Acne.org Products
I dont know how many percent improvement acell would give but Ive known it healed full dermal thickness wounds before, Im not sure whether there was scarring left but I think there was slight scarring. However, it is still promising and the tricky thing is finding a doctor to cut out your scars like what everyone else has says. I think acell might work for smaller scars? But bigger boys they would have to refined the product first I guess. What you guys think?
Also, I think its possible that a surgeon can cut out slightly to the level of the dermis THEN apply acell, thus getting some improvements...
Where did you read about the scarring? I've not seen any mention of scarring after ACell's use.
The answer to cutting will be the scar eating enzyme mentioned in the above article. I expect it's reveal close to ACell's birth date for human consumption.
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate. An acne scar will go down PAST the dermis. I'm not saying I don't think we could still have regeneration, but it's going to be MAJOR surgery. You're going to have to remove large pieces of skin all the way INTO the fatty subcutaneous layer. Keep that in mind. I'm not at all trying to be discouraging, but rather informative.
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
hopeseed- I have to disagree. Dermabrasion goes about half way through the dermis and it does not even closely remove all the scar tissue, even on the most superficial of scars. I believe most scars go down in the subcutaneous layer. I could be wrong, but that is what I think.
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
hopeseed- I have to disagree. Dermabrasion goes about half way through the dermis and it does not even closely remove all the scar tissue, even on the most superficial of scars. I believe most scars go down in the subcutaneous layer. I could be wrong, but that is what I think.
It could still remove the scar tissue and you still could have a pit because the dermis does not regenerate and on those areas where you had a pit (less dermis to begin with) you actually went deeper realtively to everywhere else. My beliefe is that dermabrasion doesn't work the way we would want it to because the dermis does not regenerate (winks at acell). The pit is missing tissue caused by a scar. If you got rid of the scar, you'd still have missing tissue...you need something to spark regeneration.
It could still remove the scar tissue and you still could have a pit because the dermis does not regenerate and on those areas where you had a pit (less dermis to begin with) you actually went deeper realtively to everywhere else. My beliefe is that dermabrasion doesn't work the way we would want it to because the dermis does not regenerate (winks at acell). The pit is missing tissue caused by a scar. If you got rid of the scar, you'd still have missing tissue...you need something to spark regeneration.
Are you sure that there will be missing tissue. Haven't some User in this forum claimed that the scar tissue pushes the skin down(atropic scar). But If you are right then acell will do the trick. But how can
you apply the powder on the right place without dermabrasion? Make it fluid and inject it? Isn't it also possible that to much new tissue will be created so that the skin will be not smooth?
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
hopeseed- I have to disagree. Dermabrasion goes about half way through the dermis and it does not even closely remove all the scar tissue, even on the most superficial of scars. I believe most scars go down in the subcutaneous layer. I could be wrong, but that is what I think.
It could still remove the scar tissue and you still could have a pit because the dermis does not regenerate and on those areas where you had a pit (less dermis to begin with) you actually went deeper realtively to everywhere else. My beliefe is that dermabrasion doesn't work the way we would want it to because the dermis does not regenerate (winks at acell). The pit is missing tissue caused by a scar. If you got rid of the scar, you'd still have missing tissue...you need something to spark regeneration.
Well the dermis does regenerate itself to a certain degree. Dermabrasion destroys half the dermis (the papillary dermis and the top of the reticular dermis). If this didn't regnerate than dermabrasion would be garunteed to destroy your skin.
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
hopeseed- I have to disagree. Dermabrasion goes about half way through the dermis and it does not even closely remove all the scar tissue, even on the most superficial of scars. I believe most scars go down in the subcutaneous layer. I could be wrong, but that is what I think.
It could still remove the scar tissue and you still could have a pit because the dermis does not regenerate and on those areas where you had a pit (less dermis to begin with) you actually went deeper realtively to everywhere else. My beliefe is that dermabrasion doesn't work the way we would want it to because the dermis does not regenerate (winks at acell). The pit is missing tissue caused by a scar. If you got rid of the scar, you'd still have missing tissue...you need something to spark regeneration.
My friend says that the scars may show due to fat loss, so maybe thats the reason? If there is something to be able to regnerate the fat, I think it might solve this problem.
I dont know how many percent improvement acell would give but Ive known it healed full dermal thickness wounds before, Im not sure whether there was scarring left but I think there was slight scarring. However, it is still promising and the tricky thing is finding a doctor to cut out your scars like what everyone else has says. I think acell might work for smaller scars? But bigger boys they would have to refined the product first I guess. What you guys think?
Also, I think its possible that a surgeon can cut out slightly to the level of the dermis THEN apply acell, thus getting some improvements...
Where did you read about the scarring? I've not seen any mention of scarring after ACell's use.
The answer to cutting will be the scar eating enzyme mentioned in the above article. I expect it's reveal close to ACell's birth date for human consumption.
Be a quality time to release its reveal IMO.
When I did a search on enzymes that eat scar tissue, there is a story with this quote from 2008:
It consists of 2 days in the hospital with a catheter in my spine where they can inject enzymes that eat scar tissue without affecting the nerves thamselves every 3 hours.
The guy has a back injury, I can give the link if needed but that is the main thing about the enzymes. Spinal surgeons have been using this.
In another article, this : Dissolving of scar tissue: Scar tissue is made of protein. Proteolytic enzymes can effectively "digest" scar tissue - particularly in the circulatory system.
link: http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/578427...ymes/index.html
so with the army using this in regeneration of limbs I wonder if it works better there and maybe for spinal cord injuries than for people with acne scars.
I wonder if it is a proteolytic enzyme?
My friend says that the scars may show due to fat loss, so maybe thats the reason? If there is something to be able to regnerate the fat, I think it might solve this problem.
I believe your friend is correct when talking about scars like ice picks. In that case, something like autologous treatments like harvesting fat and injecting them in the site needed as outlined by this professional here may be needed.
Be a quality time to release its reveal IMO.
Absolutely. In all likelihood, asking any ACell trained physician will point you in the right direction in terms of using the treatment on older scars.
It's coming!
I wonder if it is a proteolytic enzyme?
My studies on Serrapeptase have led me to believe that it will be a topical form of this drug (hence the light dusting comment in the article above). So yes, it is most likely a chemically engineered proteolytic enzyme. Good call.
I wonder whether there has been any progress with Sgt. Shilo Harris's thumb (soldier in the US military) testing A-Cell's pig bladder; the article is dated 19th June 2008:
"Four weeks later, Shilo showed me the new growth that looks like a pink bump.
"Now he has more finger than he had before already, and so we're just going to keep putting it on and keep going and see what happens," said Dr. Steven Wolf, who is testing the 'pixie dust.'
The powder is from a pig bladder. Doctors believe it can attract his natural stem cells and trick them into regenerating the finger. Doctors here have asked four or five other patients to see if they want 'pixie dust' to regenerate their fingers. They're considering it. Doctors want to try it on 10 people to see how it really works."
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=...&id=6216619
Lee Spievak's finger tip seemed to have regrown within four weeks:
For ten days Mr Spievak put a little on his finger. "The second time I put it on I already could see growth. Each day it was up further. Finally it closed up and was a finger. "It took about four weeks before it was sealed."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7354458.stm
It seems like Sgt. Harris' progress is in line with Spievak's since Harris is missing his entire finger (I assume) whilst Spievak only required the finger tip to regrow back. Seems like Sgt. Harris has grown as much finger as Spievak in the same amount of time which is great...definitely an improvement already, let's hope it keeps growing.
Doctors want to try it on 10 people to see how it really works.
I don't think they will have much trouble finding volunteer over here 
:). I wish they could send us some ACell dust.
so with the army using this in regeneration of limbs I wonder if it works better there and maybe for spinal cord injuries than for people with acne scars.
The scarring response is similar on all parts of the body that scar instead of regeneration, except the brain. If it works on one place that scars it would work on another.
so whats the hold up...whats it going to hurt to say get someone with a acne scarred back that could be used for these treatments at first.personally i dont care too much about my back,but my face really bothers me.i bet most derms never even have heard of this stuff yet.they are still using their useless lasers for acne scarring and charging a fortune.im not getting anymore scar treatments until i find a proven treatment.
I wonder whether there has been any progress with Sgt. Shilo Harris's thumb (soldier in the US military) testing A-Cell's pig bladder; the article is dated 19th June 2008:"Four weeks later, Shilo showed me the new growth that looks like a pink bump.
"Now he has more finger than he had before already, and so we're just going to keep putting it on and keep going and see what happens," said Dr. Steven Wolf, who is testing the 'pixie dust.'
The powder is from a pig bladder. Doctors believe it can attract his natural stem cells and trick them into regenerating the finger. Doctors here have asked four or five other patients to see if they want 'pixie dust' to regenerate their fingers. They're considering it. Doctors want to try it on 10 people to see how it really works."
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=...&id=6216619
Lee Spievak's finger tip seemed to have regrown within four weeks:
For ten days Mr Spievak put a little on his finger. "The second time I put it on I already could see growth. Each day it was up further. Finally it closed up and was a finger. "It took about four weeks before it was sealed."http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7354458.stm
It seems like Sgt. Harris' progress is in line with Spievak's since Harris is missing his entire finger (I assume) whilst Spievak only required the finger tip to regrow back. Seems like Sgt. Harris has grown as much finger as Spievak in the same amount of time which is great...definitely an improvement already, let's hope it keeps growing.
Doctors want to try it on 10 people to see how it really works.I don't think they will have much trouble finding volunteer over here
edited.
Actually I think if they could come up with an injection for the face with the scar eating enzmye that would just dissolve the bad tissue slowly, then as you healed many of us would start to regenerate naturally over a few months, just like dermabrasion patients do, but without any of the horrid side effects. Maybe there would not be full regeneration like with the acell, but improvement without cutting would be great. That was what I was going for when I injected saline under my scars, it was thought to have an action on scar tissue where it broke it up and helped to dissolve it.
Guys, let's not forget that scarring most likely goes all the way into the subcutaneous, fatty tissue underneath the dermis, as that is where follicles originate.
Scarring doesn't most likely go all the way INTO the subcutaneous because the bulk of the infection and the inflammation is on the level of the sebaceous gland and above (which is mid dermis to above).
Follicles aren't in the subcutaneous layer ...after all they are called dermal papillae for a reason. The base of the follicle is at the start of the dermis. So it isn't likely that it goes INTO the subcutaneous layer (possible, but not likely)
hopeseed- I have to disagree. Dermabrasion goes about half way through the dermis and it does not even closely remove all the scar tissue, even on the most superficial of scars. I believe most scars go down in the subcutaneous layer. I could be wrong, but that is what I think.
It could still remove the scar tissue and you still could have a pit because the dermis does not regenerate and on those areas where you had a pit (less dermis to begin with) you actually went deeper realtively to everywhere else. My beliefe is that dermabrasion doesn't work the way we would want it to because the dermis does not regenerate (winks at acell). The pit is missing tissue caused by a scar. If you got rid of the scar, you'd still have missing tissue...you need something to spark regeneration.
Well the dermis does regenerate itself to a certain degree. Dermabrasion destroys half the dermis (the papillary dermis and the top of the reticular dermis). If this didn't regnerate than dermabrasion would be garunteed to destroy your skin.
What do you think they mean by "the procedure thins the skin" when people talk about CO2 and dermabrasion? Thins the skin is in reference to the fact that the dermal layer doesn't regenerate. C02 and dermabrasion destroys dermis and creates a new, flatter, hopefully more appeasing scar. I think the bulk of people believe the reason why the dermis doesn't regenerate because scarring blocks this process. ECMs hopefully block this process and that is why there is excitement in this area ...I refer you to this link:
As you see it has been proven with scaffolds we can get the dermis to regenerate. Now we just have to find the right scaffold that will do it exceptionally well for our purposes.
Absolutely. In all likelihood, asking any ACell trained physician will point you in the right direction in terms of using the treatment on older scars.
I wonder how are we supposed to find an Acell trained physician?
I'm sure by this time next week, when the human grade ACell is available, contacting the company will give us this answer. They'll want us to know who's got the product available.
What do you think they mean by "the procedure thins the skin" when people talk about CO2 and dermabrasion? Thins the skin is in reference to the fact that the dermal layer doesn't regenerate. C02 and dermabrasion destroys dermis and creates a new, flatter, hopefully more appeasing scar. I think the bulk of people believe the reason why the dermis doesn't regenerate because scarring blocks this process. ECMs hopefully block this process and that is why there is excitement in this area ...I refer you to this link:
As you see it has been proven with scaffolds we can get the dermis to regenerate. Now we just have to find the right scaffold that will do it exceptionally well for our purposes.
I agree with you that the dermal layer does not regenerate within normal boundaries. We are excited for ACell due to this. I have more scars than acne remnants on my body. I also have a good amount of stretch marks. I have been researching ACell mainly for this purpose. Some reports that I've read about claim that their striae have been completely erased (after a strong peel). We all know where striae are found... in the dermis. This should definitely lend us some hope as to how potent this new regenerative technique really is.
Absolutely. In all likelihood, asking any ACell trained physician will point you in the right direction in terms of using the treatment on older scars.
I wonder how are we supposed to find an Acell trained physician?
I'm sure by this time next week, when the human grade ACell is available, contacting the company will give us this answer. They'll want us to know who's got the product available.
I called Acell and was forwarded to a gentelman named Ralph. He gave me the number of a cosmetic sugeon in Orlando, FL, Christopher Prevel - 407-352-1818 who is currently using Acell. He is also a researcher at the company. I called his office and his receptionist said that they are only using Acell for surgery wounds (tummy tucks, etc) that don't heal well.
Ralph said that by next month they hope to have a list of surgeons who will be using Acell. Perhaps at least one of them will be willing to use it for scars.
Absolutely. In all likelihood, asking any ACell trained physician will point you in the right direction in terms of using the treatment on older scars.
I wonder how are we supposed to find an Acell trained physician?
I'm sure by this time next week, when the human grade ACell is available, contacting the company will give us this answer. They'll want us to know who's got the product available.
I called Acell and was forwarded to a gentelman named Ralph. He gave me the number of a cosmetic sugeon in Orlando, FL, Christopher Prevel - 407-352-1818 who is currently using Acell. He is also a researcher at the company. I called his office and his receptionist said that they are only using Acell for surgery wounds (tummy tucks, etc) that don't heal well.
Ralph said that by next month they hope to have a list of surgeons who will be using Acell. Perhaps at least one of them will be willing to use it for scars.
It seems like we are just moving into the human use stage. Let's hope it comes with good results and no disappointments.