Acne.org Products
Hey Rez77, to me its about reporting truths (which anyone can do), over being better at something, its about peer to peer and not about message board experts. And I believe no one should give trust, to anyone, without sources to a claim on the internet. So your generally trusting sources not me I hope. Generally stuff posted on the net without a source has a high probability to be poor quality imo. Btw, the only thing available for when this will be available is the sources, already posted on this board, which I think stated a 18 to 24 month range earlier this year.
Yo Rez, what do you think about the viability of temporary swelling? You having a strong science background and all. I made a thread on this just now. Please answer lol.
so temporary swelling is just swelling induced for a few days either through laser application or sometimes derma needling. It lasts a few weeks and then you're back with the same level of scarring you had before. I don't have a science background, I just know a lot of people who work in the science community/biotech and how all of that works so I'm quite cynical. But what's the point of temporary swelling, it doesn't solve the problem?
Seabs is a smart guy, and I agree with him, but I'm still skeptical because even if the experimental evidence shows something is possible, i feel that there are way too many obstacles from the inception of something to it's being finally realized and available. Frankly, I don't know.
Let me give you an example of another area where there was a supposed breakthrough and it lead to nothing. A lot of times to fix jaw and dental problems people need jaw surgery. Many times you don't have enough bone for the surgery so they try and graft bones from other parts of the body, but it usually resorbs. Earlier in the century a Russian scientist Illarazov found that when wounded soldiers had a space from a fracture on their leg and you incrementally distracted the fracture, your own bone would fill in the space and you'd have more new bone. It's called "distraction osteogenesis" Major breakthrough, and it's used today to make short people taller, it's called leg lengthening through distraction osteogenesis. Well in the past decade they tried the technique for jaw surgery, when people are born with retruded jaws or jaws that are too small, instead of bone grafting from other parts of the body or using synthetic implants, thy create a tiny fracture, insert a metal distractor and actually grow the jaw, the bone fills in and the patients have the same result. About a decade ago there were hundreds of papers demonstrating this and it's still done today, so you would think jaw surgery has changed, right? No, 100 percent of surgeons still do it the old way, why? A couple of reasons, it's a much more complicated way and requires more specialized skills --not worth it for the surgeons. Second, the architecture of the jaw is much more complex than that of the legs and for some reason they don't understand why the new grown jaws are not as stable, the new bone here resorbs and shrinks. Ultimately it didn't work. I'm not saying there's an analogy here between scarless healing and bone regeneration. I'm just saying, we need to totally temper our expectations with this because if it were as simple and as easy as these initial papers demonstrate I think it would be here by now.
Anyway, I'm going to stop chiming in here, because I'm not really contributing anything. I'll just check back occasionally to see if there's any progress. But i'm sure if there's scarless healing it'll be all over the place and I'll hear about it anyway.
Well the big deal is that suppose you induce micro swelling once a week for the rest of your life. That would essentially mean walking around scar free year round for just a 10-15 min time commitment on weekends. A year of being scar free would require an infinitesmal amount of time to maintain. Heck even if you're in a relationship, your significant other won't even realize it. This is if there's a way to do such a thing, which I'm sure someone can come up with.
Yeah, I'll pass.
Yo Rez, what do you think about the viability of temporary swelling? You having a strong science background and all. I made a thread on this just now. Please answer lol.
so temporary swelling is just swelling induced for a few days either through laser application or sometimes derma needling. It lasts a few weeks and then you're back with the same level of scarring you had before. I don't have a science background, I just know a lot of people who work in the science community/biotech and how all of that works so I'm quite cynical. But what's the point of temporary swelling, it doesn't solve the problem?
Seabs is a smart guy, and I agree with him, but I'm still skeptical because even if the experimental evidence shows something is possible, i feel that there are way too many obstacles from the inception of something to it's being finally realized and available. Frankly, I don't know.
Let me give you an example of another area where there was a supposed breakthrough and it lead to nothing. A lot of times to fix jaw and dental problems people need jaw surgery. Many times you don't have enough bone for the surgery so they try and graft bones from other parts of the body, but it usually resorbs. Earlier in the century a Russian scientist Illarazov found that when wounded soldiers had a space from a fracture on their leg and you incrementally distracted the fracture, your own bone would fill in the space and you'd have more new bone. It's called "distraction osteogenesis" Major breakthrough, and it's used today to make short people taller, it's called leg lengthening through distraction osteogenesis. Well in the past decade they tried the technique for jaw surgery, when people are born with retruded jaws or jaws that are too small, instead of bone grafting from other parts of the body or using synthetic implants, thy create a tiny fracture, insert a metal distractor and actually grow the jaw, the bone fills in and the patients have the same result. About a decade ago there were hundreds of papers demonstrating this and it's still done today, so you would think jaw surgery has changed, right? No, 100 percent of surgeons still do it the old way, why? A couple of reasons, it's a much more complicated way and requires more specialized skills --not worth it for the surgeons. Second, the architecture of the jaw is much more complex than that of the legs and for some reason they don't understand why the new grown jaws are not as stable, the new bone here resorbs and shrinks. Ultimately it didn't work. I'm not saying there's an analogy here between scarless healing and bone regeneration. I'm just saying, we need to totally temper our expectations with this because if it were as simple and as easy as these initial papers demonstrate I think it would be here by now.
Anyway, I'm going to stop chiming in here, because I'm not really contributing anything. I'll just check back occasionally to see if there's any progress. But i'm sure if there's scarless healing it'll be all over the place and I'll hear about it anyway.
Well the big deal is that suppose you induce micro swelling once a week for the rest of your life. That would essentially mean walking around scar free year round for just a 10-15 min time commitment on weekends. A year of being scar free would require an infinitesmal amount of time to maintain. Heck even if you're in a relationship, your significant other won't even realize it. This is if there's a way to do such a thing, which I'm sure someone can come up with.
Yeah, I'll pass.
How can you not see the huge upside of intentional microswelling? Someone needs to invent something that can do such a thing ASAP.
Yo Rez, what do you think about the viability of temporary swelling? You having a strong science background and all. I made a thread on this just now. Please answer lol.
so temporary swelling is just swelling induced for a few days either through laser application or sometimes derma needling. It lasts a few weeks and then you're back with the same level of scarring you had before. I don't have a science background, I just know a lot of people who work in the science community/biotech and how all of that works so I'm quite cynical. But what's the point of temporary swelling, it doesn't solve the problem?
Seabs is a smart guy, and I agree with him, but I'm still skeptical because even if the experimental evidence shows something is possible, i feel that there are way too many obstacles from the inception of something to it's being finally realized and available. Frankly, I don't know.
Let me give you an example of another area where there was a supposed breakthrough and it lead to nothing. A lot of times to fix jaw and dental problems people need jaw surgery. Many times you don't have enough bone for the surgery so they try and graft bones from other parts of the body, but it usually resorbs. Earlier in the century a Russian scientist Illarazov found that when wounded soldiers had a space from a fracture on their leg and you incrementally distracted the fracture, your own bone would fill in the space and you'd have more new bone. It's called "distraction osteogenesis" Major breakthrough, and it's used today to make short people taller, it's called leg lengthening through distraction osteogenesis. Well in the past decade they tried the technique for jaw surgery, when people are born with retruded jaws or jaws that are too small, instead of bone grafting from other parts of the body or using synthetic implants, thy create a tiny fracture, insert a metal distractor and actually grow the jaw, the bone fills in and the patients have the same result. About a decade ago there were hundreds of papers demonstrating this and it's still done today, so you would think jaw surgery has changed, right? No, 100 percent of surgeons still do it the old way, why? A couple of reasons, it's a much more complicated way and requires more specialized skills --not worth it for the surgeons. Second, the architecture of the jaw is much more complex than that of the legs and for some reason they don't understand why the new grown jaws are not as stable, the new bone here resorbs and shrinks. Ultimately it didn't work. I'm not saying there's an analogy here between scarless healing and bone regeneration. I'm just saying, we need to totally temper our expectations with this because if it were as simple and as easy as these initial papers demonstrate I think it would be here by now.
Anyway, I'm going to stop chiming in here, because I'm not really contributing anything. I'll just check back occasionally to see if there's any progress. But i'm sure if there's scarless healing it'll be all over the place and I'll hear about it anyway.
Well the big deal is that suppose you induce micro swelling once a week for the rest of your life. That would essentially mean walking around scar free year round for just a 10-15 min time commitment on weekends. A year of being scar free would require an infinitesmal amount of time to maintain. Heck even if you're in a relationship, your significant other won't even realize it. This is if there's a way to do such a thing, which I'm sure someone can come up with.
Yeah, I'll pass.
How can you not see the huge upside of intentional microswelling? Someone needs to invent something that can do such a thing ASAP.
i'm going to be polite because i think you're saying this in earnest. don't take offence. this is a VERY stupid idea. first, to induce sufficient swelling to obscure deep scars you would need to do something quite abrasive --either needling (the device already exists, you can get it on amazon) or a fairly strong laser. Inflammation of that sort is NOT GOOD FOR YOU. It will progressively damage your skin and tissue, even while it might obscure your scars temporarily. Your body would probably build up a resistance so you would need to do more abrasive techniques progressively, leading to more tissue damage. Have you ever tried derma needling? It causes inflammation but makes your skin peel and red and look like shit. Also just think of the time investment. This whole idea is idiotic. Please don't bring it up with me again.
I just wanted to share just one area of science and tissue regeneration and where "seabs" philosophy of trusting the "scientific evidence" in fact fails.
For a long while various scientists have been claiming tissue regeneration for gum recession and bone loss in teeth. They have published several dozen papers showing bone and tissue regeneration. Here's an extended presentation by one doctor showing tons of double blind controlled experiments with photographs. This presentation was given to a group of scientists and practitioners in 2007!! It is all to regenerate the papilla between teeth. I have some papilla loss, and so I contacted the doctor now several years later, almost 7 years after this presentation and he said there is no predictable way to regenerate the papilla and thus none of these techniques ended up working. And this is way more evidence than the hydrogel studies. These are all clinical human trials!! Why the hell does this very doctor now not even offer the procedure!!?? This is why I'm skeptical about anything these scientists say.
Rez77, I was planning on having a break from this board until roughly November.
A brief note: Imo, you are comparing apples and oranges.
With regards to papilla and this dentistry gum disease video; I haven't looked at the full 46minutes as it is about gum recession, I guess. I personally have no interest in gum disease or bone regeneration, and I don't have the motivation. However it is certainly a different drug with completely different properties, and it is about surgical technique and to boot it involves individual dentistry technique. They are clearly not comparable. And btw, if you don't trust forensic scalable scientific truths, or maps or objective evidence, then this is impossible; as scientific truths are universally reliable, if it is not reliable then it is not 'testable'. A scientific truth is a truth to a fish in a pond, or to anyone, all without prejudice. Btw I don't wholly trust word of mouth, fallacy, etc. And if you do not like scientific truths then imo you should not expect anyone else to then validate a word of mouth or opinion; after you ignore objective testable truths; in turn validating the pseudoscience or the opinion etc. that will follow.
Rez77, I was planning on having a break from this board until roughly November.
A brief note: Imo, you are comparing apples and oranges.
With regards to papilla and this dentistry gum disease video; I haven't looked at the full 46minutes as it is about gum recession, I guess. I personally have no interest in gum disease or bone regeneration, and I don't have the motivation. However it is certainly a different drug with completely different properties, and it is about surgical technique and to boot it involves individual dentistry technique. They are clearly not comparable. And btw, if you don't trust forensic scalable scientific truths, or maps or objective evidence, then this is impossible; as scientific truths are universally reliable, if it is not reliable then it is not 'testable'. A scientific truth is a truth to a fish in a pond, or to anyone, all without prejudice. Btw I don't wholly trust word of mouth, fallacy, etc. And if you do not like scientific truths then imo you should not expect anyone else to then validate a word of mouth or opinion; after you ignore objective testable truths; in turn validating the pseudoscience or the opinion etc. that will follow.
I do sort of understand what you're saying. And I think part of skepticism may be informed by a sort of belief that this is all "too good to be true." So yes, not scientific at all, more intuition which can be highly fallible. I still have a lot of skepticism and doubt frankly about the whole field of scientific publishing and what implications we draw from experimental results but I'm willing to let this debate go as indeed I must also admit I don't understand these specific scientific results all too well. I'm going to take a break from this board till Jan infact and maybe something will have changed or there will be some new news. Good luck to everyone.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
doesn't sound that promising to me, just says that the healing "regressed" even though there was some improvement. doesn't say anything about FULL TISSUE OR SKIN REGENERATION!!
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
doesn't sound that promising to me, just says that the healing "regressed" even though there was some improvement. doesn't say anything about FULL TISSUE OR SKIN REGENERATION!!
I agree. This makes it seem as if it only improves the amount of scarring. Now I'm skeptical. I'm praying that the news we receive in November is that the models illustrated complete skin regeneration. I'm sure me and every scarring victim will rejoice.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
doesn't sound that promising to me, just says that the healing "regressed" even though there was some improvement. doesn't say anything about FULL TISSUE OR SKIN REGENERATION!!
I agree. This makes it seem as if it only improves the amount of scarring. Now I'm skeptical. I'm praying that the news we receive in November is that the models illustrated complete skin regeneration. I'm sure me and every scarring victim will rejoice.
yeah but why would you think that, it says nothing about full skin regeneration. there are already tons of synthetic products which help healing in burns --seabs? what happened to all your confidence in scientific data --i told you this is the way these scientists work, they're bullshitters, as are all marketers
Rez77, with respect, you did not tell me anything. I don't go by word of mouth on a message board. Btw, also, if someone worked like you claim, then they are not scientists. Regarding the link, the link is an abstract briefly describing 'two' different materials at an event. As it is an abstract announcing an event, not a paper, there is no scientific truths stated there. With regards to my confidence coming from any scientific document. My confidence will stand until the end of time, a scientific document, is a truth that can be tested. And, no amount of word of mouth on a message board can change peer reviewed facts.
doesn't sound that promising to me, just says that the healing "regressed" even though there was some improvement. doesn't say anything about FULL TISSUE OR SKIN REGENERATION!!
The regression you speak of solely concerned immuno-deficient (sp?) mice. It is somewhat vaguely written though. The whole article/blurb whatever you want to call it. It's kind of all over the place. Like someone screaming to you incoherently from outside while there's stormy weather. 
Anyway, they say that it provides novel platforms whatever that means. I do think that they're on to something at least. It seems like that anyway.
The only thing that I don't get is how they will do this in regards to the blood that will come from excising the scar. Obviously if you cut the skin deep enough to remove a scar it will bleed, probably a lot. How soon after they excise the scar will they have to put the hydrogel on? And can you place it over dried blood? I know no one probably knows the definite answers to these questions, but if someone understands can they please explain it to me.
Also, I just read this article posted a couple of days ago.
Seems interesting.
I read that link
this is very
sad i mean that links show us that regeneration its more difficul that we think dont you
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
>>
Hi Golfpanther, are you still in touch with the researchers?
Do you here anything about the pig trials,, if they are still ongoing?
Please keep us inforrmed.
Many thanks
Regards
Hi Repola,
I haven't personally been in touch with them for a bit now but I posted this a bit ago and will again now:
https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/webprogram/Paper337043.html
I'd imagine some of whatever new information they have will be shared at this conference. As you can see in this abstract for what they'll be presenting they are indeed currently testing on pigs. So come November 6th if the information from the conference isn't readily available, I'll email them again to ask them about it.
doesn't sound that promising to me, just says that the healing "regressed" even though there was some improvement. doesn't say anything about FULL TISSUE OR SKIN REGENERATION!!
The word "regresses" is used in the press release (or whatever you want to call it) in reference to a separate test that was conducted by Gerecht's team. It's not referencing the same paper that we've all been talking about on here. For clarity's sake, here are links to both papers' abstracts:
Integration and regression of implanted engineered human vascular networks during deep wound healing.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23486832
and here's the one we've all been talking about on here for some time:
Dextran hydrogel scaffolds enhance angiogenic responses and promote complete skin regeneration during burn wound healing
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/12/13/1115973108.abstract
So, it's likely that they'll try to cover progress on both fronts at the conference. The latter paper (the one we constantly refer to on here) said plainly that they had achieved complete regeneration in the mice tests. We'll just have to wait until Nov. 6th to see what's going on with pigs.
Honestly, it feels like a lot of people on here just want to twist anything into something that can fit their agenda. While I can see a therapeutic need for that (although, not a logical one) if JHU was completely mum about the hydrogel, I don't get reading too much into an abstract hyping their portion of an event that's taking place in less than a month. We'll get our answers straight from Gerecht's mouth in about 3 weeks.
BTW, if you read the paper about the hydrogel you will see they frequently use terms like "enhanced re-epithelialization" and "promotes tissue regeneration" along with "scar free tissue regeneration" an "complete tissue regeneration." Likely because that's the standard medical jargon that can be understood to mean something by other researchers reading it (e.g. this hydrogel works better than the control, standard wound dressings and/or a hydrogel with certain things omitted or added and so on). Does it mean something that they didn't use the term "complete tissue regeneration" in the press release? Maybe, maybe not. Again, we're not going to have to wait too long to find out.
That's cool. It would be cool if you could just get zapped and then sent home...and then in a while everything's as it was pre-injury. Yeah!
Also, I just read this article posted a couple of days ago.
Seems interesting.
I was just reading it again and it said this:
Even though our rodents had an intact adaptive immune system, we were able to generate scarless skin regeneration in these adult mammals.
I've seen that pop up a few times now, that researchers managed to achieve scarless/free healing in animals. So that's a huge step forward, people!
That's cool. It would be cool if you could just get zapped and then sent home...and then in a while everything's as it was pre-injury. Yeah!
Also, I just read this article posted a couple of days ago.
Seems interesting.
http://www.skinculture.cz/en/skin-repair-hydrogel
What is this?
http://www.skinculture.cz/en/skin-repair-hydrogel
What is this?
I don't see how that would work by just putting it on already formed scars...