Acne.org Products
There's more information if you look at the clinical trials website for FS2. It utilized Kynurenic acid, which you can already buy for research purposes on sites like cayman chemical.
12 minutes ago, scarred2468 said:There's more information if you look at the clinical trials website for FS2. It utilized Kynurenic acid, which you can already buy for research purposes on sites like cayman chemical.
Thanks for the info! I'll read up on the trials and will see if I can get my hands on it. Combine that with rough abrasion and mega dosing on supplements for the next year or so and I believe I'll be able to get rid of my scars or at least diminish them by 70% or more. Nice
16 minutes ago, scarred2468 said:There's more information if you look at the clinical trials website for FS2. It utilized Kynurenic acid, which you can already buy for research purposes on sites like cayman chemical.
I don't understand how do you get rid of a scar simply by rubbing an ointment on to it? I thought it would have to be excised. How would it fix texture issues?
It would affect the skin the same way that using topicals would, changing the skin cells as they remodel over a few months. Keep in mind this cream and most treatments are primarily aimed at treating hypertrophic scars (keloids) and cicatrices (scar tissue). If it could correct an acne scar or depression in the skin just by application it would probably be advertised as being capable of it, or under claims/aims. So for depressions/ice picks/etc. you would need to excise the tissue, but for a hypertrophic scar and hopefully standard scars you'd just apply it like many people already do with silicones. Silicones are already pretty effective at getting a raised scar down to the level of the skin, what I'm most interested in is regeneration though. I've been reading every patent involving scarring I can find.
And Ageless Frost, I do not recommend trying it on yourself, we have no idea what could happen. It did pass phase 1 but the company may have prepared it differently or affected its delivery to the body or any number of things. I think waiting is more wise, we don't even know it works as well as they say it does.
33 minutes ago, scarred2468 said:It would affect the skin the same way that using topicals would, changing the skin cells as they remodel over a few months. Keep in mind this cream and most treatments are primarily aimed at treating hypertrophic scars (keloids) and cicatrices (scar tissue). If it could correct an acne scar or depression in the skin just by application it would probably be advertised as being capable of it, or under claims/aims. So for depressions/ice picks/etc. you would need to excise the tissue, but for a hypertrophic scar and hopefully standard scars you'd just apply it like many people already do with silicones. Silicones are already pretty effective at getting a raised scar down to the level of the skin, what I'm most interested in is regeneration though. I've been reading every patent involving scarring I can find.
And Ageless Frost, I do not recommend trying it on yourself, we have no idea what could happen. It did pass phase 1 but the company may have prepared it differently or affected its delivery to the body or any number of things. I think waiting is more wise, we don't even know it works as well as they say it does.
So I'm assuming the hydrogel and the newer article about activating hair growth is a better bet for regeneration.
There is almost no information or reason to strongly believe any of these will work. Sunogel healed a tiny wound on someone's finger, which for all we know could have regenerated itself. Both Gemstone's and sunogel's hydrogels are preclinical. Cotseralis's reasoning that fat cells/hair would heal scars makes no sense to me, people get fat injections all the time with no effect on scar tissue, the same with hair growth. I don't know how high FS2 is aimed at achieving and they've only completed phase 1. I want to believe one of them will work but there is really no convincing evidence to believe this.
12 hours ago, scarred2468 said:It would affect the skin the same way that using topicals would, changing the skin cells as they remodel over a few months. Keep in mind this cream and most treatments are primarily aimed at treating hypertrophic scars (keloids) and cicatrices (scar tissue). If it could correct an acne scar or depression in the skin just by application it would probably be advertised as being capable of it, or under claims/aims. So for depressions/ice picks/etc. you would need to excise the tissue, but for a hypertrophic scar and hopefully standard scars you'd just apply it like many people already do with silicones. Silicones are already pretty effective at getting a raised scar down to the level of the skin, what I'm most interested in is regeneration though. I've been reading every patent involving scarring I can find.
And Ageless Frost, I do not recommend trying it on yourself, we have no idea what could happen. It did pass phase 1 but the company may have prepared it differently or affected its delivery to the body or any number of things. I think waiting is more wise, we don't even know it works as well as they say it does.
At this point I'd much rather set my skin on fire tbh. People pity burn scars over what I have. I'd rather have that.
guys just read this one. sound promising.
http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-figured-out-how-to-make-wounds-heal-without-scars
What do you think of it ??????
something short term or long term?
This has already been brought up recently on this forum. But I've still been reading more about it and understanding it a bit better. Part of the problem are that all these websites report this like it's proven it will work in humans or at all, when there's no strong evidence or clinical trials haven't been performed.
In light of all the crappy media coverage and misconceptions, NCBI put out this article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/behindtheheadlines/news/2017-01-09-reports-of-a-wrinkle-cure-look-a-little-saggy/ .
The conversion of myofibroblasts to fat was done inhumankeloids in vitro, which is not as helpful as a clinical trial or even evidence that non-hypertrophic scarring can be avoided, but at the very least we know thatoneaspect of scarring can be controlled: myofibroblasts.
Originally I was confused because Cotsarelis was saying that the "key is regenerating hair follicles first" (which he's helped work on with companies like Follica), and I thought in response, well, what if I want to heal an area of skin that doesn't have hair follicles? Then I better understood that you don't need hair to convert myofibroblasts to adipocytes, you need BMP signalling. This is a much more efficient and sane approach then trying to grow hair everywhere, which is kind of what Cotsarelis made it sound like lol.
Ultimately, a combination approach might be needed. We can see that hydrogels are very efficient at creating elastin, and this concept you're referring to addresses a separate facet of scarring. But it's always good news when the puzzle gets another piece put together.
Anyone else, please continue to update here
As the developmental teams behind the hydrogels have stated, it's totally feasible to apply cytokines and chemicals within the hydrogel, so hypothetically you could have a BMP hydrogel that gives you the benefit of both approaches. But for some reason, possibly patent laws, no one usually attempts such ideas
Just posting this: https://marketexclusive.com/skin-bones-regenerative-medicine-takes-leap-forward-frost-backing-polarityte-inc-nasdaqcool/72230/ . Don't think it has been posted here.
Thank you for sharing, I check this forum very frequently and am excited to see new posts. I Just read the article. There was a clear improvement/acceleration of the wound result, so that's awesome. On the other hand, they saved this information for last:
"Perhaps most importantly, the system is deployable with third-party scaffolds, which are basically support structures within which the skin grows, and these third party scaffolds are already FDA approved."
We know that scarless healing is not currently possible. I would induce that the scaffolds they're using in this product will not be quite as advanced as the newer hydrogels, though who knows how successful they will be. There has to be an improvement in the healing/application/any reason for the new hydrogel scaffolds to be FDA approved, so logically I'd think the scaffolds mentioned inthe article are not as sophisticated. It seems to be a rejuvination and business spotlight on an already available but minimally effective product, unless something changes.
By the way I hope you don't interpret this as me putting down the news you're sharing, but I naturally share commentary on these issues.
2 hours ago, scarred2468 said:Thank you for sharing, I check this forum very frequently and am excited to see new posts. I Just read the article. There was a clear improvement/acceleration of the wound result, so that's awesome. On the other hand, they saved this information for last:
"Perhaps most importantly, the system is deployable with third-party scaffolds, which are basically support structures within which the skin grows, and these third party scaffolds are already FDA approved."
We know that scarless healing is not currently possible. I would induce that the scaffolds they're using in this product will not be quite as advanced as the newer hydrogels, though who knows how successful they will be. There has to be an improvement in the healing/application/any reason for the new hydrogel scaffolds to be FDA approved, so logically I'd think the scaffolds mentioned inthe article are not as sophisticated. It seems to be a rejuvination and business spotlight on an already available but minimally effective product, unless something changes.
By the way I hope you don't interpret this as me putting down the news you're sharing, but I naturally share commentary on these issues.
Couldn't it just mean that the scaffold they are using has ingredients or is approved already but for something different? And it serves a dual purpose for scars? Just like the Gemstone hydrogel contains Dextran, I'm sure Dextran is already FDA approved.
42 minutes ago, scarred2468 said:I don't know if dextran is approved for some medical use already, but yes you could be right about that.
For example I found this: https://www.drugs.com/pro/dextran-75.html . I am sure Dextran is FDA approved, just was never used to treat skin scars. Kind of like Cymbalta is an SSRI prescribed for depression, but also is used for inflammation.
I just wanted to put this article here: http://today.uconn.edu/2015/11/researchers-aim-to-regenerate-human-limbs-by-2030/ . It's not scar related but it's amazing that we have researchers at UCONN aiming to regenerate limbs by 2030 and we still have scars. I really hope between the hydrogel or other recent research that has been join on that we are close, it doesn't really make any sense if we aren't.
On 2/22/2017 at 5:16 PM, mjg713 said:I just wanted to put this article here: http://today.uconn.edu/2015/11/researchers-aim-to-regenerate-human-limbs-by-2030/ . It's not scar related but it's amazing that we have researchers at UCONN aiming to regenerate limbs by 2030 and we still have scars. I really hope between the hydrogel or other recent research that has been join on that we are close, it doesn't really make any sense if we aren't.
I know like literally WTF!!!??? Honestly guys the future is approaching WAY slower than we think. 2001 expected us to have interplanetary travel and Bladerunner assumed we'd have humanoid androids and flying cars. We don't have a tenth a hundredth of that shit. I talked to a top scientist and he said we may and he was saying this is highly imporbably but we MAY have tissue regnerative capcities that could help scars by the early 2030s. None of this dextran hydrogel shit does anything. Hydrogel may be useful as a scaffold for some tisue regeneration once we figure out how to do it but that's at least a decade away. I would just try lasers followed by fat for now.
oh and dermabrasion
FUCK LITERALLY NO PROGRESS ON THIS ENTIRE FRONT FROM 2007 when this thread began 10 years ago!!!!
It is easy to get frustrated about this. 17 years (!) have gone by since 2000, and still "nothing" has happened regarding acne scar treatments. At the same time science has made major steps in other areas. I find it difficult to understand. Still, I hope that something will happen the next 5-10 years. Something that will make a difference.
Hi, I was reading through this thread and I thought I would share a few things.
A. None of these innovations will help with existing scars. They are all preventive measures for quicker wound healing in things like burns, ulcers, big cuts etc...
B. I'm sure a better solution for acne scars will come out someday, the sad truth is most of these things require money and time. Clinical trials especially in the US take forever.
C. I really only see bioprinting as a solution to achieve scarless healing. This is mostly due to how skin heals. Fibrosis is the skins default tool to repair itself when the dermis has been compromised. This means you would have to control inflammation and replenish lost skin cells while instructing the skin to regenerate instead of repair. At least 3 labs off the top of my head are working on creating bio ink for burn wounds. These will all start by using only two cell types keratinocytes and fibroblasts, this means the skin would not be fully functional and there will be scars although the skin would heal much faster. The labs hope to use more cell types in the future that will allow for matching pigmentation, hair follicles, oil glands etc... They are also testing the use of various stem cells to promote healing and tools to vascularize the ink so it takes to the skin better. Some time after the first human trials they will test this on remodeling scars. But it is still aways away. They are also looking at this as a tool for vitiligo. So it's fun to look towards the future but let's face it no time soon will their be a cure for scarring although progress is being made.
10 minutes ago, scarred2468 said:The idea for many of these methods is that you excise the scar and it grows back as normal skin, that's the only way it would work for something like a hydrogel I think. What did you think of the bioprinting method I linked about?
Correct, I actually think it makes more sense to grow back the normal skin as opposed to bioprinting it. Although, the last article I read about them bioprinting in Spain said that they have transplanted it in humans already.