Acne.org Products
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!!!
The only real solution for acne scar sufferers is regeneration of healthy skin. None of the current treatments even come close to offering this. We hear a lot of hype around the potential of stem cell treatments and the like but we never see anything useful coming out of it. This shows how incredibly difficult the challenge of skin regeneration is. The truth is, there are all sorts of similar problems in medicine and science has failed to solve any of them. Usually, once a part of the human body is damaged it stays that way subject to whatever healing mechanism the body might bring to bear on the problem. For example, I suffer from tinnitus which is a condition that results from damaged cilia in the ears. Damaged cilia are like acne scarred skin, once they are broke they stay that way, and despite years of trying, science can't do anything about it. I'm pessimistic. I think many of the issues medical science faces, like scarred skin, are massive and possibly insurmountable. Yes, come back in 7 years but if I was putting money on it I'd say that at that time we'll still be going around in circles and coming to dead ends. It's as though God decided that some problems should never be solved.
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!!!
The only real solution for acne scar sufferers is regeneration of healthy skin. None of the current treatments even come close to offering this. We hear a lot of hype around the potential of stem cell treatments and the like but we never see anything useful coming out of it. This shows how incredibly difficult the challenge of skin regeneration is. The truth is, there are all sorts of similar problems in medicine and science has failed to solve any of them. Usually, once a part of the human body is damaged it stays that way subject to whatever healing mechanism the body might bring to bear on the problem. For example, I suffer from tinnitus which is a condition that results from damaged cilia in the ears. Damaged cilia are like acne scarred skin, once they are broke they stay that way, and despite years of trying, science can't do anything about it. I'm pessimistic. I think many of the issues medical science faces, like scarred skin, are massive and possibly insurmountable. Yes, come back in 7 years but if I was putting money on it I'd say that at that time we'll still be going around in circles and coming to dead ends. It's as though God decided that some problems should never be solved.
I agree with this generally. I mean you read all this Ray Kurzweil stuff about exponential growth in the biological sciences. sorry it ain't happening. there were reports in the 80s about baldness cures being a reality 5-10 years in the future. And they're STILL PREDICTING THE SAME SHIT every year there's a new so called "discovery" that suggests such a discovery that will lead to a cure. Curing grey hair, curing baldness, tooth regeneration, and skin regeneration. THESE ARE ALL MYTHS AND THE REAL SCIENTISTS SAY SO. Recently tons of major newspapers and well-respected scientists etc.. actually said the cure for grey hair has been found. But then I read a paper by a well known geneticist. He basically wrote that when scientists find something that may theoretically have some bearing on a problem (BIG MAYBE) they publish it claiming that it's the seed for a cure, and the media hype and publish it cause everyone wants to believe it. But then he actually showed the known science regarding these problems and they genetics is so friggin complex, there are so many unknowns and so many unpredictable things we don't know, he said it's virtually impossible to claim from the findings that whatever discovery there was would ever lead to a cure for grey hair.
There have been TONS of scientists working on tissue regeneration. Even this year (from urine blah blah), but I just read a government assessment where they sent two top genetecists to study the findings. They said basically that the problem was so complex to get from whatever mice teeth or whatever were supposedly developed it would take at least a century to move from that to fully functional teeth regeneration in human beings. Trust me, I've done all the research on this that's possible. I understand the science. These things, if possible, are very, very, very far away. NOT IN OUR LIFETIME.
I changed my mind about Ray Kurzweil, he is something between pseudoscientist and scientist, the problem is that mainstream scientists don't accept his vision of the future, he has an endless list of critics, in his book 'The Age of Spiritual Machines' that he wrote in the 1990s and published in 1999 he predicted that by 2009 we will have new 'bioengineered treatments that will reduce the toll from cancer heart disease and a variety of other health problems' (this probably includes a cure for scars), this is clearly a failed prediction (though I think that his' Law of Accelerating Returns' is relevant for the number of publications in peer reviewed magazines related to tissue engineering, it is doubling every 5 years, tissue engineering is definitely one of the fastest growing areas of science if scientific output is measured by the number of publications in peer reviewed magazines), it is all still in the experimental stage (just like his predictions about driverless cars by the year 2009), and his key predictions that we will reverse engineer the human brain by 2029 and that we will have nanobots by 2030s are unlikely to materialize, not to mention his nonsense ideas about 'technological singularity' and 'mind uploading', it is more like the late 21st century or 22nd century technology and it is silly to talk about such things if we still have no cure for scars or baldness, Michio Kaku is far more realistic than Ray Kurzweil, he has no endless list of critics like Kurzweil, in his book 'Physics of the Future' he actually summarizes what 300 leading mainstream scientists in all areas of science have to say about the future of medicine, energy, computers, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology,...
But then I read a paper by a well known geneticist. He basically wrote that when scientists find something that may theoretically have some bearing on a problem (BIG MAYBE) they publish it claiming that it's the seed for a cure, and the media hype and publish it cause everyone wants to believe it. But then he actually showed the known science regarding these problems and they genetics is so friggin complex, there are so many unknowns and so many unpredictable things we don't know, he said it's virtually impossible to claim from the findings that whatever discovery there was would ever lead to a cure for grey hair.
Well the main tendency of the media is to present bad news much worse than they actually are and vice versa - the good news much better than they actually are, it is called sensationalism, so forget about the media reports, that is why the media buzz shouldn't be taken too seriously into consideration (I have found that some stupid journalist predicted in 1997 that 'in 5 to 10 years there will be scarless healing drugs on the market' or something like that), but it is quite another story if you read Michio Kaku or reports of firms such as Gartner (their hype cycle) or McKinsey.
It's super fast and big. It's cool.
What you can expect from the to scale science. It will digest as fast in any mammal tissue and reepithelize as fast in context to the control..
So what are you guys expecting to hear from Gerecht and her pals in November?
By the way, I've got a new laptop.
It's super fast and big. It's cool.
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!!!
The only real solution for acne scar sufferers is regeneration of healthy skin. None of the current treatments even come close to offering this. We hear a lot of hype around the potential of stem cell treatments and the like but we never see anything useful coming out of it. This shows how incredibly difficult the challenge of skin regeneration is. The truth is, there are all sorts of similar problems in medicine and science has failed to solve any of them. Usually, once a part of the human body is damaged it stays that way subject to whatever healing mechanism the body might bring to bear on the problem. For example, I suffer from tinnitus which is a condition that results from damaged cilia in the ears. Damaged cilia are like acne scarred skin, once they are broke they stay that way, and despite years of trying, science can't do anything about it. I'm pessimistic. I think many of the issues medical science faces, like scarred skin, are massive and possibly insurmountable. Yes, come back in 7 years but if I was putting money on it I'd say that at that time we'll still be going around in circles and coming to dead ends. It's as though God decided that some problems should never be solved.
I agree with this generally. I mean you read all this Ray Kurzweil stuff about exponential growth in the biological sciences. sorry it ain't happening. there were reports in the 80s about baldness cures being a reality 5-10 years in the future. And they're STILL PREDICTING THE SAME SHIT every year there's a new so called "discovery" that suggests such a discovery that will lead to a cure. Curing grey hair, curing baldness, tooth regeneration, and skin regeneration. THESE ARE ALL MYTHS AND THE REAL SCIENTISTS SAY SO. Recently tons of major newspapers and well-respected scientists etc.. actually said the cure for grey hair has been found. But then I read a paper by a well known geneticist. He basically wrote that when scientists find something that may theoretically have some bearing on a problem (BIG MAYBE) they publish it claiming that it's the seed for a cure, and the media hype and publish it cause everyone wants to believe it. But then he actually showed the known science regarding these problems and they genetics is so friggin complex, there are so many unknowns and so many unpredictable things we don't know, he said it's virtually impossible to claim from the findings that whatever discovery there was would ever lead to a cure for grey hair.
There have been TONS of scientists working on tissue regeneration. Even this year (from urine blah blah), but I just read a government assessment where they sent two top genetecists to study the findings. They said basically that the problem was so complex to get from whatever mice teeth or whatever were supposedly developed it would take at least a century to move from that to fully functional teeth regeneration in human beings. Trust me, I've done all the research on this that's possible. I understand the science. These things, if possible, are very, very, very far away. NOT IN OUR LIFETIME.
So what do you honestly think then Vladislav? The three areas I'm interested in: scarless skin healing, or skin regeneration, tooth regeneration/cloning from scratch and a baldness cure. You seem to be quite well read on these topics. Do the number of peer reviewed journals escalating(which might just be a result of increased funding for research etc. in these fields, AND NOT ACTUAL PROGRESS) actually indicate that there will me major advances in these fields?
What does Michio Kaku say about these three issues (or implies): baldness, teeth, skin?
I'm not sure what to think of Kurzweil --I've seen him gives talks citing stuff that is complete BS. For example, he talks about 3D printers and then the reasearch done at lake forest university with regards to organ printing etc.. But all of that is not even in the experimental stages --it's SO FUCKING MISLEADING!!! When they say they've built a liver or something, what they mean is that they've built in vitro a few cells that function LIKE a liver and the major goal here is to see if they can use it test liver drugs on it. They're FAR, FAR, FAR from actually producing a fully functioning human liver. And even if they do produce such a thing, it would be 10-15 years before it would be commercially available. So even if they, and BIG IF, if they developed it in 20 years, it would take another 15 to be available and ALL OF THIS IS JUST HYPOTHETICAL!!! There's an AIDS vaccine already that's passed PHASE I trials (and this is a technology which could save MILLIONS OF LIVES so you'd thiink they'd fast track it), but it won't be commercially available for another 10-15 years, that's how long it will take for it to pass PHASE II and PHASE III trials!!!!!! AND THIS IS FOR SOMETHING THAT'S AN URGENT PROBLEM!!!!
I don't think anyone should be extrapolating conclusions from media reports or even scientific papers about certain experiments. If you google "tooth regeneration" some Chinese scientists published a paper about how they derived stem cells from urine and turned them into "tooth like structures". Within the VERY narrow domain of their field, this may be impressive or a breakthrough, but it has nothing to do with making teeth for people(which is the way the media reports it). I read a scientific paper then by a British Scientist which criticized the Chinese experiments saying these are just flimsy aggregates of calcium, they don't have the structure of real teeth, they're not differentiated into the several different layers of real teeth which all have different functioning cells (enamel, dentin, pulp, root (there are technical names of the cells the function to produce these different structures). The gene science behind how all this works is completely unknown. The British scientist said, we would be lucky to know more about this (just know more) in 20 years, leave alone actually producing teeth.
The only story of something being created to actually be used was that stem cell regenerated wind-pipe --Kurzweil cited that in one of his recent talks this summer --only the girl died three weeks later because the thing didn't work. It wasn't a real windpipe, it was just an artificial scaffold with sprayed on cells.
I don' want to be a downer but I want to be a realist. we are all extrapolating conclusions from stuff that we don't really understand. All of you who cite the scientific papers don't really understand how narrow these studies are and how inapplicable to humans. We're wasting our lives even following this shit. The only use any of these experiments are is in the very long term view of scientific knowledge building for the sake of science and funding research departments. There is no real application behind it. I KNOW THIS AND I'LL PROVE IT TO YOU. You say count the number of papers in peer reviewed journals!!?? I say NO. Count the private sector/business funding!
Listen, i have friends at MIT(even though I'm not in science). They said EVERY SINGLE RESEARCH LAB these days tries to become a BUSINESS. Most scientists these days are all trying to become entrepreneurs. So they present their business model to investors/venture capitalists. Paul Sharpe wanted to start a business for his tooth regeneration findings. The company folded in a year, even though he demonstrated in scientific paper after paper that it was possible. Why did it fold? Why did investors pull out their money? Because even though it was scientifically feasible, it would take too long, there is no readily available source of mesencheymal cells which are needed to grow teeth. Investors are looking for a return on their investment at the MOST within a 10 year period (and most of the time 2-5 years). THat means that if the technology is not being funded by investors it either DOESN'T REALLY WORK, or IT WOULD TAKE TOO LONG. SO EITHER WAY WE'RE FUCKED!!!!!
He doesn't say anything about those three issues, he is fosused on the most serious illnesses like cancer, heart disease, liver cirrhosis, organ failures, spinal cord injuries and the like, for example he says that the liver is a relatively simple organ and that he expects that in 5 years or so there will be the first artificial liver transpanted into a human, he jokingly comments that is good news for all alcoholics 
And Stephen Badylak and the regrowtn fingertip with his ECM are mentioned in the book, Anthony Atala and the Wake Forest University are also mentioned, an artificial bladder and windpipe, 3D bioprinters with the precise placement of every cell are mentioned, he says that Nobel Prize laureate Walter Gilbert told him that in a few decades every organ exept the brain will be grown in the laboratory from your own cells, so there will be so called 'human body shop' for patients with organ failures, so that is why I believe that the promise of regenerative medicine goes far beyond scarless skin healing, I mean if we will be able to grow new organs in the lab (some even from scratch) then we will be able to perfectly regenerate existing organs (skin and possibly all other organs - heart, spinal cord, perhaps brain and liver and so on).
And then there is the part of the book devoted to gene therapy, he says that diseases caused by mutations in a single gene will be the first to be cured, he mentions SCID (severe combined immunodeficiency) and schizophrenia, the genetic mechanism of SCID is fully understood, but the genetic mechanism of schizophrenia is not understood very well because many genes are invovled in schizophrenia and that could be a problem (I would say it is just like the genetic mechanism of wound healing).
And it is true that FDA is a major obstacle, this hydrogel for SCI could be approved in mid-2019, five years later that it is originally expected:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1665222-invivo-therapeutics-suffers-from-fdas-timidity-on-biologic-grafts?source=yahoo
Here is a story about artificial windpipe, it works perfectly:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120223-will-we-ever-create-organs
He doesn't say anything about those three issues, he is fosused on the most serious illnesses like cancer, heart disease, liver cirrhosis, organ failures, spinal cord injuries and the like, for example he says that the liver is a relatively simple organ and that he expects that in 5 years or so there will be the first artificial liver transpanted into a human, he jokingly comments that is good news for all alcoholics
And then there is the part of the book devoted to gene therapy, he says that diseases caused by mutations in a single gene will be the first to be cured, he mentions SCID (severe combined immunodeficiency) and schizophrenia, the genetic mechanism of SCID is fully understood, but the genetic mechanism of schizophrenia is not understood very well because many genes are invovled in schizophrenia and that could be a problem (I would say it is just like the genetic mechanism of wound healing).
And it is true that FDA is a major obstacle, this hydrogel for SCI could be approved in mid-2019, five years later that it is originally expected:
Here is a story about artificial windpipe, it works perfectly:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120223-will-we-ever-create-organs
Actually the girl died after two weeks but it's not entirely clear whether it was because of failure of the device. There's a lot of confusion and lies in the reporting of these things, because this 2013 report says she was the first, but so does that bloody report you posted from 2011!!! So which is true? Probably neither.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/girl-dies-groundbreaking-trachea-transplant/story?id=19604605
The FDA stuff is will completely screw this all up even further. Thank God China and Korea may be able to circumvent all this bullshit and people will travel for surgical tourism.
The Michio Kaku stuff is all bullshit, he's just writing science fiction, I've seen a bunch of his interviews. These guys may be able to say stuff about computers and be right, but biology is WAY WAY more complex. trust me, I've been reading up on the tooth engineering stuff. They're not one step closer since 2004. NOT ONE STEP!!! They've just been riding the wave of one experimental result for almost 10 years. I checked out the papers for an international dentist conference on tooth engineering --all the papers are just pure speculation, from 2013 --no real experiments, no findings. They don't understand shit.
As critics of Ray Kurzweil rightly argue, the analogy between computer science and biological science is specious. Moore's law may predict computer chips will improve exponentially, but it's a false analogy between that and biology. Biology and medicine aren't even progressing at that fast a linear pace. I fact several diseases such as mental disorders, autism, adhd etcc. are getting much much WORSE!!! All the examples you mention from Kaku's book have lead to NOTHING.
so i just read an interview with a scientist about the hydrogel --says clinical trials on humans are at least 5 years away and
a few say closer to 10. Either way, as I said before, don't expect any significant news on this till 2020. Adieu and good luck,
it ain't happening any time soon. I will not be visiting this board again.
Where is your source?
so i just read an interview with a scientist about the hydrogel --says clinical trials on humans are at least 5 years away and
a few say closer to 10. Either way, as I said before, don't expect any significant news on this till 2020. Adieu and good luck,
it ain't happening any time soon. I will not be visiting this board again.
A mixture of hUC-MSCs, Wharton™s jelly, and skin microparticles were transplanted to 10-mm diameter, full-thickness, middorsal, excisional skin wounds of mice. After 7 days, the tissue sections were sampled for reconstruction analysis and histological examination. After transplantation, there was a remarkable development of newborn skin and its appendages. We could see newly generated layers of epidermis, sebaceous glands, hair follicle, and sweat glands clearly. This innovative strategy could be very promising and may significantly increase the quality of repair and regeneration of skin in injuries.
Rez77, look at this chart:And read this paper:A mixture of hUC-MSCs, Wharton™s jelly, and skin microparticles were transplanted to 10-mm diameter, full-thickness, middorsal, excisional skin wounds of mice. After 7 days, the tissue sections were sampled for reconstruction analysis and histological examination. After transplantation, there was a remarkable development of newborn skin and its appendages. We could see newly generated layers of epidermis, sebaceous glands, hair follicle, and sweat glands clearly. This innovative strategy could be very promising and may significantly increase the quality of repair and regeneration of skin in injuries.
Then read these three news:
Thanks Vladislav, all of this is great stuff. I just came back to the board because seabs quoted me and it showed up in my email. All of this is fascinating. But we're both reading the same articles. As interesting as it all is it's very far from even human clinical trials. You need to read between the lines here. First, rat and mice biology is incredibly different from human biology. Tons of experiments have been done in mice to then fail in humans. I've heard a lot of scientists talk in private that showing proof of concept in mice is a great marketing tool because the general public think mice are "cute and furry". But regardless, read the language use, it's always "researchers believe these findings could possibly one day be used to blah blah blah in humans"
And then they provide some completely meaningless and hypothetical timeline i.e. should be available "in 5-10 years" Or human "clinical trials" might begin in 5-10 years. THIS IS CLEAR: THEY HAVE NO IDEA.
Look at this interview. The scientist and reporter here are purely speculating. Hydrogels were first discovered to purportedly regenerate dental pulp in 2004!!! This interview is from 2013, a few months ago, the scientist who is head of this research program is still spewing the same crap, saying that the "human clinical trials" to regenerate the dental pulp MAY BEGIN in about 5 years!!!
And as for full tooth regeneration "there are still many complex challenges" (read: we have no idea if it's even possible). And then for each of these papers there are separate govt. reports where independent scientists have said it may not be possible at all, ever or at least not in the near future!!
Even with the stuff you posted. Let's be naive and say okay it's all true. When do you think it will be available to the average person? You would agree at least 10 years, right? I'm just talking about something like the hydrogel for skin healing. AT LEAST. Well, frankly, that's way too far in the future for me to even be thinking about right now.
for anyone who is intelligent you'll be able to see through their bullshit language:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323297504578579590276114884.html
This special task force was started in 2006!!! AND HAD TOP GOVT. SUPPORT AND FUNDING. THEY BROUGHT TOGETHER
THE BEST SCIENTISTS. YOU CAN SCAN THE ARTICLE AND JUMP TO THE CONCLUSION:
spoiler alert: it was disbanded and after many years only got to the point of producing more proposals and more speculation
because it showed the problems were INSURMOUNTABLE.
AND THERE HAS BEEN NO PROGRESS IN THIS FIELD IN THE FOLLOWING 8 YEARS!!!!????? TO NOW!!?? Dentists are still
using shitty silver amalgam and composite fillings.
The increased numbers of papers being published in these areas means nothing. It just means education departments are growing
and there's are more idiots taking courses and writing papers which don't have any substantive value.
Guys, remember ACELL back in like 2005!? There are still reports of this on this thread from 2009!!! What happened to that, it
supposedly grew a FUCKING FINGER!!!
I'm sorry, but you have to interpret the language of the scientists, they all say "clinical human trials COULD START IN 5 to 10 YEARS" they're like taught to say that or something!!!!
Once again, see you in 2020 when the clincal human trials start. I'll already be too old to give a shit.
oh here is the "special task force" i mentioned above from 2006
from the article vladislave sent me:
"Taylor, who led some of the first successful experiments to build rat hearts1, is optimistic about this ultimate challenge in tissue engineering. I think it's eminently doable, she says, quickly adding, I don't think it's simple. Some colleagues are less optimistic. Paolo Macchiarini, a thoracic surgeon and scientist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, who has transplanted bioengineered tracheas into several patients, says that although tissue engineering could become routine for replacing tubular structures such as windpipes, arteries and oesophagi, he is not confident that this will happen with more complex organs."
man it's all just bullshit --fucking Ray Kurzweil is a mega asshole. He cites these things as if they're already a reality. I'm changing my estimation. Not 2020, more like 50 years away. Most of us may or may not be around that long.... All any of this is, inlcuding this thread which has been going on for a decade!!! Is just a bunch of moronic amateurs speculating on stuff they know NOTHING (and I mean really nothing) about. I'm through.
Thanks Vladislav, all of this is great stuff. I just came back to the board because seabs quoted me and it showed up in my email. All of this is fascinating. But we're both reading the same articles. As interesting as it all is it's very far from even human clinical trials. You need to read between the lines here. First, rat and mice biology is incredibly different from human biology. Tons of experiments have been done in mice to then fail in humans. I've heard a lot of scientists talk in private that showing proof of concept in mice is a great marketing tool because the general public think mice are "cute and furry". But regardless, read the language use, it's always "researchers believe these findings could possibly one day be used to blah blah blah in humans"
And then they provide some completely meaningless and hypothetical timeline i.e. should be available "in 5-10 years" Or human "clinical trials" might begin in 5-10 years. THIS IS CLEAR: THEY HAVE NO IDEA.
Look at this interview. The scientist and reporter here are purely speculating. Hydrogels were first discovered to purportedly regenerate dental pulp in 2004!!! This interview is from 2013, a few months ago, the scientist who is head of this research program is still spewing the same crap, saying that the "human clinical trials" to regenerate the dental pulp MAY BEGIN in about 5 years!!!
And as for full tooth regeneration "there are still many complex challenges" (read: we have no idea if it's even possible). And then for each of these papers there are separate govt. reports where independent scientists have said it may not be possible at all, ever or at least not in the near future!!
Even with the stuff you posted. Let's be naive and say okay it's all true. When do you think it will be available to the average person? You would agree at least 10 years, right? I'm just talking about something like the hydrogel for skin healing. AT LEAST. Well, frankly, that's way too far in the future for me to even be thinking about right now.
Again scaffolds are not pills or injections which do behave differently between species. And all scaffolds do is either get rejected by the body or 'degrade,' hence digest, hence 'get eaten,' the body does the rest by itself, 'no human' adjusts a micro mechanism here.
And all scaffold behave similar in all mammal tissues. Tissues that are in the same species or in different species; unlike pills and injections which behave differently in rats and humans in general. If you cut a piece of scaffold with the same properties, and put it on many tissues amongst different species, it will either degrade or get rejected at roughly the same rate and behave similar. Or it will degrade slow, hence something between digestion and rejection, behaving similar. When it is rejected you scar, when it is eaten tissue is created. There have literally been hundreds of thousands of documented pieces of evidence that scaffolds digest similar in all tissues and do not discriminate
Pills and injections though generally fail in rat and then humans as they are designed by humans to knock out one mechanism that worked in a rat that may not work in a human. Scaffolds on the other hand, when they are digested, let the body heal without a human micro intervention.
Btw you still have not provided a source as to where you heard someone state that this will be here by some rolling year, I think you mentioned 2020?
man it's all just bullshit --fucking Ray Kurzweil is a mega asshole. He cites these things as if they're already a reality. I'm changing my estimation. Not 2020, more like 50 years away. Most of us may or may not be around that long.... All any of this is, inlcuding this thread which has been going on for a decade!!! Is just a bunch of moronic amateurs speculating on stuff they know NOTHING (and I mean really nothing) about. I'm through.
Ray Kurzweil is not even a subject matter for scar free healing. Talking about him, or a future, or focusing on him intently, is a distraction from real evidence in this subject. A reason, though he is interesting, I do not talk about him on this thread. Its like looking at the monkey, a Chewbacca type defence, a red herring. Btw >>>> He sells books and conferences about his predictions<<<< And he does not cite things about his predictions as if they are reality, I think you meant cite things that are objective instead or reality (objective, whereby a control has been used and you have clear evidence of scientific truths etc.). Anyway, and his 'predictions,' and 'opinions' without using objective sources is usually pseudo science, like anything else. Objective evidence is using stuff that has 'results.'
By assuming opinion and prediction is objective, you are giving credit to 'opinion' and 'prediction' over objective evidence and scientific truths.
And I bet if you talked to Kurzweil face to face he will admit his scientific thinking is not science but is currently pseudo science, and he'd state this is done on purpose by him anyway, as he believes his role is to generate interest in this technology that has potential. I also bet he has never ever said or conveyed, 'and all this my friends, is not pseudo science or prediction, and this wing it graph is objective evidence of limb regeneration.'
so i just read an interview with a scientist about the hydrogel --says clinical trials on humans are at least 5 years away and
a few say closer to 10. Either way, as I said before, don't expect any significant news on this till 2020. Adieu and good luck,
it ain't happening any time soon. I will not be visiting this board again.
The body and nature heals itself.
Not scientists.They cant see other things than their eduation.
Idk if this is just my optimism speaking, but I have a good feeling about the hydrogel. Like seabs135 said, scaffolds are different than injections and pills. If everything goes accordingly, the scaffold will work the same in all mammals. I would just like to know how long it will take for the hydrogel to be available to the public. Hopefully, it's within the next 3 years or so. *crossing fingers*
Idk if this is just my optimism speaking, but I have a good feeling about the hydrogel. Like seabs135 said, scaffolds are different than injections and pills. If everything goes accordingly, the scaffold will work the same in all mammals. I would just like to know how long it will take for the hydrogel to be available to the public. Hopefully, it's within the next 3 years or so. *crossing fingers*
oh god, it's acell all over again, that was 7 years fyi. why 3? why not 5? why not 500? If you read real science assessements of these things, HUMAN APPLICATION is always deferred to being in the far distant future. Okay, I'm going to make an official pact with all of you. Keep this thread alive, keep wasting your time, keep blabbering about all this BS for as long as you want.
But remember this post. I will come back EXACTLY December 31st, 2014, that is well over a year from now.
I say there will be NO progress in this or any other scarless healing technology. I will not post till then. Even if it will
work by 2020, there should be some significant (i.e. application in humans something news till then). I'm not even saying it will be available. I'm saying there will be NO progress up till then and you'll have wasted a year of your lives with this crap constantly on your mind! See you December 31st 2014/Jan. 1st 2015!! Goodbye, goodluck.
I could write a big response to this and be a dick. But out of respect I'll not.
You have clearly not read or understood the real scientific truths and testable scientific truths of these things so you could reason, I could list them out and cite them, but I'd be accused of being a dick.
You clearly jump from scientific truths (non bs) on to the pseudo scientific. You assumed general 'predictions' about 'organ regeneration' and cancer cures (apples) by Ray Kurrzweil was false evidence of scar free healing of tissue (oranges). And you applied Kurzweil's logic wrongly to the topic. Kurzweil forecasting has nothing to do with objective findings (scientific truths) in scar free healing, or scientific truths elsewhere. And if Kurzweil is right with his organ regeneration forecasting, scar free healing by following the logic, would have also been proven way before hand anyway; as you cant regenerate with scarring. Anyway all you have done is create a distraction from scientific truths [i could be a dick an insert an insult here]. Your logic is also like someone stating 'I refuse to use my car/bicycle/legs even though they are effective, to get my groceries until they develop a spaceship I read about in a book.' Even though a truth is the bicycle, a car, a bus or your legs, are good enough for you to transport your groceries from a to b.
Idk if this is just my optimism speaking, but I have a good feeling about the hydrogel. Like seabs135 said, scaffolds are different than injections and pills. If everything goes accordingly, the scaffold will work the same in all mammals. I would just like to know how long it will take for the hydrogel to be available to the public. Hopefully, it's within the next 3 years or so. *crossing fingers*
oh god, it's acell all over again, that was 7 years fyi. why 3? why not 5? why not 500? If you read real science assessements of these things, HUMAN APPLICATION is always deferred to being in the far distant future. Okay, I'm going to make an official pact with all of you. Keep this thread alive, keep wasting your time, keep blabbering about all this BS for as long as you want.
But remember this post. I will come back EXACTLY December 31st, 2014, that is well over a year from now.
I say there will be NO progress in this or any other scarless healing technology. I will not post till then. Even if it will
work by 2020, there should be some significant (i.e. application in humans something news till then). I'm not even saying it will be available. I'm saying there will be NO progress up till then and you'll have wasted a year of your lives with this crap constantly on your mind! See you December 31st 2014/Jan. 1st 2015!! Goodbye, goodluck.
you all must put hydrogel in some web of foundation donations people interesest like that: crowdfounding
by the way i think
seab is a dreamer man
so i just read an interview with a scientist about the hydrogel --says clinical trials on humans are at least 5 years away and
a few say closer to 10. Either way, as I said before, don't expect any significant news on this till 2020. Adieu and good luck,
it ain't happening any time soon. I will not be visiting this board again.
The body and nature heals itself.
Not scientists.They cant see other things than their eduation.
the slaves here can not understand nothing
you all must put hydrogel in some web of foundation donations people interesest like that: crowdfounding
by the way i think
seab is a dreamer man
so i just read an interview with a scientist about the hydrogel --says clinical trials on humans are at least 5 years away and
a few say closer to 10. Either way, as I said before, don't expect any significant news on this till 2020. Adieu and good luck,
it ain't happening any time soon. I will not be visiting this board again.
The body and nature heals itself.
Not scientists.They cant see other things than their eduation.
the slaves here can not understand nothing
You would not need crowdfunding or any funding for this --if it worked or showed a promising time line you'd have huge pharma with their billions of dispossable income throwing money at it. If there's no funding it doesn't work or the potential for it to work is in far far distant future. I'll reply if people quote me, but I'm going to win this bet, Jan1st 2015 no progress.