So, it seems that the minute amounts of TCA placed directly on top of scar tissue (and only on scar tissue) works to dissolve the contorted tissue. When the scar tissue has been carefully dissolved, the distored structure is removed and the skin reverts back to a more normal structure.
The key would be getting rid of all of the scar tissue without causing new scar tissue. That is the balance that has yet to be acheived.
So, I just feel that this is more evidence that supports the scar tissue distortion causing the appearance atrophic scarring.
Like I said, has anyone actually shown that there is, in actuality, a loss of tissue?
Now I know that scar tissue distortion is greatly implicated, but I don't know to what degree tissue loss is.
It is probable that there is some degree of tissue loss involved, but I think it may be far less of a factor than scar tissue distortion.
Hey, that's just my guess. Everybody is guessing aren't they? Even the so called "experts" are guessing...obviously. They've been guessing for a long time and their guesses haven't accounted for a lot of progress.
Sorry that this is totally off topic but i think you guys would be best to answer this. What happened to the dermaroller plus immediate application of stem cells after a dermaroller session? I remember reading some articles on that and to me it sounds like a very very good idea.
I plan on using the expensive stem cell cream (can't remember the name, but it is about 1,500 dollars a pot) after a heavy dermaroller session and then use a home dermaroller to aid in the penetration of the stem cells.
Hi Scarcrash,
I went through your post and here are my thoughts:
Scarcrash: People undergoing subscision have the scar tendrils that are tethering down their scars cut and released and most have had substantial results. The reason why their scars are then still visible is the fact that although the scar tissue has been cut from the subcutaneous structures, the distorted structure of the scar tissue itself remains, nonetheless.
Anna: When I performed my subcision I went from having an atrophic scar to having a scar that was level with my surrounding tissue. It is like the epidermis was saran wrapped so tightly over a hole in pudding that it conformed to the indentation. After the subcision blood pooled in the area and when it finished healing over six months later I was left with a level scar. The hole was pretty much filled in but the tissue that filled in to replace my healthy tissue is white and shiny. There is definitely new and different tissue.
Scarcrash: People talk about about needling and TCA "stimulating" collagen. I'm sure that is true to a degree, but I think that the therapeutic effect is truly created through the disruption (breaking up or dissolving, respectively) of the scar tissue. When I was needled, the skin all around my scars was needled as well, yet I did not develop any raised tissue. If the stimulation of collagen (to replace missing tissue) is the primary effect, then why doesn't needling on healthy skin produced new and extra collagen growth there. As we all know, needling healthy skin produces no change whatsoever to that skin. I asked the person who needled my skin if needling can alter normal skin in any way and he said no. It seems more likely that the improvement from needling is gained through breaking up of the distorted configuration of the scar tissue and allow the natural elasticity of the skin to revert back to a more normal structure.
Anna:Actually, this isnat true in all cases. There are people who develop keloids even with tattooing and the dermaroller is primarily sold as a rejuvenation tool. This is counting on the fact does produce new and extra collagen. This is not the supple and perfect collagen you had as a baby but a tighter and less resilient collagen, nonetheless, it still provides a rejuvenating result.
Scarcrash:TCA also is said to stimulate new collagen. If this is true and I TCA cross normal tissue, then I should have new extra collagen on top of the healthy tissue. People actually talk about TCA eating away at healthy tissue (true, it may caused raised scars in those prone to keloid scarring). So, it seems that the minute amounts of TCA placed directly on top of scar tissue (and only on scar tissue) works to dissolve the contorted tissue. When the scar tissue has been carefully dissolved, the distored structure is removed and the skin reverts back to a more normal structure.
Anna:If you were prone to keloids you could have wound up with the wrong type of collagen forming over your healthy tissue. TCA CAN eat away at healthy tissue if it goes deep enough past the dermal/epidermal juncture. It is difficult to know where this juncture is in everybody. Think of the epidermis as the ocean and the dermis as the ocean floor (flat in some places and jagged and precipitous in other areas). On the surface a healthy skin is smooth and in some cases deep (as when we are young) and in some cases shallow as when we get older and our epidermis thins. When you breach the surface and injure the epidermis you donat know how deep the dermis is below. On those folks who have a thick epidermis they can have relatively deep treatments and not scar. If you have a thin epidermis you could easily wind up with scarring because the dermal/epidermal juncture is so close to the surface. This is one of the reasons in the past skilled dermabrasion doctors were so successful a they were able to recognize the bleed point and thereby know when they had gone as deep as they could safely go.
The key would be getting rid of all of the scar tissue without causing new scar tissue. That is the balance that has yet to be acheived.
Anna:I used to think that this was true too. Iam not so sure now though. The reason my opinion has changed is that I was informed by Renovo that none of their products, neither Juvista nor Juvidex, will help with existing acne scars. If all it took was to suppress scar tissue from forming then Juvista should help with regeneration if it was used after a deep ablative treatment, but that isnat the case. It apparently isnat enough just to suppress TGFB1.
Scarcrash: So, I just feel that this is more evidence that supports the scar tissue distortion causing the appearance atrophic scarring.
Anna: I think there is definitely a component of distorted tissue, however I believe there is a type of table to address all scar types that consists of the type of tissue, the color, and the quantity.
You could have a hypopigmented scar like I have which is white, shiny, and level. In this case the color of tissue is wrong as is the type, but the quantity is now close to correct.
In the case of the icepicks on my nose, the type and color of tissue is correct, but the quantity is too little.
The immunization scar on my arm is somewhat raised, but my correct skin color. In this case the type of tissue is correct as is the color, but the quantity is excessive.
Scarcrash:Like I said, has anyone actually shown that there is, in actuality, a loss of tissue? Now I know that scar tissue distortion is greatly implicated, but I don't know to what degree tissue loss is.
Anna: It seems obvious to me that it is but if I am proven wrong I donat really care if it addresses the issue.
Scarcrash: It is probable that there is some degree of tissue loss involved, but I think it may be far less of a factor than scar tissue distortion.
Hey, that's just my guess. Everybody is guessing aren't they? Even the so called "experts" are guessing...obviously. They've been guessing for a long time and their guesses haven't accounted for a lot of progress.
Anna: I think that we all (not just the experts but everyone here as well) are doing more than guessing. We are all here to share our experiences and thoughts and that has built an objective body of knowledge. I AM hopeful that we will see true progress soon.
Thanks-
Anna
Scarcrash:Like I said, has anyone actually shown that there is, in actuality, a loss of tissue? Now I know that scar tissue distortion is greatly implicated, but I don't know to what degree tissue loss is.
Anna: It seems obvious to me that it is but if I am proven wrong I donat really care if it addresses the issue.
Hi Anna,
My basic point is that, in my opinion, there is more evidence to support scar tissue distortion rather than missing tissue. Like I said, it's most likely a combination of the two (depending on the scarring), although I think that the tissue distortion is a more dominant factor. And, like Hopeseed said, it is the existing scar tissue that inhibits the reformation/regeneration of healthy tissue. It forms a distinct barrier.
The reason why you still have a scar after the subscision is that you still have scar tissue. That is the point that I was trying to make. The subscision never removed any of your scar tissue. It just released it.
Anna:I used to think that this was true too. Iam not so sure now though. The reason my opinion has changed is that I was informed by Renovo that none of their products, neither Juvista nor Juvidex, will help with existing acne scars. If all it took was to suppress scar tissue from forming then Juvista should help with regeneration if it was used after a deep ablative treatment, but that isnat the case. It apparently isnat enough just to suppress TGFB1.
Didn't we know that this wouldn't help with existing scars? This won't even help if it is administered after scar revision procedure to prevent new or additional scarring or the reformation of previous scarring?
If it turns out that Juvista won't suppress scar tissue formation, then why are we still even talking about it? Wasn't that the whole concept behind it- preventing scars from forming?
Thanks for your comprehensive response... Good points...
Just to add my two cents in about the needling/stimulating collagen theory.
A lot of people are puzzled at the fact that if needling induces collagen then why won't it raise all the areas with the scarred areas...
I use to think this about this too.. if I'm promoting collagen growth in the areas where I'm not scarred and the areas I do have atrophic scarring won't it really negate itself if my goal is to have my atrophic areas even with my normal areas?
Well after brainstorming about it I came up with a theory (I have no evidence to back this up).
Maybe the non atrophic places on the skin that are needled don't raise up etc because although some stimulation of collagen might be induced there is just no place for it to go. In an atrophic area you have room for induced collagen to go. I think of it as having a box full of jars. If I want to put jars in a box that is full with stacks of jars completely filling the box then the jar that I'm attempting to put in can't fit, and it's outside...and it might get moved somewhere else or die.
If I have areas in the box with no jars then I can put jars in the box....until it is full.
Does this illustrate my point?
I thought that Juvista was being used in a study on new breast reduction scars and that it was supposed to help to heal surgical scars to the point where they would be greatly minimized, maybe even invisible to the human eye. Wouldn't this then help us because after a punch/scalpel excision it would be used to help heal the linear scars to almost nothing?
Jan31
This would be an interesting read if anyone can get the article
and then there is this article, which my school has made available every issue BEFORE the 16th volume and the Feb issue AFTER. why they are missing this one boggles my mind ....someone powerful must hate me.
Didn't we know that this wouldn't help with existing scars? This won't even help if it is administered after scar revision procedure to prevent new or additional scarring or the reformation of previous scarring?
If it turns out that Juvista won't suppress scar tissue formation, then why are we still even talking about it? Wasn't that the whole concept behind it- preventing scars from forming?
Thanks for your comprehensive response... Good points...
You're welcome Scarcrash-
We didn't actually know that Juvista wouldn't help existing scars (even after revision) until about a year ago. About five years ago the banner on Renovo's website and the come on in all their marketing to lure investors was that they were frontiering the future of "Scarfree Healing." There was no qualifing statement to suggest that it would only be helpful for pre-surgical care or new wounds. However it does turn out that in those cases it will (in all likelihood) lessen the densely collagenous surgical white lines. So, it will be helpful for excisions.
It WON'T allow true regeneration to occur though, as was the thought when we believed that simply blocking TGFB1 would allow it. If it DID allow regeneration then one would have to assume that any excised tissue (such as an unwanted mole) would simply regrow and that doesn't seem to be the case from looking at their website.
Anyway...we all keep plugging along don't we?
Thanks, Anna
This would be an interesting read if anyone can get the article
and then there is this article, which my school has made available every issue BEFORE the 16th volume and the Feb issue AFTER. why they are missing this one boggles my mind ....someone powerful must hate me.
Really interesting hopeseed!
I need some time to go through all these articles...you've been BUSY!
Thanks-
Anna
If it DID allow regeneration then one would have to assume that any excised tissue (such as an unwanted mole) would simply regrow ....
I say this in jest ...but is regeneration what you really want in excising a mole? Could you imagine the horror the patient would have watching the mole grow back exactly how it was!
I doubt our genome codes for every single mole we have on our skin (it's exact place, color, size) but wouldn't it be funny (in a cruel way) if a regenerative approach made the mole grow back?
Really interesting hopeseed!
I need some time to go through all these articles...you've been BUSY!
Yeah I know, I'm starting to think this is unhealthy.
If it DID allow regeneration then one would have to assume that any excised tissue (such as an unwanted mole) would simply regrow ....
I say this in jest ...but is regeneration what you really want in excising a mole? Could you imagine the horror the patient would have watching the mole grow back exactly how it was!
I doubt our genome codes for every single mole we have on our skin (it's exact place, color, size) but wouldn't it be funny (in a cruel way) if a regenerative approach made the mole grow back?
Really interesting hopeseed!
I need some time to go through all these articles...you've been BUSY!
Yeah I know, I'm starting to think this is unhealthy.
I understand it's in jest, but we just won't know until regeneration can occur. I would tend to think that moles and skin geography are genetically determined, but I don't know. We have to think about the possibility of regrowing foreskins and artistically perfected noses that parents paid good money to fix...yikes! In regeneration, I suppose what we want isn't going to be so much the issue. Our bodies will give us what we were destined to get originally. It would be ideal if we could turn it on and off by region.
I have taken breaks from the board in the past. Sometimes it is good to regain perspective, but this is as healthy a hobby as any. 
A downloadable PDF file of an interesting, current, review of scarless healing
Also from this article we are given another company to keep our eye on:
another company I have an eye on
Go to the products page...I find STP-705 particularly interesting
"Under the terms of the agreement, Sirnaomics and GRL will jointly focus on developing two multi-targeted RNAi therapeutic products to improve scarless skin wound healing and to treat prostate cancer. The first product is expected to consist of three siRNA duplexes targeting three genes involved in scar formation during the skin wound healing process. The further in vivo study will demonstrate that the siRNA/polymeric nanoparticle formulation with topical cream application is able to enhance the wound healing process with minimum scar formation."
An exception to this pattern in mammals does exist, however. Wounds in fetal skin heal without forming scarsayielding perfect skin regeneration and indicating that the switch to a fibrotic response arises with the developmental maturation of the skin. Although this difference could reflect a change in the biology of the fibroblasts, it is more likely a result of altered signaling from the extracellular wound environment modulating the behavior of the fibroblasts, which in turn suggests that therapeutically modifying those signals could change the healing response. At the same time, the fact that limb amputations during fetal stages of development do not result in regeneration of the limb reminds us that scar-free wound healing is likely to be necessary but not sufficient for regeneration.
Looking at my first bit highlighted Hopeseed, as of this moment I'm 99% certain that scar free healing will come from an extracelluar matrix you apply onto the wound...
I believe even more that scar free healing is around the corner in fact I'd be suprised if it is not already here(they need it as a prior step for something they are already researching???), and looking at the second bit I've highlighted from page 5, I think it is fair to say almost for definite we will know scar free healing is here when they regenerate a digit (in the next few years), if say they don't announce it before the the regenerate the digit be it we can now predict that the step before regenerating a digit is scarless healing.
Looking at my first bit highlighted Hopeseed, as of this moment I'm 99% certain that scar free healing will come from an extracelluar matrix you apply onto the wound...
I believe even more that scar free healing is around the corner in fact I'd be suprised if it is not already here(they need it as a prior step for something they are already researching???), and looking at the second bit I've highlighted from page 5, I think it is fair to say for definite we will know scar free healing is here when they regenerate a digit, if say they don't announce it before the the regenerate the digit be it we can now predict that the step before regenerating a digit is scarless healing.
I feel like dancing on the ceiling - cheesy Lionel Richie style.
ANNA get on the dance floor.
I think you're way too optimistic kirk.
quote:
"altered signaling from the extracellular wound environment modulating the behavior of the fibroblasts, which in turn suggests that therapeutically modifying those signals could change the healing response"
although its almost certain that altered signaling from extracellular wound enviroment would modulate the behaviour of the fibroblasts, we arent even sure completely what the signals are. Im sure there are some unknowns for perfect skin regeneration that has yet to be discovered.
Looking at my first bit highlighted Hopeseed, as of this moment I'm 99% certain that scar free healing will come from an extracelluar matrix you apply onto the wound...
I believe even more that scar free healing is around the corner in fact I'd be suprised if it is not already here(they need it as a prior step for something they are already researching???), and looking at the second bit I've highlighted from page 5, I think it is fair to say for definite we will know scar free healing is here when they regenerate a digit, if say they don't announce it before the the regenerate the digit be it we can now predict that the step before regenerating a digit is scarless healing.
I feel like dancing on the ceiling - cheesy Lionel Richie style.
ANNA get on the dance floor.
I think you're way too optimistic kirk.
quote:
"altered signaling from the extracellular wound environment modulating the behavior of the fibroblasts, which in turn suggests that therapeutically modifying those signals could change the healing response"
although its almost certain that altered signaling from extracellular wound enviroment would modulate the behaviour of the fibroblasts, we arent even sure completely what the signals are. Im sure there are some unknowns for perfect skin regeneration that has yet to be discovered.
Tgan as you can see I pulled in the rains and redited my post when you were composing the response. Anna will be gutted...
Seriously though with what I've informed myself with I'm optimistic for a reason.
It might secretly piss some people off I'm optimistic? Fuck them, they can't inform yourself more than yourself...
I think we can project that Scar less healing will be here soon, just by linking evidence, if he is optimistic he will regenerate a digit in three years, and he claims that the first step is scarless healing... You figure?
And regarding optimism over the extracelluar matrix. Consider that it is known in a scientific concensus that what works in other scarring response tissues can work in the skin as well...
Well here is an example of a form of extracelluar matrix that I'm assuming will not be as good as Badylaks; I've read that Badylak is a matrix that is the least artificially tampered with out of all the extracelluar matrixes, and he claimed that because of this his matrix is more effective.
As you can see a 90-95% regeneration of the surrounding tissues with regards to this matrix>>>
http://humodnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/bios...e-in-heart.html
Compare a 95% regeneration success rate against other drug treatments that are going through a process of clinical trials that people have been made to think are the next best thing...
Consider that Badylaks matrix might be better than the example in the above link...
And you can see why I feel I'm informed. And why I at this moment feel optimistic. I maybe wrong but I reckon I'm informed...
yes but kirk, the one thing that makes me doubtful is that researching doesnt neccesarily equate to finding a cure that easily. No doubt there is a lot of research going on for scarless healing.
though this article gives me hope...
http://www.worldhealth.net/p/research-brin...2006-10-09.html
this is a quote from the article:
"Regenerative medicine, if driven by a cohesive federal initiative, has the opportunity to begin producing complex skin, cartilage and bone substitutes in as little as five years," it said. "Tissue and organ patches, designed to help regenerate damaged tissues and organs such as the heart and kidneys, are within reach in 10 years. Within 20 years, with appropriate federal funding and direction, the goal of 'tissues on demand' is realistic."
very assuring, but still we have to wait for YEARS, arrgghhh just bare with our scars for a little more kirk...
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Regenerat..._A_Man_s_Finger
So this is back in the news.....i wonder if this technology is going to come out faster since more awareness is being brought to it. I wish they had an ETA on when it can be obtained! This would not only be revolutionary for amputees, but also for individuals with scars i think. I saw a video about the same technology months back but this seems to be show that's its moving at a positive rate of globalization.
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Regenerat..._A_Man_s_Finger
So this is back in the news.....i wonder if this technology is going to come out faster since more awareness is being brought to it. I wish they had an ETA on when it can be obtained! This would not only be revolutionary for amputees, but also for individuals with scars i think. I saw a video about the same technology months back but this seems to be show that's its moving at a positive rate of globalization.
Lol yeah i know its a digg article....
