Jump to content
Search In
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


Veteran Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by seabs135

  1. 16 minutes ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    Nobody is looking for re-assurance. I've have mentioned this before, you cannot say anything about Sunogel until clinical trials are underway and we truly see its potential. Stop re-igniting an old debate which you clearly lost. 

    It seems the only person looking for re-assurance is only you unfortunately. You are trying to promote a product which states scarless healing in theory only but has yet to be tested or proven. Stop assuming or claiming false information without facts. A few published papers by its maker, Dr. Sun, and a pic of a finger cut that is less than a cm are not enough to prove the effectiveness of the product itself without real results. 

    You are no better than all the other posters who were once talking about Polarity, Recell, etc. and how revolutionary they were. Stop giving out false hopes. If you feel like discrediting other posters by claiming they are looking for re-assurance, I've got news for you, you make yourself look bad. Also, claiming that the product should work because the scientist behind it has a burden does not hold. 

    I do not wish to argue with you any further regarding this topic. You can assume many things but at the end, we both just want our acne scars to be eliminated. Unfortunately, you want back the baby skin you were born with and that you will never achieve even with scarless healing. 


    If something states 'complete regeneration'/scar free healing in its information, like sunogel does then that something has a scientific/engineering burden to upkeep. I will keep referencing that scientific/engineering burden for them publically... You see, this is simple, I want people like this to be funded, I want them to progress 'fast,' very fast... I will also not be wasting my time talking about the 'future' or alternative percentage improvement products to scar free healing on a scar free healing message board; whilst at the same time pretending the burden is much lower than 'scar free healing,' as doing this would be akin to watching paint dry...


  2. 13 hours ago, AlexaderZ77 said:

    Hi guys!

    I’ve been following this thread for some time and i have a question for you guys. How long until there will be a product that can completly regenerate skin ? Will it happen within next 10 years?

    Im asking couse I have giant scar on my back from surgery and laser didnt do shit even though i had 4 treatments with it

    This thread is really the wrong place to ask this question at the minute and it has been for a long time... If you look at the thread carefully the thread has two or more topics going simultaneously... One topic is scar free healing and the other topic is 'percentage improvements/' or future percentage improvements. So if you look at the thread, one topic is the discussion of scar free healing/complete regeneration/scarless healing, (all used interchangeably) hence perfect regeneration; and the other topic is future scar improvement products or percentage improvements, which has nothing to do with cited scar free healing. IMO things ;like percentage improvement products should really have their own topic. The topic scar free healing cannot be accurately discussed whilst people keep talking about percentage improvement products. It is that simple.

    To look at the topic of scar free healing you have to look at things historically and cite progression without distraction... An example of information for you to cite would be: in 2011 scar free healing was highlighted with a hydrogel from John Hopkins university. Or you could talk about the fact that small wounds do not scar. Or you could discus Sunogel, which has brought forward a paper about complete regeneration in 2016. Sunogel is a class 2 device, a biodegradable material, not a drug and therefore has a very agile route to market. https://www.sunogel.com/pipeline/

    Unfortunately when you talk about scar free healing on this thread it tends to be drowned out by diversions. You tend to be given information about percentage improvement products, or diversions about 'the future.' This maybe because people are looking for reassurance... However sadly, these discussions tend to knock the topic off-topic.



  3. 3 hours ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    Nope, I never said it is a problem of the future. I just said we have to be realistic for now. FS2 promotes scar free healing according to its makers for new wounds and improvement of existing scars. It is in clinical trials unlike Sunogel. People behind FS2 might release a product in 2019, that's next year. You can see the second Youtube video posted this month where the company's representative suggests that. Sunogel is still searching for a partner. 

    We don't know what FS2 can actually do just like we don't know what Sunogel will do. The hydrogel has yet to be tested on bigger wounds so your affirmations of it being 100% scarless healing are pretentious. Two papers and a pic of a small finger cut are not enough to state that it truly works. Sunogel doesn't work on existing scars at all. FS2 at least improves them. It prevents scars in new wounds, so it belongs on this forum just like all the other alternatives who claim to be as such.

    Claiming Dr. Sun has a " burden", so this is the only reason why his hydrogel should work is completely outrageous. You cannot expect people to believe you when you make such statements. So just because a scientist has a burden when they say something we should all conclude that their discovery is bulletproof. You don't make sense.

    I'm a scientist myself and mistakes are part of life. How many times do recalls happen? How many scientists have done wrong and risked it all. Again, I'll give you Polarity as an example. But again this goes back to what you said before. Not all scientists are impartial and jump on the cash when they see an opportunity. We are all humans after all and rotten apples are everywhere. 

    To achieve scar free healing with Sunogel you must excise the scar before applying it. Plastic surgeons are moving away from this practise and doctors rarely excise undiseased skin nowadays for risk of infection.

    Polarity used a similar approach. They were removing existing scars on patients while in clinical trials and applying SkinTE on top. The results that came out months later are not scarless. They always claimed they can regenerate skin with full appendages. Where are they now? Nobody talks about them anymore and everyone who did is either gone or completely avoids the subject when they are questioned about it. You mentioned also Polarity had a burden. Well, they completely missed their chance or they just tried to scam people. I think the later is more plausible. 

    You must be involved with Sunogel because it seems I hit a sensitive spot everytime I mention it or try to criticize it. That's how I see things. I however am not involved with FS2. I'm impartial and realistic. Wether it works or not, I cannot say but Sunogel will definately get you a big fat 0% improvement on your current scar thats been around since you were a kid. Now, let that sink in for a moment. 

    Stop discrediting anything else that's not Sunogel. Also, you seem to have a big bias towards anything else that's not.

    I also believe that everyone's interpretation of scarless healing is different which is also something you also agreed upon. So, anything that promotes scarless healing or improves the appearance of scars to make them invisible deserves to be discussed here. 

    And to end this pointless conversation, I hope you find what you are looking for one day. At the end, we all have been scarred to some degree to be here looking for alternatives. 

    FS2 does not bring scar free healing. There is no scientific document that show it brings scar free healing... No matter how many times you say it might, it really doesn't bring scar free healing in its papers. It has set its own standard. Without being rude to you, this argument with regards to FS2, is silly. I have not discredited FS2, I have, if you like, described what is written on the tin. Believe you and me, if the science stated 'complete regeneration,' or 'scarless healing,' or 'scar free healing,' I'd be stating this scientific paper claimed 'scar free healing.'

    Sunogel claimed in a scientific paper,' it got 'complete regeneration.' Therefor it has set its own standard of scar free healing. Without being rude to you again, this argument is also silly. 

    Sunogel is a 'device.' Not a drug. Devices take months to get approved. Drugs, on the other hand take roughly 12 year for approval.  

    I'm not involved with anyone. I will proportionally criticise Sunogel, like anything else, if it fails with its scar free healing 'burden' it has given itself. In the mean time I will be referencing its burden.

    The interpretation for 'scar free healing,' or 'complete regeneration' is, 'perfect tissue;' not 'nearly scar free healing,' but unambiguous complete tissue.


  4. 1 hour ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    What bias I'm a trying to promote and what re-assurance am I looking for? I don't understand. I'm criticizing Sunogel and Dr. Sun's procastanation. His inability to move things forward make me question many things.

    If you are a poster boy of this product and you firmly believe it truly works, then that is your belief and you cannot change mine.

    Needless to say, my opinions about something do not necessarily have to be accepted by everyone. However, it seems you want to impose your beliefs on others. Are you looking for re-assurance? 

    The ability to move things along is clearly not in Dr Suns control. Dr Sun has shown science that brings complete regeneration in the past with a paper... He has given himself a burden.

    You are constantly promoting that scar free healing is a 'future problem' on an internet message board about 'scar free healing...' You are constantly trying to give an impression that this is hopeless. I know one thing here, if I thought this was 'hopeless', or this was a 'future problem,' I'd certainly not be wasting my time on the message board trying to get people to believe this is a 'future problem.' Personally, I'd rather watch paint dry. I'd move on for the next 10years...


  5. 5 hours ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    People need to be realistic and not believe everything they hear. Nobody said that scars won't be dealt with in a few years time but for now, nothing exists that makes them completely go away. That is a fact.

    Unfortunately, you are the one coming here claiming that a certain product acheives scarless healing. You are the one claiming that Dr. Sun is not moving things forward. So how is that re-assuring? 

    If you believe Sunogel truly works, then that is your business. You don't have to force everyone to believe it truly does. It seems you are doing the same of what you accuse others of. 

    Scarless healing has been attained probably numerous times but they probably won't release a drug or product at this time as lasers are dominating the market. Dermatologists will lose a lot. You said that yourself. On the contrary, plastic surgeons will be ecstatic. Also, the definition of scarless healing changes on perception which is something you state numerous times. 

    Your arguments don't hold and you need to stop dissemanating false information about other posters. At the end, everyone just wants the scars to go away. Any method is good but when you have others moving ahead doing clinical trials and others making bold claims doing nothing for the last 2 years, it's a little strange.

    Don't forget, many have made false statements and failed miserably. FS2 and OLX101 may fail also which I believe are scar free which is what they claim. Nobody said that everything is set in stone. However, it is reassuring that some scientists are moving forward. 

    People were once raving about Polarity. Almost all are gone, never to be seen again. 

    I have not made any false statements anywhere.

    My position is very simple and straight forward. Lets number my statements: and take a quick look:

    1. 'Dr Sun, and John Hopkins have brought out papers that showed scar free healing.' He is a scientist with a burden. In no where have I twisted that information... 2. 'Scar free healing was proven in 1997, when it was shown small wounds do not scar, therefore it is not a future problem we can all day dream about.' In no where have a twisted that information. 3. 'FS2 is a percentage improvement/scar improvement drug. It does not bring scar free healing. No scientific paper has claimed complete regeneration. And as it is a drug it will have go through 3 phases of trials.' In no way have I twisted information anywhere.

    You keep promoting this as if scar free healing is x years away. IMO, this shows you either want reassurance, or you persistently want to divert information long term for some bias. I know if I thought scar free healing was a future problem I would not be posting on this board every day telling people it is a future problem - I'd just be getting on with my life... Think about this last paragraph for one second.

  6. 3 hours ago, slave of jesus said:

    I wonder why people don't believe in scar free come to this section ? at least, if you didn't believe it's your business but don't discourage those who believe it especially with the current scientific evidence. 50 years ago who would have thought that people would have the possibility to call with a wireless cell phone... things happen sooner than we think. just because the media doesn't report it doesn't mean there's no good progress in scar free.

    It is strange. It is like they are either wanting reassurance (which imo is probable), or, they, nefariously, are interested in diverting information in a certain way to suit a long term bias... I know if I did not believe the facts I have seen about scar free healing being a fact, I would not come on this board determined to explain to the many, 'it is x years away' every day - it would be like watching paint dry, imo. Repeatedly telling people it is not coming would be like watching paint dry, it would drive me mad... 

  7. 17 minutes ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    It seems we are on the same page however you are expecting something that will not happen anytime soon. Sunogel will take a long time before it launches, for now we got FS2, might be here in 5 years tops. I'll take the improvement for now and I believe most of us would then wait on Dr. Sun and his miracle product which may never launch. 

    We are partially on the same page. But Sunogel is a device. I once read medical devices take weeks to 4 years to come to market. Weeks for a class 1 device and 3 to 4 years for a class 3 device. It is a device that could also use a digestable material as a predicate, which would make an even faster track to market... There are plenty of digestable materials to predicate it with too. A predicate would mean the device would be classed as a class 2 device too. To boot it has also done it's animal testing. However for what ever reason, maybe they are walking on egg shells to not offend others, they have pencilled in the approved for market stage as 2021. FS2, as a percentage improvement product, I have no interest in it. However, you are clearly looking at many more years to market than a device, being that it is a drug and it has to go through 3 phases of trials.

  8. 3 hours ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    I am perplexed by your comment. I always said that scarless healing is possible however FS2 and OLX101 seem to be way ahead of all the other things that claim to be scarless currently. 

    Sunogel has been around for some time, there is no progress and maybe it's time we moved on. That's all I am saying. There has been many other things in the past that claimed to be scarless that failed and fooled us all. Then you claim these scientists have a burden but like I said they are accountable for what they say. Polarity is an example of a probable failure to come and the scientists behind it risk losing a lot more. So why lie? 

    You showed me papers of scarless healing but two involve Sunogel. They are not impartial. There are no other papers that back up your claim that scarless healing is possible way back from 1996. You corrected yourself and then said 1997. All I saw from Sunogel was a pic of a finger cut that healed which was under a cm. It healed without a scar after applying Sunogel. As I mentioned before, 2 mm wounds heal without scarring. What are we suppose to conclude from that? 

    The idea behind all this is that we don't know what FS2 will bring to the table. Let's wait for the results of the clinical trials before we start claiming that they are not scarless. They have taken a different approach from anyone else. They seem legit. 

    Scarless healing changes depending on perception as you mentioned before. Scarless healing and scar free healing are similar but mean different things. So if FS2 can attain 90% improvement and the scar is invisible to the human eye, why would that be an issue? After all, waiting for Sunogel for the last 2 years to start clinical trials has not brought us any closer to eliminating our scars. 

    Scar free healing, or complete regeneration is the return of perfect tissue. I and others are only interested in scar free healing. The problem with percentage improvements is that 90% to you could be 10% to someone else and you cannot accurately measure what x% is. You also have the fact that peoples perceptions will change day by day. Example on one day someone may think the scar improvement is 10% then on day three they may think it is 70%, then on day 5 think it is 20%.

    Sunogel has claimed complete regeneration in a paper... Moving on from Sunogel, as you want people to do, would be akin to creating or conditioning mass amnesia with regards to historical documents which show scar free healing... I also referenced you to sunogel papers that claimed complete regeneration. These papers are signed off, they are probative. The people who signed them off have burdened themselves. With regards to 2mm small wounds. Small wounds heal without scarring, I referenced you to the paper that scientifically proved it in 1997. You can conclude from that, that you can remove tissue, and the replacement tissue will not be scar. You can conclude from these references, scar free healing has been achieved.

    We do know what FS2 brings to the table. We can deduce, FS2 will 'not' bring scar free healing to the table, it will bring percentage improvements. FS2 has never claimed to have brought scar free healing. They have not brought any paper out that shows they have brought scar free healing in anyway. The papers, the probative documents, do not show they have completely removed scarring... It is reasonable to state that it is a percentage improvement product. 



  9. 26 minutes ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    I have read those papers in the past so you brought nothing new to the topic of scarless healing. Small wounds less than 2 mm do not scar anyways. Do you have a scar after getting blood taken with a needle? No. 

    I have deliberately brought nothing new to the conversation. You asked for some of my sources which show scar free healing and therefore end the argument that scar free healing is a problem of the future... 

  10. 30 minutes ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    You just restate what I say in different wording. I would like to see those papers stating scarless healing in 1996, 2011 and 2016 by the way. You seem to acknowledge that scientists have made mistakes and have changed their wording numerous times about a particular product for scarring. It just reinforces what I have been claiming. 

    I live my life with my acne scars and come here time to time to see what's the next big thing in scarless healing advancement. I would like for my acne scars to disappear one day but many of us just accept them and move on. Claiming I'm wasting my life away doesn't bring anything to the conversation. 

    I have not restated or reinforced anything you have said in different wording. I said if say, Polarity have done something, then that has no bearing on Dr Sun, who has absolutely nothing to do with Polarity. Just like you have nothing to do with your a neighbours business. I also mentioned Polarity have changed what they mean by scar free healing as time went by, which is true. Polarityte tried to change the meaning of complete regeneration. However complete regeneration to everyone else, means perfect tissue. 

    You are literally wishing your life away waiting for a pipeline with percentage improvements to be fulfilled. 

    Btw, here are the papers:

    The above paper, come out in 1997(when I said 1996 I meant 1997) and highlights small wounds to do scar in tissues that scar:

    Cass DL, Sylvester KG, Yang EY, Crombleholme TM, Adzick NS. Myofibroblast persistence in fetal sheep wounds is associated with scar formation. J Pediatr Surg. 1997;32(7):1017-1021; discussion 1021-1022.

    The next paper is the dextran hydrogel:

    Dextran hydrogel scaffolds enhance angiogenic responses and promote complete skin regeneration during burn wound healing

    The next paper is Dr Sun's 2017 paper, though Dr Sun has brought out a few papers that you can see on the sunogel website:

    Pro‐Regenerative Hydrogel Restores Scarless Skin during Cutaneous Wound Healing, September 2017 Advanced Healthcare Materials, Guoming Sun



  11. 1 hour ago, MyBeautifulScars said:

    There has been many claims that scarless healing has been achieved numerous times. I can think of Avotermin, Recell, Juvista and recently Polarity. When you make such bold statements, you need to back yourself up. Many researchers behind these projects who tried to fool people. 

    If you can present us with those papers you claim you have from way back in 1996, 2011 and 2016, it would give a sense of hope for everyone. However, you make such statements without any concrete evidence of any sorts. 

    As for scars, everyone has them. Some have bigger more horrendous scars than others. Everyone will benefit from a scarless healing product. You said it yourself that Dr. Sun is taking an incredible amount of time to market this "miracle" product. As for FS2, they claim it stops scarring in new wounds and improves existing scars. 

    I am not a poster boy of FS2 but they seem quite legit. As for those who believe they can achieve scarless healing in 2 years, I've got bad news for them. It's called being realistic and setting expectations.

    FS2 is a start. In a few years, scars might be a thing of the past. But for now, if FS2 truly works even if it is 50% improvement, I believe people should be quite enthusiastic. It can help people and for those who can't settle for that, then I believe they have other issues that scarless healing would never achieve anyways. 

    The thing is scientists/engineers can try to fool people all they want, as scientists they understand they live and die by the 'burden.' There was a famous case a few year back were a scientist did lie, and this brought tragic consequences, people lost their status as scientists. And sadly one scientist even took his life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus-triggered_acquisition_of_pluripotency

    Btw you frame it that Avotermin, Juvista as once stating 'complete regeneration.' They never done anything of the sort. They caught the imagination with slick brochures but they never claimed complete regeneration. Renovo was a company that was built on people believing scar free healing was the future. The products that Renovo brought out were products that talked up things like 'percentage improvements' or things like 'scar improvement'. They had a massive time wasting pipeline. I can remember once reading that beyond the drugs they were trialling, they had something like 20+ 'percentage improvement' products in line. Imagine waiting for an entity to fulfil 20 percentage improvements. Therefor you can clearly deduce they had no intention of bringing out 'complete regeneration' in our life time. Their schtick was to make everyone believe in percentage improvements and get you to buy the percentage improvements going on their impressive sounding bombast. You can clearly deduce their whole operation depended on me and you and others thinking this is the future. Btw juvista 'was tested for 5% improvement using the human eye. It failed a phase two trial. And it failed its phase three trial. It was tested against sailine.

    Recell has never claimed to bring regeneration to full thickness wounds. 

    You mention Polarity. These guys have been given a burden. They have shown slick brochures. They have also, over time changed what they mean by the term 'complete regeneration.' None the less they have a burden.

    You are using a very broad brush and unfairly restricting Dr Sun who himself is burdened, and is not accountable for any mistakes or whatever was done by others with no connection to himself, if they happened to have made mistakes. 

    FS2 is a percentage improvement product. You are wasting your life away wanting wish fulfilment from percentage improvements.

  12. On ‎12‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 12:07 AM, MyBeautifulScars said:

    Complete regeneration won't happen for a while. We are just starting to do face and hand transplants. In a few years leg transplants for sure. There is still no effective cure for AIDS or cancer, just treatments that prevent or slow down the progression. I believe these topics are well ahead for researchers to solve than scarless healing for the moment. We need to be realistic.

    FS2 may not be scarless but if it improves scars, it is a start. Nothing out there can claim to do that presently and it prevents scarring in new wounds as per its makers, so we can say that they are a scarless healing product for now, for new wounds anyways. They are ahead of anyone else presently along with OLX101. They are doing clinical trials and are careful with their wording. They seem pretty legit unlike Polarity that you were once a supporter of. Whatever happened to them? They seem like another scam if anything to me. 

    I am aware that Dr. Sun developed a hydrogel while at John Hopkins. It failed at first and he continued. He founded Sunogel, another company with a hydrogel he claims truly works.

    Gemstone however has a lot of researchers from John Hopkins who came together. Many worked with Dr. Sun before. Gemstone began after Dr. Sun left John Hopkins. They have funding and a lot more opportunities to grow. Dr. Sun is looking for a company in order to conduct trials. Do you believe a company would invest in a product that we don't know truly works?

    It seems that this hydrogel everybody is talking about is well behind of the competition for the moment. If Dr. Sun is unable to pitch effectively his product in 2019, I believe it would be time to forget about Sunogel for a while. 

    FS2 seems to be the closest thing to achieving scarless healing for now. Let's see what this product can do before we jump to conclusions so fast. 

    Complete regeneration occurred in 2011 with a hydrogel... This is a fact... Dr Sun in testing also claimed complete regeneration in 2016 with another tunable hydrogel. He brought forward a paper for his disruption. This is a fact. (These are probative signed off documents...) Dr Sun is also a scientist/engineer with a burden. All scientists/engineers that state something burden themselves. When a scientist claims something, for the sake of progression, you should always keep him to the burden. This is a game of high stakes.

    Dr Sun has 'not' been given funding for his disruption. This is a fact. Why? we do not know... You presume and hint that his lack of investment is because his product is poor? As if a lack of investment means therefore highlights the product is a waste of time... You seem keen to influence people to absorb this belief? Whereas I and maybe others are very suspicious that the lack of funding, and the procrastinating, is because it is too disruptive to people who may have invested a lot of opposing money elsewhere. 

    People have invested money and turf in percentage improvements... The idea of 'complete regeneration' is absolutely disruptive to the idea of 'percentage improvements'... Just like a lorry was absolutely disruptive to the horse and cart... FS2 has never got complete regeneration only percentage improvements... Not one scientific paper claims complete regeneration with regards to FS2. As Golfpanther has stated, I also have no doubt FS2 will have a use somewhere but this promises nothing I want. I have also read someone some one state 40%-90% going on what the human eye can see... This is very soft science and not good enough for me and many people, I bet, who read the scarless healing thread... Regarding myself, the statement 40 to 90% annoys me and insults me. Just to give you the subjectivity concept, If your wife or partner wanted 40% blue paint for your child's wall I bet her shade of 40% would be different to what you would think 40% was with your eye... What is 40% improvement to you may be 90% to someone else's subjectivity. Percentage improvement as an idea, going by the human eye is sloppy.

    Then you have the human bias thing with money. Example, what would someone who invested money in a percentage improvement product be incentivised to do? IMO there would be a clear incentivisation for the entity to protect its investment and to centrally control or gate keep what information people get. Without being arsey to you, and I guess you are probably not, but for the sake of asking the question, are you gatekeeping? You see, using probative documents, we can see scar free healing was achieved in 2011 and 2016. (I could show something as far back as 1996 but I'll leave that for now.), You ignore these probative documents and you go on about FS2 as if it is the state of the art and the year is 2004 again... And as if we should all give and absorb that this is a fact... Quite a few times you have also slipped something in and tried to get people to forget about the hydrogel too... (No one in there right mind, who is scarred, would forget about something that has shown complete regeneration in scientific papers) I guess though, this is just harmless message board enthusiasm.

    Anyway, so you are suggesting getting all the board forgo looking at something that has shown scar free treatment in the past(ignore the probative documents), loose this pushy supply and demand expectancy we have, that has built up over time; and then look long sighted to the future, for something that brings pointless 'percentage improvements'?

    You seem to be suggesting people look at the shiny object of future 'percentage improvement' advancements and pretend scar free healing has never been observed in the past??? And then buy this expensive FS2 injection/cream at a later date with induced amnesia? Are you suggesting people stop looking at historical dates which highlight scar free healing occurred? (scar free healing occurred 2011 and other dates) Are you suggesting we keep pretending the scar war is ongoing in a 'jam tomorrow, never today' fashion and we must keep propagating 'percentage improvements', and more percentage improvements?



  13. 3 hours ago, Frasier said:

    I wish seabs could talk to him directly. So that we can clear this up once and for all. It is tiresome with all this information back and forth: Does it work or doesnt it?

    No offense Frasier, but I do not want to keep coming to this thread, again and again and again to refute misinformation...
    The hydrogel has proven scar free healing by the fact it has got rete pegs, scar tissue does not get rete pegs... I could go on and on, and on highlighting that and then other people could go on and on obscuring and then misinforming the scientific information from the consensus in a never ending circle. Where time will be wasted and wasted and wasted...
  14. 20 hours ago, Albaneso said:
    work hydrogel for surgical scars ?? According to these data you have presented.

    sorryformyenglish :(
    I was just pointing out that the hydrogel did not scar in the porcine model as the hydrogel got rete pegs. Scars do not have rete pegs.
  15. 46 minutes ago, SunnyX said:

    The dextran hydrogel has been licensed by gemstone biotherapeutics. They tested the hydrogel on pigs which hv similar skin to humans and there they don't anymore say complete regeneration of skin. And they are more looking into chronic wounds. So I guess in humans it does not regenerate normal skin

    I have been looking at this since 2011. In 2011 the hydrogel highlighted complete regeneration. Gemstone have indicated the hydrogel for use in diabetic wounds.  With regards to the porcine testing. In no paper have they disclosed they got incomplete regeneration. In the paper Acellular hydrogels for regenerative burn wound healing: translation from a porcine model they tested a couple of mechanisms which the hydrogel promoted regeneration, this is highlighted in the introduction... In that paper they highlighted the hydrogel got healing with rete pegs, rete pegs are not found in scarring.
  16. 10 hours ago, De Rerum Natura said:

    full regeneration is something not possible, but a 99% improvement of scar appearence theoretically is possible and what the difference between these two? for the patient nothing, for the science, is everything
    full regeneration means that the scar is not a scar anymore, and this is rely on the stem cells or other gene therapy studies.
    fading a scar to the point it wont be noticiable anymore will be something achiveable in the hands of good plastic surgeons in a near future

    Every non injured tissue on your body completely regenerates. Wounds with a diffusion distance less than 2mm can regenerate completely. Tissues that reepithialize in under 2weeks completely regenerate,.. Then you have various scientific papers that have shown complete regeneration that have been shown on this thread..
  17. On ‎06‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 0:56 AM, mjg713 said:

    Ok well if that is the case, is this hydrogel suppose to show complete regeneration? Is this something to be taken seriously or will it be another let down? I am just a little weary about it because it's hard to find any information on it other than this board. On the other hand i would like to believe that we have finally made some progress regarding scars. We have made many medical advances in current years. Do you think anything promising will be developed in Xtime or is this all just wishful thinking?
    Well I take the objective information in the PNAS type journals and scientific statements more seriously than something stated on a message board. Btw I would guess the things you have been let down by are things that use subjective statements that say something like '50% or 90% 'scar-less' improvement...' You will always be let down by statements like that.
    Whereas complete regeneration is objective. 
    When will it be here? hopefully soon.
  18. On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 0:33 AM, mjg713 said:

    Ok so I looked into this hydrogel. It seems like a decent concept but haven't read anything too substantial yet. From what I've read, it only has been tested on mice and pigs. Any idea when human trials will start? I'm not looking for necessarily a cure, just something that might make scarring around 90% better. I feel like lasers are too much of a risk because they can make things worse and don't yield great results all the time. I would think that my regular scarring would be a little easier to treat than deeper acne scarring. Any idea where we will be around 5 years time? I think waiting and hoping for something that won't come to us for 15-20 years is a waste of time.
    Looking at the gemstone site, it looks iike a gel will be used on humans in the next year or so...
    Btw, imo, you cant define if something is 5% or 90% better. What is 90% to you may 5% to another. 
    Things are either completely regenerated, or incompletely regenerated...
  19. On ‎23‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 9:31 PM, mjg713 said:

    I want to start by saying that I do not have acne. However, I recently acquired a small scar that is troubling me. I found this thread about scarless healing and it interested me that this one day can be a possibility. Without going through 271 pages, can someone tell me the progress of this for say trauma scars or surgical scars? Would these type of scars be easier to treat than acne scars? Is there any estimate on how long we will see this technology? I would be happy with even say 90% improvement compared to completely scarless healing. Thank you in advance.

    All scars are the same, In that they are an over production of collagen.
    Look into the hydrogel treatment that has been highlighted, which has been shown to completely regenerate tissue.
  20. On ‎04‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 4:31 AM, CollegeKidd said:

    I'm really upset about the John Hopkin's dextran hydrogel as well. I remember when I started posting here a little over 2 years ago there was a lot of hope and anticipation for it. It is the only thing to date that has fully healed a mouse's skin without a scar.... it was gonna be tested on larger animals like pigs, and then I don't know what happened. Does anyone know? lol Did they have success with the pigs, I'm still not sure. Do they plan on testing it on humans by Spring of this year, which I think I read somewhere? I would even be willing to do the clinical trials if I could. I just wish they kept the small public that is actually interested updated on their progress.

    I also miss Seabs135's posts haha, he always managed to keep me hopeful.

    I'm still here, it is just I currently don't see the point in repeating the facts for new readers if they keep getting lost and wasted in the noise of other information, info that has nothing to do with complete regeneration. It is like a constant fire fight, it gets tiring. Btw nothing has changed in the facts. There is absolutely nothing to be upset about the JH hydrogel, the documents do not change. I think they are moving to human tests this year?
  21. On their website it says they're gearing up to begin phase one clinical trials in mid to late 2016. The FDA requires three rounds of clinical trials so even if it's promising it could still be a while. Here's a video of them applying the hydrogel to the pigs in the porcine study though! http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v135/n10/extref/jid2015182x2.mov

    This will be classed as a device and will only require one clinical trial. This clinical trial will start in one year from now, be completed in two years from now, and the finished product will reach clinics in three years from now (in my rough estimation).

    A while ago I read the trial process for a device is not like a drug trial process and device approval process can last a few months. Also I read that some devices are even allowed to be sold even when the approval process in on going... I do not know if this applies here though.

  22. Seabs135 : what do you think of "designed to make all sign of wounds disappear?"

    I just think it is some sentence, in some article, describing a paper that highlighted reepithialization of a tissue in under 14days...

  23. Seabs135: whats your take on this news?

    Lapiz : do you think they will go to human trials? Or they revert back to murine study?

    Thanks guys

    Nothing has changed. The scientific info hasn't changed. It reepithialized inside two weeks whereas only 14% of the control did. This is also even more translative to human skin...

    Some medical professionals claim that scars can form within 14 days though.

    Here is clinical data that highlights scarring is very rare in anything wound that reepithilizes in under 14 days..