Acne.org Products
Thanks Golfpanther! It's appreciated.
Alright, so they've definitely started testing on pigs. Check this out:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
And we now have a date that will reveal more information (one would think anyway) about how things are going; November 6th.
It's only going to be an 18 minute presentation (per the itinerary for the conference) so it might not be thorough but I'm sure we'll learn something about how it's progressing.
I know what you mean Maldition, some mature scars remain red but if you carefully read the script:
Dextran Hydrogel Results in Complete Skin Regeneration. Finally, we
analyzed the structure of the regenerated skin. As mentioned
above, we observed healing within 3 weeks of wound cover.
Indeed, at this time point, regression of the vasculature allowed
dermal maturation accompanied skin regeneration.
So I think the regression of the vasculature is even more important.
in fact we will be more in the future ugly pollution as a scientist said we will resemble much of what is now understood as an alien with big eyes and a nose with filters
You're such a funny guy, your comments make me laugh sometimes 
and your English is hilarious
Look at the Gartner hype cycle for 2013 - according to their estimates 3D bioprinting is now 5 to 10 years away from the 'plateau of productivity' phase, last year is was estimated that 3D bioprinting is more than 10 years away from that phase.
And evolution will not make us big eyes and filters in the nose because we will be able to control the evolution rather than being controled - that is called 'Human Augmentation' or 'Humans 2.0', you can see it on the Gartner hype cycle, however it is probably far distant future. And there won't be pollution in the future because we will have more efficient solar energy, nuclear fusion energy (you can google about ITER and DEMO projects) and so called 'generation IV' fission reactors.
I always tell the truth, no matter what it takes, no matter if it sounds negative I analyze and study for decades this issue and see that the only solution if there is one, is, is gene therapy to cure all diseases
If you ask a chemist, will tell the simple rule of thumb, the bigger, stronger, as this can project to medicine: the more genes are handled better result. I do not think a physical element as hydrogel us a solution. perhaps help in scar reduction but I do not regenerate normal skin and perfect routed least follicles.
the only cure is gene therapy and yes, we're screwed, this will be true in a hundred years (although probably illegal dark laboratories already be experiencing advanced countries with this), also can not give this therapy light that would be illegal, have to go through shit that would lead approvals so long.
I just want to say that for me it is totally inconceivable that gene therapy could achieve the same result on mice as the hydrogel during the next 20-30 years - scar free helaing and complete regeneration of the skin with hair follicles and sebaceous glands, just read this paper:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0032875
In this reseach they found 27 genes that have a different pattern of expression during wound healing in salamanders compared to mice, that means that the mechanism of wound healing is very complex, so that's why genomics/gene therapy is the wrong approach, the result of that approach could be only scarless healing (for example it could be very useful for a heart damage after an MI) but it won't be scar free healing, so the right approach is regenerative medicine: scaffolds, embryonic stem cells, iPS cells and things like that.
And gene therapy is very dangerous, for example there is a well known case when 4 out od 10 clildren with a disease called SCID (severe combined immunodeficiency) were treated with gene therapy, they were cured (since the mechanism of that disease is very simple, children lack a single gene which makes their immune systems non functioning) but later they developed leukemia, gene therapy can unintentionally damage your oncogenes (tumor suppressor genes), you don't want that to happen, on the other hand the hydrogel is just a simple scaffold, the hydrogel will not damage your tumor suppressor genes, it is safe.
this is the other opinion
Speculative really what you say, the more chaotic future sounds viable future. Why? simple, solar energy is there, but nobody uses panels or electric cars, nobody cares, but that's just a detail.
You like to use statistics chart can make a circular type with percentages by factors, you will see that the factors are more negative than positive, so the chaos is more feasible. you can see the percentage factor with cumulative factor
In this reseach they found 27 genes that have a different pattern of expression during wound healing in salamanders compared to mice, that means that the mechanism of wound healing is very complex, so that's why genomics/gene therapy is the wrong approach, the result of that approach could be only scarless healing (for example it could be very useful for a heart damage after an MI) but it won't be scar free healing, so the right approach is regenerative medicine: scaffolds, embryonic stem cells, iPS cells and things like that.
you realize that you're giving me the reason?
you are now saying what I said but in different words.
you say: that means that the mechanism of wound healing is very complex
i say before: humans are mammals and do not really think we can regenerate the skin by such condition (the exception of a mouse that can regenerate not count) evolution will always want quick heal scarred and will never give priority to human aesthetics.
you say: so that's why genomics/gene therapy is the wrong approach, the result of that approach could be only scarless healing (for example it could be very useful for a heart damage after an MI) but it won't be scar free healing
i say before: can only regenerate are some internal organs but we can never regenerate skin as this is an organ to the outside and evolution will never run the risk of infections prioritize aesthetics
on the other hand you said that we will be able to control the evolution. well let me tell you very seriously you take all these reports that one day we will be able to live forever with the discovery of a gene etc ...
are biological elements as the planet earth, I mean, we have a useful life the same planet is not going to last forever unless we
that's it
in fact we will be more in the future ugly pollution as a scientist said we will resemble much of what is now understood as an alien with big eyes and a nose with filters
You're such a funny guy, your comments make me laugh sometimes
Look at the Gartner hype cycle for 2013 - according to their estimates 3D bioprinting is now 5 to 10 years away from the 'plateau of productivity' phase, last year is was estimated that 3D bioprinting is more than 10 years away from that phase.
And evolution will not make us big eyes and filters in the nose because we will be able to control the evolution rather than being controled - that is called 'Human Augmentation' or 'Humans 2.0', you can see it on the Gartner hype cycle, however it is probably far distant future. And there won't be pollution in the future because we will have more efficient solar energy, nuclear fusion energy (you can google about ITER and DEMO projects) and so called 'generation IV' fission reactors.
Maldition is not funny.
You depend your opinion on scams and thing that would never be available to us slaves.
3d printing????LOL .Mess up so much with nature,and she will remove you.
this is the other opinion
Speculative really what you say, the more chaotic future sounds viable future. Why? simple, solar energy is there, but nobody uses panels or electric cars, nobody cares, but that's just a detail.
The future tends to be a polluted planet as there are things that are not going to be able to solve, as the ozone layer that is already destroyed among other things (possible meteorite impact on the earth), besides that social differences are greater religions as middle East where there is general hatred towards the West So do you think that people do not have technology? when wars will avanze technology that will destroy the planet and certainly elements that will be used to do damage (in addition to the ozone layer and other factors) countries in conflict with their neighbors or identity or independence issues
There is a sentence of a person for years that says 'technology will serve for a day a person can do much damage with something small'
You like to use statistics chart can make a circular type with percentages by factors, you will see that the factors are more negative than positive, so the chaos is more feasible. you can see the percentage factor with cumulative factor
In this reseach they found 27 genes that have a different pattern of expression during wound healing in salamanders compared to mice, that means that the mechanism of wound healing is very complex, so that's why genomics/gene therapy is the wrong approach, the result of that approach could be only scarless healing (for example it could be very useful for a heart damage after an MI) but it won't be scar free healing, so the right approach is regenerative medicine: scaffolds, embryonic stem cells, iPS cells and things like that.
you realize that you're giving me the reason?
you are now saying what I said but in different words.
you say: that means that the mechanism of wound healing is very complex
i say before: humans are mammals and do not really think we can regenerate the skin by such condition (the exception of a mouse that can regenerate not count) evolution will always want quick heal scarred and will never give priority to human aesthetics.
you say: so that's why genomics/gene therapy is the wrong approach, the result of that approach could be only scarless healing (for example it could be very useful for a heart damage after an MI) but it won't be scar free healing
i say before: can only regenerate are some internal organs but we can never regenerate skin as this is an organ to the outside and evolution will never run the risk of infections prioritize aesthetics
on the other hand you said that we will be able to control the evolution. well let me tell you very seriously you take all these reports that one day we will be able to live forever with the discovery of a gene etc ...
are biological elements as the planet earth, I mean, we have a useful life the same planet is not going to last forever unless we
that's it
You honestly don't think humans have altered the course of evolution for ourselves and every other species on this planet? Come on, you can't honestly believe that. The entire endeavor of medicine is predicated on controlling evolution. Evolution is just weeding out the genes and traits that make it less likely for your species to survive and propagating the ones that make it more likely. So when we treat someone with cancer or diabetes we are altering evolution every single time.
Also, who' to say that the hydrogel is not a complex solution to the problem? The researchers themselves aren't even sure how it works so the mechanisms that are in play might be extremely complex. But history has shown that complex problems don't always require complex solutions with a thorough understanding of how it operates.
You seem to want to put up imaginary barriers to progress when in reality humans are constantly altering their environment and themselvesnot always for the better. One minute you're saying gene therapy is the way but now you seem to indicate that evolution will never "allow" it. So, which is it? Isn't gene therapy an attempt to give the body a signal to regenerate, which you've contradicted yourself by indicating evolution will never allow? And stop referring to evolution as some sentient being that decides what is and isn't possible. It's a symptom, not the cause, of some genetic mutation in an animal.
Just some help with your use of words, but if you say something is impossible then it has no solution. It's irrelevant to say the solution wouldn't be "easy" because if it's impossible it's just thatnot possible.
BTW, I'm in my 30s so maybe I'm younger than you, maybe I'm not. I will say that I probably would have been more inclined to your fatalistic viewpoint (and yes, it's fatalism and not realism because you ignore any evidence contrary to what you believe) when I was younger versus being older. When a person is young, he or she will typically base all their reasoning on assumptions and feelings. Whereas an older person will mature (hopefully) and stick with objective data.
Bottom line, we get it. You don't think it will work. That's fine. I'm not telling you to change your mind. But when you talk in absolutes and base your ideas on little more than assumptions then you're being no different than the alleged scam artists you vilify. I think we'd all be much more interested in your posts if you could supply objective data on other solutions or something that indicates that the hydrogel definitely will not work. Alas, so far all you've given us is your personal assumptions and biases.
And since you seem to like quotes, I'll end with one:
"Only fools deal in absolutes."
Here is the latest news about gene therapy for heart scarring after a heart attack (MI):
(but as far as I know only 3 genes are injected and if I understand it right they are able to transform fibroblast cell that are within the scar into heart cells, so the scar does not disappear, but heart cells grow from the scar, so it is not scar free healing but it could be very useful for heart attack sufferers, and the therapy is minimally invasive)
Scientists use gene therapy to repair muscles damaged in heart attacks
Researchers were able to transform scar tissue in working heart musclesScientists have come a step closer to being able to repair the damage done by heart attacks, using a cocktail of genes to transform scar tissue into working heart muscles.
Novel techniques to mend broken hearts using gene therapy and stem cells represent a major new frontier in the treatment of heart disease.
In the latest breakthrough, achieved by researchers at the Gladstone Institute of Cardiovascular Disease in California, researchers were able to re-programme scar-forming cells into heart muscle cells, some of which were capable of transmitting the kind of electrical signals that make the heart beat, according to the latest issue of the Stem Cell Reports journal.
My point is this: there are many possible approaches how we can treat scars and it is good that there are more possible approaches, but some are right and some are wrong, my opinion is that the right approach is regenerative medicine (because there are already two published papers in peer reviewed magazines which claim complete regeneration of full trickiness skin excisions on mice with all appendages - hair follicles, sebaceous and sweat glands) and genomic medicine is the wrong approach due to the complexity of the mechanism of wound healing, simply put genomics/biotechnology is still too primitive and crude and will stay primitive and crude for a long time to come, I don't believe there will be gene therapy that could totally alter the mechanism of wound healing and have the same result as the hydrogel on mice for another 20, 30 or 50 years, if gene therapy could totally and completely alter the mechanism of wound healing and make humans with salamander-like regenerative abilities then we would have medicine like in Star Trek, we could cure all or nearly all genetic diseases.
then stadistics,math, and science?
"Only fools deal in absolutes."
Are you trying to say that scientists and mathematicians deal in absolutes? If so, you're sorely mistaken. Scientists (honest and good ones) would never say anything is an absolute. Science and math are both constantly evolving fields that change as a our understanding of the data and ability to analyze in new and different ways grows. The obvious example was the belief that the world was flat or that Earth was the center of solar system. As methods improved, so too did our understanding. A more complicated example would be frequency response curves of the human ear. A long held belief was supplanted by new testing and greater precision.
So no, I definitely don't think scientists, statisticians, mathematicians, biologists, doctors etc. deal in absolutes. In fact, I would guess they would be some of the last people to do so.
I see that you have no idea what you say
go to first-year physics
we are physical (chemical) beings, physical process has a beginning and end,
The universe seems infinite, but has a beginning and an end. the universe is so big that our cosmic level problems are nonexistent. time is measured in millions of years for which we 'do not exist' in fact what we live for, plus they always live in the past (what we do is we move so we lived rebound in the past). There are no museums or football, heroes and all this has no relevance either at the time or cosmic level, even so and all this universe has limits in its extension. physics thus determines a limit. Does your do not understand that we are biological and chemical beings?
the facts are just variables in a large salad, the variables are not transcendent enough to determine anything unless a significant percentage in favor or against. variables can say that regeneration requires modular growth factors, but this does not mean that doing that we have the solution
so, there is no solution at the day, that's it and that is the way it is
i just remember a words
'bastards just believe in positivism and facts, but only geniuses can look impartially, the positivism, is a cute blindfolded to pass the time and do nothing ... but I'd rather live without that band and do something or just realize what will be the reality that will come'
and yes, you, are wrong again (like many here)
then stadistics,math, and science?
"Only fools deal in absolutes."
Are you trying to say that scientists and mathematicians deal in absolutes? If so, you're sorely mistaken. Scientists (honest and good ones) would never say anything is an absolute. Science and math are both constantly evolving fields that change as a our understanding of the data and ability to analyze in new and different ways grows. The obvious example was the belief that the world was flat or that Earth was the center of solar system. As methods improved, so too did our understanding. A more complicated example would be frequency response curves of the human ear. A long held belief was supplanted by new testing and greater precision.
So no, I definitely don't think scientists, statisticians, mathematicians, biologists, doctors etc. deal in absolutes. In fact, I would guess they would be some of the last people to do so.
I see that you have no idea what you say
go to first-year physics
we are physical (chemical) beings, physical process has a beginning and end,
The universe seems infinite, but has a beginning and an end. the universe is so big that our cosmic level problems are nonexistent. time is measured in millions of years for which we 'do not exist' in fact what we live for, plus they always live in the past (what we do is we move so we lived rebound in the past). There are no museums or football, heroes and all this has no relevance either at the time or cosmic level, even so and all this universe has limits in its extension. physics thus determines a limit. Does your do not understand that we are biological and chemical beings?
the facts are just variables in a large salad, the variables are not transcendent enough to determine anything unless a significant percentage in favor or against. variables can say that regeneration requires modular growth factors, but this does not mean that doing that we have the solution
so, there is no solution at the day, that's it and that is the way it is
i just remember a words
'bastards just believe in positivism and facts, but only geniuses can look impartially, the positivism, is a cute blindfolded to pass the time and do nothing ... but I'd rather live without that band and do something or just realize what will be the reality that will come'
and yes, you, are wrong again (like many here)
then stadistics,math, and science?
"Only fools deal in absolutes."
Are you trying to say that scientists and mathematicians deal in absolutes? If so, you're sorely mistaken. Scientists (honest and good ones) would never say anything is an absolute. Science and math are both constantly evolving fields that change as a our understanding of the data and ability to analyze in new and different ways grows. The obvious example was the belief that the world was flat or that Earth was the center of solar system. As methods improved, so too did our understanding. A more complicated example would be frequency response curves of the human ear. A long held belief was supplanted by new testing and greater precision.
So no, I definitely don't think scientists, statisticians, mathematicians, biologists, doctors etc. deal in absolutes. In fact, I would guess they would be some of the last people to do so.
Are you referring to Newton's Laws of motion? Is that what you're referencing in terms of me taking a physics course (which I've taken 4 at a college level)?
Well, they work great in macroscopic conditions but they are inappropriate for things that are incredibly small, move at extremely fast speeds or very strong forces of gravity. Like anything in science (as of now) there are always exceptions and anomalies that preclude any absolute. That may be the end goal for science; the absolute truth of the universe and all of its operations, but it hasn't happened as of yet and likely never will. Look at any science that has proclaimed something to be a definite, an absolute. Something always comes along to show that it's not absolute in all cases thanks to better analysis and tools.
And then you state that physical processes have a beginning and an end. Yes, humans die, but that isn't the end of the matter that comprised us. You've written a poorly constructed sentence that really means nothing. Another law in science is the Law of Conservation of Mass. So unless you are limiting physical processes to organic beings (which would be unwise and untrue) then you are flying in the face of something you would probably consider an absolute. Incidentally, that law would probably be more accurate if it was the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy.
Again, your English is so poor that it's hard to even comprehend any point, if there is one, that you're trying to make so forgive me if I'm not understanding because of that deficit. I don't know whose quote that is but I can't say that I agree with it. And for someone that was just writing about the importance of absolutes in science (something that is based on objective facts) this sure seems to contradict that. But it is in line with your thinking since the writer seems to think they can just "realize" the reality without facts being necessary. And you aren't living by those words. You aren't doing anything but proclaiming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling!"
We all know you don't believe the hydrogel is going work and I think we're all fine with your thinking that. But when you start writing poorly constructed posts meant to shift the narrative into pseudo-scientific nonsense you degrade the message board. I'm sorry you're depressed about your scars and don't want to get burned by new research raising your hopes up. But what you do on this board causes more harm than good because it's in no way productive. You're like a religious zealot proclaiming that everything is and always will be and can never be changed because God wills it to be so. You may claim that your suppositions are based on something scientific but nothing is. It's just the writings of a guy that's pissed, hurt and upset about not getting his way. We all feel your pain, so why not try to remain objective and give us something to actually think about such as why you scientifically don't think it will work. And I don't mean writing stuff like your hard to decipher ramblings about variables, salad and growth factors. Something tangible, something tested or something from an expert you've talked to who gives their reasons.
One last thing; what am I wrong about? I've never said the hydrogel is definitely going to work and even if I had there's no study that's shown that it won't as of yet. I guess I'm wrong because I believe in the power of humans to change things (as we have for millennia)? Or is it something else?
Sigh, enough of this. Can we please just keep the board to updates on things related to scar free healing? It doesn't have to be the hydrogel or anything else previously discussed. I just want to get away from this kind of thing.
Maldition I'm sorry to see that you suffer so much, you said you're taking some anti-depressants or something, so how old are you and what kind of scars do you have? If you have mild to moderate acne scars than there is no reason for you to be so sad, you can have a longer beard and the problem is partially solved.And have a little more faith in regenerative medicine!Read this:and this:
i do not take any medication, i only wanna know if any here take a medication because a depression because scars and how its that feell nothing more, you must read better, the english
I see that you have no idea what you say
go to first-year physics
we are physical (chemical) beings, physical process has a beginning and end,
The universe seems infinite, but has a beginning and an end. the universe is so big that our cosmic level problems are nonexistent. time is measured in millions of years for which we 'do not exist' in fact what we live for, plus they always live in the past (what we do is we move so we lived rebound in the past). There are no museums or football, heroes and all this has no relevance either at the time or cosmic level, even so and all this universe has limits in its extension. physics thus determines a limit. Does your do not understand that we are biological and chemical beings?
the facts are just variables in a large salad, the variables are not transcendent enough to determine anything unless a significant percentage in favor or against. variables can say that regeneration requires modular growth factors, but this does not mean that doing that we have the solution
so, there is no solution at the day, that's it and that is the way it is
i just remember a words
'bastards just believe in positivism and facts, but only geniuses can look impartially, the positivism, is a cute blindfolded to pass the time and do nothing ... but I'd rather live without that band and do something or just realize what will be the reality that will come'
and yes, you, are wrong again (like many here)
then stadistics,math, and science?
"Only fools deal in absolutes."
Are you trying to say that scientists and mathematicians deal in absolutes? If so, you're sorely mistaken. Scientists (honest and good ones) would never say anything is an absolute. Science and math are both constantly evolving fields that change as a our understanding of the data and ability to analyze in new and different ways grows. The obvious example was the belief that the world was flat or that Earth was the center of solar system. As methods improved, so too did our understanding. A more complicated example would be frequency response curves of the human ear. A long held belief was supplanted by new testing and greater precision.
So no, I definitely don't think scientists, statisticians, mathematicians, biologists, doctors etc. deal in absolutes. In fact, I would guess they would be some of the last people to do so.
Are you referring to Newton's Laws of motion? Is that what you're referencing in terms of me taking a physics course (which I've taken 4 at a college level)?
Well, they work great in macroscopic conditions but they are inappropriate for things that are incredibly small, move at extremely fast speeds or very strong forces of gravity. Like anything in science (as of now) there are always exceptions and anomalies that preclude any absolute. That may be the end goal for science; the absolute truth of the universe and all of its operations, but it hasn't happened as of yet and likely never will. Look at any science that has proclaimed something to be a definite, an absolute. Something always comes along to show that it's not absolute in all cases thanks to better analysis and tools.
And then you state that physical processes have a beginning and an end. Yes, humans die, but that isn't the end of the matter that comprised us. You've written a poorly constructed sentence that really means nothing. Another law in science is the Law of Conservation of Mass. So unless you are limiting physical processes to organic beings (which would be unwise and untrue) then you are flying in the face of something you would probably consider an absolute. Incidentally, that law would probably be more accurate if it was the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy.
Again, your English is so poor that it's hard to even comprehend any point, if there is one, that you're trying to make so forgive me if I'm not understanding because of that deficit. I don't know whose quote that is but I can't say that I agree with it. And for someone that was just writing about the importance of absolutes in science (something that is based on objective facts) this sure seems to contradict that. But it is in line with your thinking since the writer seems to think they can just "realize" the reality without facts being necessary. And you aren't living by those words. You aren't doing anything but proclaiming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling!"
We all know you don't believe the hydrogel is going work and I think we're all fine with your thinking that. But when you start writing poorly constructed posts meant to shift the narrative into pseudo-scientific nonsense you degrade the message board. I'm sorry you're depressed about your scars and don't want to get burned by new research raising your hopes up. But what you do on this board causes more harm than good because it's in no way productive. You're like a religious zealot proclaiming that everything is and always will be and can never be changed because God wills it to be so. You may claim that your suppositions are based on something scientific but nothing is. It's just the writings of a guy that's pissed, hurt and upset about not getting his way. We all feel your pain, so why not try to remain objective and give us something to actually think about such as why you scientifically don't think it will work. And I don't mean writing stuff like your hard to decipher ramblings about variables, salad and growth factors. Something tangible, something tested or something from an expert you've talked to who gives their reasons.
One last thing; what am I wrong about? I've never said the hydrogel is definitely going to work and even if I had there's no study that's shown that it won't as of yet. I guess I'm wrong because I believe in the power of humans to change things (as we have for millennia)? Or is it something else?
Sigh, enough of this. Can we please just keep the board to updates on things related to scar free healing? It doesn't have to be the hydrogel or anything else previously discussed. I just want to get away from this kind of thing.
nevermind
Maldition I'm sorry to see that you suffer so much, you said you're taking some anti-depressants or something, so how old are you and what kind of scars do you have? If you have mild to moderate acne scars than there is no reason for you to be so sad, you can have a longer beard and the problem is partially solved.And have a little more faith in regenerative medicine!Read this:and this:i do not take any medication, i only wanna know if any here take a medication because a depression because scars and how its that feell nothing more, you must read better, the english
lol my laptop broke down so i'm writing this using my playstation 3 which is annoying to do. but i've taken meds once, maldition. because of this very gloomy state i was in due to... well, it was partly due to the scarring i had and it was like it turned my mind into arock where it was a river before. hard to explain. anyway, i'd recommend seeing a psychologist. talking helps.
Maldition I'm sorry to see that you suffer so much, you said you're taking some anti-depressants or something, so how old are you and what kind of scars do you have? If you have mild to moderate acne scars than there is no reason for you to be so sad, you can have a longer beard and the problem is partially solved.And have a little more faith in regenerative medicine!Read this:and this:i do not take any medication, i only wanna know if any here take a medication because a depression because scars and how its that feell nothing more, you must read better, the english
lol my laptop broke down so i'm writing this using my playstation 3 which is annoying to do. but i've taken meds once, maldition. because of this very gloomy state i was in due to... well, it was partly due to the scarring i had and it was like it turned my mind into arock where it was a river before. hard to explain. anyway, i'd recommend seeing a psychologist. talking helps.
psychologists are useless, if ye serve suffered some psychological trauma that fixed this then there is nothing more.
but when there is psychological trauma due to physical trauma(fisic body trauma), doctors always say that the solution is to reduce the unsightly, because if not removed the scar is very difficult for the patient to 'cure'
and well, I do not accept not in this case, I refuse to accept that there is no solution though admittedly there.
if I be happy with my scars would be a mediocre. I can not understand people as happy with scars. I admit that I'm a perfectionist and that aggravates my character, even so, and all live in a superficial world so I can not understand how people live happy with this.
just say be happy with scar is somewhat infamous for my
and well, I do not accept not in this case, I refuse to accept that there is no solution though admittedly there.
if I be happy with my scars would be a mediocre. I can not understand people as happy with scars. I admit that I'm a perfectionist and that aggravates my character, even so, and all live in a superficial world so I can not understand how people live happy with this.
just say be happy with scar is somewhat infamous for my
wow this thread was started in 2007. Almost 7 years ago. AND THERE HAS BEEN NOT A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT IN EVEN MODERATELY HEALING ACNE SCARS. 7 YEARS. SO MUCH FOR KURZWEIL AND "EXPONENTIAL GROWTH" IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES!!!!
CHECK BACK IN 7 YEARS, 2020, we might have some small sliver of hope by then, or MAYBE NOT!!!