Acne.org Products
However, I do see a bit of a problem with the scab kind of interfering with the healing process. It seems that the scab impedes the application of ACell.This is why hope recommends keeping a moist healing environment. First hand (kind of a pun), I have experience with a very large wound healing on my palm where I did not bandage it and it was exposed to water every day during healing. It barely scabbed and two weeks later it had healed without a trace. It would be an excellent idea to dress the treated wound with saline once every few days and re-bandage with a waterproof covering.
Spoke with Manning today. He said that Dr. jones is being guided by Acell's VP during the entire process. He also mentioned that if the wound seems to be drying out too much that they could always revise the wound as many times as they need and still continue to have a scarless recovery.
He said that he is 100% confident that there will be no scar and it's just a question of whether or not the skin will regenerate hair. But he is hopefull that it will.
WOOT! This is one important step. Do you have any idea about the recovery time though?
Yes. Manning said that we should see significant healing by week 6. Seeing hair would take between 6 weeks to maybe 12 weeks or more from the time of wounding.
so when do the tests on acne scars begin?
I don't believe that there are any efforts at present by any plastic surgeons or derms to implement Acell into the scar revision process. As far as I understand, Acell doesn't have a lot of money and they aren't performing clinical trials on their own. They depend on people like Dr. Jones to take things into their own hands and create delivery methods for their product.
If someone is going to go ahead and get a procedure like fraxel, CO2 or dermabrasion (all of these should only be considered after much research and consideration. Some involve major risks - especially so with C02 and dermabrasion), then I'd certainly recommend using Acell to accelerate the healing process.
HOWEVER....
If anyone thinks that they're going to get rid of their deeper acne scars to any significant degree with this method, it's just simply not going to happen. Sebaceous follicles on the face often reach into the subcutaneous tissues which lie underneath the dermis, and there is missing tissue all the way down to that level. Simply grinding away the top levels of the defects and slapping some acell over it is NOT going to cause these scars to miraculously FILL IN. There must be an effort to combine innovative surgical techniques (there aren't many in the world of acne scar revision) with the use of these tissue regeneration materials, such as Acell.
To further illustrate this point, I created the illustration that I've uploaded along with this post. I hope it works. If not, I'll upload it to another site and provide a link.
This is also very important for anyone with acne scars to understand:
Follicles 101
There are 3 types of follicles on the body:
1.) Terminal Hair follicles: These hairs have a very thick shaft with mid-sized sebaceous gland located about half way up the hair shaft. These can extend deep into the subcutaneous layer. These follicles are found on the scalp and in the beard & body hair areas. The hairs that come out of these follicles are thick and pigmented.
2.) Vellous Hair Follicles: These are more shallowly located in the mid-deep dermis. These have small sebaceous glands and a tiny colorless ‚Å“peach fuzz‚ hairs. These are usually found all over the body, including the face.
3.) Sebaceous follicles: These follicles have very large sebaceous glands that are located at the bottom of the follicle. They usually have a tiny vellous hair growing from the shaft. These follicles can usually extend into the deep dermis and often into the subcutaneous fat underneath. Because of the great amount of sebum they produce, these are the follicles susceptible to acneic eruptions. They exist in great number on the face, chest, and back - which is why acne mainly occurs in these areas.
Bardia Amirlak, MD, Fellow, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, states that ‚Å“Epidermal appendages are intradermal epithelial structures lined with epithelial cells with the potential for division and differentiation. These are important as a source of epithelial cells, which accomplish re-epithelialization should the overlying epidermis be removed or destroyed in situations such as partial thickness burns, abrasions, or split-thickness skin graft harvesting. Epidermal appendages include sebaceous glands, sweat glands, apocrine glands, mammary glands, and hair follicles. They often are found deep within the dermis, and in the face may even lie in the subcutaneous fat beneath the dermis. This accounts for the remarkable ability of the face to re-epithelialize even the deepest cutaneous wounds.‚
One more thing to add. I am currently forming a non-profit organization that will fund new and existing projects around the globe that are dedicated to researching and developing novel methods for wound healing, skin regeneration, and facial scar revision with the end goal of providing skin restoration with near-perfect fidelity to healthy surrounding tissues. Some people think we're already there with Acell. If we were, then it would mean we could theoretically remove a large portion of someone's facial skin down to the subcutaneous tissues, apply Acell, and in a couple of months, the area would be totally regenerated with near-perfect fidelity to surrounding tissues. In order to have near-perfect fidelity, this means that the newly regenerated skin would have to have the same look and feel as surrounding tissues and have an imperceptible border. Surrounding facial skin tissues normally have as many as 100 follicles per square centimeter and so we'd most likely need the newly regenerated skin to regenerate some degree of follicles to give it the same suppleness and texture. There is a molecule in Acell called Laminin 511 http://med.stanford.edu/news_releases/2008...y/follicle.html which has been shown to signal embryonic stem cells in the skin to start growing hair. There are other projects working with regenerating hair follicles, such as Follica http://www.follicabio.com/ ---- so it's not implausible to conceive of regenerating follicles along with skin.
I don't quite believe Acell is the full answer, but certainly believe it or a product like it is an important piece of the puzzle. However, I could be proven wrong in a few weeks after Dr. Jones's patient heals up completely. Believe me when I say that I'd be ecstatic to be proven wrong in this instance.
I'm in the very beginning of the legal process of setting up my non-profit, but will keep everyone up to date. My plan is to, at some point, use some of the funding to create a research institute dedicated to fostering innovation and creativity towards the development of new surgical techniques and other as of yet non-existent methods (using all the newly emerging tissue regeneration materials) specifically for the purpose of eliminating acne scars. That, however, is a few years down the road. One step at a time. Of course it is my sincere hope that someone will get around to starting something like this before I do (or maybe something it is in the works right now - but I doubt it). However, I'm not going to waste any time waiting and hoping. My efforts are an investment in my future. I want to do everything I can to see to it that -- at the *very, very* longest, 10-15 years down the road, but hopefully **much** sooner (5-8 years) -- there's a set of materials and methods that could restore skin that has been damaged by acne, burns, accidents, surgery, stretchmarks, etc. with near-perfect fidelity to healthy surrounding tissues.
All right, enough writing, time to get to work. : )
Yeah, letas hope so, but as holdontohope reminds us, although we may easily think that weave figured out how to dramatically get rid acne scaring once and for all, thinking still incredibly and unbelievably means nothing. Letas hope we figure it out before we land on Mars.
so when do the tests on acne scars begin?
I don't believe that there are any efforts at present by any plastic surgeons or derms to implement Acell into the scar revision process. As far as I understand, Acell doesn't have a lot of money and they aren't performing clinical trials on their own. They depend on people like Dr. Jones to take things into their own hands and create delivery methods for their product.
If someone is going to go ahead and get a procedure like fraxel, CO2 or dermabrasion (all of these should only be considered after much research and consideration. Some involve major risks - especially so with C02 and dermabrasion), then I'd certainly recommend using Acell to accelerate the healing process.
HOWEVER....
If anyone thinks that they're going to get rid of their deeper acne scars to any significant degree with this method, it's just simply not going to happen. Sebaceous follicles on the face often reach into the subcutaneous tissues which lie underneath the dermis, and there is missing tissue all the way down to that level. Simply grinding away the top levels of the defects and slapping some acell over it is NOT going to cause these scars to miraculously FILL IN. There must be an effort to combine innovative surgical techniques (there aren't many in the world of acne scar revision) with the use of these tissue regeneration materials, such as Acell.
To further illustrate this point, I created the illustration that I've uploaded along with this post. I hope it works. If not, I'll upload it to another site and provide a link.
This is also very important for anyone with acne scars to understand:
Follicles 101
There are 3 types of follicles on the body:
1.) Terminal Hair follicles: These hairs have a very thick shaft with mid-sized sebaceous gland located about half way up the hair shaft. These can extend deep into the subcutaneous layer. These follicles are found on the scalp and in the beard & body hair areas. The hairs that come out of these follicles are thick and pigmented.
2.) Vellous Hair Follicles: These are more shallowly located in the mid-deep dermis. These have small sebaceous glands and a tiny colorless aoepeach fuzza hairs. These are usually found all over the body, including the face.
3.) Sebaceous follicles: These follicles have very large sebaceous glands that are located at the bottom of the follicle. They usually have a tiny vellous hair growing from the shaft. These follicles can usually extend into the deep dermis and often into the subcutaneous fat underneath. Because of the great amount of sebum they produce, these are the follicles susceptible to acneic eruptions. They exist in great number on the face, chest, and back - which is why acne mainly occurs in these areas.
Bardia Amirlak, MD, Fellow, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, states that aoeEpidermal appendages are intradermal epithelial structures lined with epithelial cells with the potential for division and differentiation. These are important as a source of epithelial cells, which accomplish re-epithelialization should the overlying epidermis be removed or destroyed in situations such as partial thickness burns, abrasions, or split-thickness skin graft harvesting. Epidermal appendages include sebaceous glands, sweat glands, apocrine glands, mammary glands, and hair follicles. They often are found deep within the dermis, and in the face may even lie in the subcutaneous fat beneath the dermis. This accounts for the remarkable ability of the face to re-epithelialize even the deepest cutaneous wounds.a
Which physiology, histology, and anatomy books did you consult to make such a graphic? I know every book I have consulted has shown the sebaceous glands in the dermis, and they have described acne as a disease of inflammation of the sebaceous gland ...not the follicle. P. acnes proliferates in the sebaceous gland, not the terminal root of the hair follicle that only tethers to the surface of the subcutaneous (not within).
&imgrefurl= http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v117/n5/fig_tab/5601259f2.html%3Furl%3D/jid/journal/v117/n5/full/5601259a.html&usg=__eR3_W7PwfB-GGllO7k_Ro9mHdQ4=&h=569&w=400&sz=203&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=yddurw6wZlDOmM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=94&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dacne%2Bcunliffe%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3D N" rel="external nofollow"> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt...s%3Den%26sa%3DN
If you go to the link above and look at figures D and H, you will see a plugged sebaceous follicle in back skin. I wish the image were larger!!! Anyways, the sebaceous follicles are clearly located at the same depth as the tiny vellous root which is the tiny dark spot to the left of the sebaceous glands. Also, if you refer to page 138 of the book "Acne" by William James Cunliffe (see attached image entitled Picture 489 - this is a screen capture of one of the pages from his book available online with google books) you will see an actual image of a sebaceous follicle taken from back skin. The sebaceous glands are clearly located at the base of the sebaceous follicle. I've included screen captures of other pages (Picture 490 - Picture 494 --- I won't be able to attach them all in this post but will attach in a subsequent post) dealing with sebaceous follicles from his book as well as a screen capture of some other site (Picture 495) that uses the same kind of illustrations. They don't use any clinical citations, but it's merely to show that there are other sites out there who acknowledge the different kinds of follicles. This link also shows a sebaceous follicle 
As far as how do I know these reach all the way into the subcutaneous, I refer to the quote I posted earlier:
Bardia Amirlak, MD, Fellow, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, states that ‚Å“Epidermal appendages are intradermal epithelial structures lined with epithelial cells with the potential for division and differentiation. These are important as a source of epithelial cells, which accomplish re-epithelialization should the overlying epidermis be removed or destroyed in situations such as partial thickness burns, abrasions, or split-thickness skin graft harvesting. Epidermal appendages include sebaceous glands, sweat glands, apocrine glands, mammary glands, and hair follicles. They often are found deep within the dermis, and in the face may even lie in the subcutaneous fat beneath the dermis. This accounts for the remarkable ability of the face to re-epithelialize even the deepest cutaneous wounds.‚
Not only that but I've read in two different peer-reviewed publications that the average depth of sebaceous follicles on the face is 2-3mm and from other studies I've read, the average thickness of the dermis is around 1-1.5 mm deep (give or take a couple tenths of a millimeter). I have the pdfs somewhere on my computer and am having a hell of a time finding them for some reason. They are articles which I purchased with my own money. I don't have money to burn, but they were purchases that I felt to be important to my self-education of the skin's histology.
If I'm wrong in any of my posts or illustrations, then I first apologize for misleading anyone and secondly would love to be provided with the sources that you have so that I can educate myself.
Hmm.... I guess I can't upload more images tonight. I think there's a limit on this site or something.
Anyways, these are the other pages in the book Acne by William James Cunliffe (viewable through google books online --- not all the pages, but most of them): pages 102, 105, and 209.
Hmm.... I guess I can't upload more images tonight. I think there's a limit on this site or something.
Anyways, these are the other pages in the book Acne by William James Cunliffe (viewable through google books online --- not all the pages, but most of them): pages 102, 105, and 209.
You used the phrase "back skin" in your previous post ...I think we are more concerned what happens to the face. I think back acne is somewhat of a different monster considering it can produce different scarring (ie ivory spots). Also the diagrams you provided did not provide any relatively or diagram the different layers.
http://www.suite101.com/view_image.cfm/351298
holdontohope,
i think i speak for many when i say we appreciate your rigor and research, but for me, i don't think there needs to be any kind of revolution in the cosmetic surgery industry to try a few tests with acell on acne scars. how i envision is that a doctor does a simple excision, but instead of sutures, they let the wound heal with acell. this can be done on a single scar on an isolated area on the face. this way i think there is very little risk.
but i also agree with you that it would benefit everyone to have a little skepticism. i, by no means want to discredit anything mr. manning is saying, but ultimately, he is just a sales rep (it seems) and not a qualified physician. it would be great news if the head scar does in fact heal without any scarring. he seems confident of this fact. it seems to me that in the dr. jones case, the scarring was very minor. if acell is able to provide an improvement from that after seeing such a large incision, then i am optimistic for what it could do for a minor excision operation to treat acne scarring.
my point is that it would be rather simple and risk free to try a test on a single acne scar with acell.
holdontohope,
Great job on the research. I am happy to see that you are dedicated to your ultimate goal.
I have an idea about Acell induced regenerative therapies, however I must caution that I do not have much practical experience with xenogeneic ECMs as of yet. Nonetheless, here's how I believe we may be able to get maximal results with this technology.
1) Isolate stem cells (from adipose tissue, bone marrow, etc... [relatively simple procedure]).
2) By way of cosmetic incisions similar to those performed during facelifts, insert Acell pads underneath the skin. Xenogeneic ECMs can and are frequently implanted, so this should not be problematic.
3) Inject stem cells from step 1 at various depths between the implanted Acell pads and the various dermal layers.
4) Dermabrade the skin (this has the added benefit of stimulating a stem cell repair response that's usually coordinated from the follicles where there is a small but steady supply of pluripotent cells). Except now you'll also have the recently injected stem cells to maximize the process.
5) Apply Acell powder and then the ECM pads onto this abraded skin.
6) Wait, pray and heal... 
This allows there to be internal regeneration and external regeneration that in essence sandwiches the scarred tissues. Theoretically what you'll get is a synergistic effect that is maximally lubricated with the use of the injected stem cells. The stem cells would aid the process by (a) infiltrating the internally implanted and externally placed ECM matrices and (b) differentiating into the the various cell types present in all dermal and subdermal tissues.
holdontohope, we really appreaciate your research so much and we are also very happy to share and discuss what we know and hepefully learn more.. to reach our goal.. which is to get rid of those scars.
Many things were said above, and to be honest i didn't understand everything. If somene can make it more simpler I will be so thankful. But i think the main point is that how deep can the Acell works on scars.
Just a question please for whoever knows.
Is it possible that a person undergoes a very deep dermabration to the depth where it eleminates all the scars, and then use the acell to regenerate all the removed layers with out scarring ??
holdontohope, we really appreaciate your research so much and we are also very happy to share and discuss what we know and hepefully learn more.. to reach our goal.. which is to get rid of those scars.
Many things were said above, and to be honest i didn't understand everything. If somene can make it more simpler I will be so thankful. But i think the main point is that how deep can the Acell works on scars.
Just a question please for whoever knows.
Is it possible that a person undergoes a very deep dermabration to the depth where it eliminates all the scars, and then use the acell to regenerate all the removed layers with out scarring ??
If you refer back a page or two, your will see that in clinical studies of ANIMALS, wounds to the bone saw a full regeneration to the fur level. Meaning all the adipose tissue, dermis layers, and follicles regenerated. Now, animals ARE better healers than humans, but results like this would not usually be seen by a natural healing. So it is apparent to me that the Acell did in fact have a hand in that.
Now, if that's truly the case and Acell truly regenerates what SHOULD be there, I think as far as simple soft tissues, possibilities are limitless [YES I KNOW THIS IS AN EXAGGERATION AND NOT ENTIRELY TRUE DUE TO SEMANTICS LOL].
I feel like excision would be the best method (but I am no doctor), as I think completely cutting out the scar tissue and letting it grow back normally would yield the best results. As far as dermabrassion goes idk... I think it would have to be EXTREMELY deep to trigger access to the blood supply (which I think it needs?) But idk...dermabrasion scares me lol
Zhou it has 'not' been demonstrated that animals are better healers than humans animals.
What has been demonstrated clinically is that we have different ranging metabolisms, however a metabolism has nothing to do with scar free healing regeneration mechanism. The tissue scarring/regeneration mechanism is different from the metabolism mechanism.
It has been demonstrated with trials that all animals have a different metabolism and react to drugs built for purposes that are not to do with scarring. differently. And a metabolistic mechanism is not a scarring/regeneration mechanism and drugs developed for a metabolistic mechanism, their percentage of success or failure has nothing to do with a simple scarring regeneration mechanisms success/failure.
And the logic I have is, unlike a metabolistic mechanism, the scarring/regeneration mechanismis is a very simple mechanism involving inflammation, fibrosis, which all leads to ECM/cross linked denatured ECM. And if you can inhibit the scar (which has been done) you can even build organs with ECM blastema material.
Here is some logic for you to think about:
There are fewer creatures on the planet who scar than regenerate, we share an ancestor with all the animals that scar, who have this simple mechanism. This shows you a shared trait with regards to this simple mechanism.
Regarding ECM
Acellular ECM is universal, however the pig is more related to the human than a dog or horse. Porcine ECCM has been tested on a pig, this would mean is you followed on from that logic, the porcine ECM should actually work better on humans. However as ECM regenerates universally, what tissue should be there on any creature... That means the dog and horse probably does not need to worry.
holdontohope, we really appreaciate your research so much and we are also very happy to share and discuss what we know and hepefully learn more.. to reach our goal.. which is to get rid of those scars.
Many things were said above, and to be honest i didn't understand everything. If somene can make it more simpler I will be so thankful. But i think the main point is that how deep can the Acell works on scars.
Just a question please for whoever knows.
Is it possible that a person undergoes a very deep dermabration to the depth where it eliminates all the scars, and then use the acell to regenerate all the removed layers with out scarring ??
If you refer back a page or two, your will see that in clinical studies of ANIMALS, wounds to the bone saw a full regeneration to the fur level. Meaning all the adipose tissue, dermis layers, and follicles regenerated. Now, animals ARE better healers than humans, but results like this would not usually be seen by a natural healing. So it is apparent to me that the Acell did in fact have a hand in that.
Now, if that's truly the case and Acell truly regenerates what SHOULD be there, I think as far as simple soft tissues, possibilities are limitless [YES I KNOW THIS IS AN EXAGGERATION AND NOT ENTIRELY TRUE DUE TO SEMANTICS LOL].
I feel like excision would be the best method (but I am no doctor), as I think completely cutting out the scar tissue and letting it grow back normally would yield the best results. As far as dermabrassion goes idk... I think it would have to be EXTREMELY deep to trigger access to the blood supply (which I think it needs?) But idk...dermabrasion scares me lol
It is because animals in general do not develop hypertrophic scars.
Keloids are also unique to humans.
That's why there was a lack of animal models in studying hyprtrophic scars. which impeded the devlopment of scar-reduction drugs.
nimals ARE better healers than humans, but results like this would not usually be seen by a natural
Has it been demonstrated that "animals ARE better healers than humans" ....more specifically the types of animals that Acell has been used on?
have an idea about Acell induced regenerative therapies, however I must caution that I do not have much practical experience with xenogeneic ECMs as of yet. Nonetheless, here's how I believe we may be able to get maximal results with this technology.
1) Isolate stem cells (from adipose tissue, bone marrow, etc... [relatively simple procedure]).
2) By way of cosmetic incisions similar to those performed during facelifts, insert Acell pads underneath the skin. Xenogeneic ECMs can and are frequently implanted, so this should not be problematic.
3) Inject stem cells from step 1 at various depths between the implanted Acell pads and the various dermal layers.
4) Dermabrade the skin (this has the added benefit of stimulating a stem cell repair response that's usually coordinated from the follicles where there is a small but steady supply of pluripotent cells). Except now you'll also have the recently injected stem cells to maximize the process.
5) Apply Acell powder and then the ECM pads onto this abraded skin.
6) Wait, pray and heal...
This allows there to be internal regeneration and external regeneration that in essence sandwiches the scarred tissues. Theoretically what you'll get is a synergistic effect that is maximally lubricated with the use of the injected stem cells. The stem cells would aid the process by (a) infiltrating the internally implanted and externally placed ECM matrices and (b) differentiating into the the various cell types present in all dermal and subdermal tissues.
What a fascinating concept.
A few questions:
1.) As far as "sandwiching" the scarred portion of skin between Acell --- at what layer in the skin would the bottom Acell pad be placed? Would it be at the junction of the dermis and subcutaneous layer? Would it be in the shallow layers of the subcuti? I suppose it's important to know how deep the facial follicles go, as I wonder if there would be negative consequences like the formation of cysts, etc, if the follicles were transected and the bottom layer of the Acell pads were put over them, yet the bottom portion of the transected follicles continued to produce oil. Big run-on sentence, I know, but I hope it makes sense to at least BRD...
2.) So I suppose the most important question, for many reasons regarding acne scar revision, is HOW DEEP DO SEBACEOUS FOLLICLES IN THE FACE REALLY GO?
There's been a little bit of debate about this on the board over the last couple of days. I've read some peer-reviewed and published articles in various dermatological publications that suggest that sebaceous follicles in the face extend into the subcutaneous tissues. How deep, I'm not sure. I've read in one of these articles that the average length of the sebaceous ducts on the face is 2-3mm. From this I have deduced that sebaceous follicles extend into the subcutaneous layer, and that even the very bottom portion of the sebaceous duct could begin there. If this is so, then acne scarring can reach this far, and the bottom layer of Acell would have to be placed just under the follicles.... I'd really just like to know how deep on average do sebaceous follicles extend into human facial skin. I'm having a hell of a time finding an answer. Do you happen to know for sure, BRD?
Thanks!!!
1.) This is an illustration of what appears to be a run-of-the mill hair follicle like what you'd find in arm skin or on the head, etc (actually the thick hairs on our head tend to go deep into the subcutaneous layer). Sebaceous follicles on the face are very different. They have huge sebaceous glands and a very tiny, translucent vellous hair. This illustration you've posted a link to is probably a pretty accurate depiction of a hair follicle found on the body, but it isn't an accurate depiction of a sebaceous follicle found on the face. There are three distinct types of follicles: Vellous (located in mid to deep dermis; they have a very tiny hair), Terminal (thick, pigmented hairs with a longer root extending as deep as 4mm into the skin), and Sebaceous follicles. All follicles have sebaceous *glands* but only sebaceous follicles have the very large sebaceous glands. Depending on the follicle type and the location, the depth varies. Sebaceous follicles are primarily where acne occurs. I think that electron microscopy images of actual sebaceous follicles, like the one shown below, would be the most helpful in answering the question - either that or getting a plastic surgeon or dermatologist who knows first hand.
2.) I work in marketing & design creating marketing materials for doctors' offices around the country. I've created many medical illustrations and I can tell you that you don't have to be an expert in anatomy to get hired to do a medical illustration. I can tell you also that many medical illustrations are created not from looking at the actual organ, but rather take their anatomical cues from other illustrations as well as written descriptions. There are other artists who have even used some of my illustrations and copied them almost exactly. The only reason they re-did them at all is for copyright purposes. However, this illustration you posted looks similar to a Netter illustration, and he was a brilliant, legit medical illustrator. But even so, the illustration still doesn't appear to be an illustration of a sebaceous follicle but rather a hair follicle that you'd find somewhere else on the body.
3.) The depth and size of sebaceous follicles varies depending on your sex, age, and other genetic factors.
I've found electron microscopic images of sebaceous follicles but they've been so close up that they don't show the surrounding tissues around the glands so I can't tell if they're rooted in the deep dermis or subcutaneous.
I know we're getting a little off topic with this "follicle" debate, but it's really important that we understand how deep in the skin facial follicles go. This way we can know how deep acne scarring can go. It's very relevant to the discussion of acne scar revision.
http://www.drrobertjones.com/acell.html
Ok that last updated pic was Nov 7.
They say it will take 6 weeks to regenerate the skin and 6-12 weeks for the hair( If it does ).
If it does regenerate all of skin and hair, what does it mean? Does it mean scarless healing? Does it mean it can be used for acne scars? Sorry for asking, but you guys give conflicting opinions. And, I wish someone could explain to me clearly what would it mean if we have positive results.First, theres a group of guys who are very positive acell is the cure for scars. I was riding on the bandwagon before another group popped out and say acell would not work for scars.
Both sides make valid points and both sides are positive they are right. On one side, we all know we have Kirk, a very intellectual individual, he made a good point that ECM is what makes up our skin and would regenerate any soft tissue adjacent to it. Holdontohope then made a good opposing point that most of the scarring of our face extends to the subcutaneous fat layers, and it wouldnt be possible to debrade to that level and simply put on acell and hope the scars completely fill in. It makes some sense too.
So, It becomes somewhat of a conflict, a paradox. We have ECM that can regenerate all of soft tissue, but since the scarring extends to the subcutaneous levels it is too deep and not practical for usage? But isnt the fatty tissues also considered soft tissue? We also have pics of the animals regenerating the fat layers too( Again this come to the point where one side argues that animals heal better, and another that humans and animals have same healing mechanism ).
Seriously, Im no medical student and sometimes I get confused by some of the medical jargons used. But, whats more confusing is the tons of different information on this forum. Its like a person with no prior knowledge stepping into a Creationism Vs Evolution kind of debate. Who to believe? Get what I mean?
http://www.drrobertjones.com/acell.html
Ok that last updated pic was Nov 7.
They say it will take 6 weeks to regenerate the skin and 6-12 weeks for the hair( If it does ).
If it does regenerate all of skin and hair, what does it mean? Does it mean scarless healing? Does it mean it can be used for acne scars? Sorry for asking, but you guys give conflicting opinions. And, I wish someone could explain to me clearly what would it mean if we have positive results.First, theres a group of guys who are very positive acell is the cure for scars. I was riding on the bandwagon before another group popped out and say acell would not work for scars.
Both sides make valid points and both sides are positive they are right. On one side, we all know we have Kirk, a very intellectual individual, he made a good point that ECM is what makes up our skin and would regenerate any soft tissue adjacent to it. Holdontohope then made a good opposing point that most of the scarring of our face extends to the subcutaneous fat layers, and it wouldnt be possible to debrade to that level and simply put on acell and hope the scars completely fill in. It makes some sense too.
So, It becomes somewhat of a conflict, a paradox. We have ECM that can regenerate all of soft tissue, but since the scarring extends to the subcutaneous levels it is too deep and not practical for usage? But isnt the fatty tissues also considered soft tissue? We also have pics of the animals regenerating the fat layers too( Again this come to the point where one side argues that animals heal better, and another that humans and animals have same healing mechanism ).
Seriously, Im no medical student and sometimes I get confused by some of the medical jargons used. But, whats more confusing is the tons of different information on this forum. Its like a person with no prior knowledge stepping into a Creationism Vs Evolution kind of debate. Who to believe? Get what I mean?
Tgan there is no argument to me as I know ECM, without denaturing regenerates every tissue and has done so for thousands of years. It is more literate on a micro scale than any human.
Tgan there is no argument to me as I know ECM, without denaturing regenerates every tissue and has done so for thousands of years. It is more literate on a micro scale than any human.
Tgan, until we see the results, we just won't know. I say I'm skeptical that Acell will regenerate everything back to perfect fidelity with surrounding tissues, but I also say that I just don't know. I really don't.
Kirk, if you're right, and denatured ECM (do you concur that Acell is denatured?) will do the job, then I couldn't be happier.
I guess it's back to waiting....
It is because animals in general do not develop hypertrophic scars.Keloids are also unique to humans.
That's why there was a lack of animal models in studying hyprtrophic scars. which impeded the devlopment of scar-reduction drugs.
nimals ARE better healers than humans, but results like this would not usually be seen by a natural
Has it been demonstrated that "animals ARE better healers than humans" ....more specifically the types of animals that Acell has been used on?
Thank you. I haven't been on in a few days to defend that statement lol =P