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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


User590023 last won the day on August 16 2017

User590023 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About User590023

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It most certainly is new. 3d printed skin has not been grafted, let alone shown blood vessel development. With stem cells grafted skin was transplanted with blood vessel development but this is quite big. Just another step towards scar free healing in the true sense. Skin will be the first organ.
  2. Lol, I'm out. You all are a bunch of neurotic babies. Peace out.
  3. Stop talk like that. Tano1 is polite and very informative. 2 things you arent well-known for. Literally, nothing the guy has said is informative or helpful.
  4. The dermis is rather deep though isn't it? You probably wouldn't have to remove ALL of the dermis if your scarring isn't that deep? At least I would hope so. Also, I have sunburn "scarring" or redness, I'm not sure which, but regardless, my skin is damaged. And I don't believe that the dermis was affected by my sunburns but maybe they were. My point is, I don't see why anyone would remove as much skin as a third degree burn if the scarring or damaged skin obviously isn't as deep. A sunburn is
  5. The forum has a terrible set up and you are in general an ignorant person with your goofy comments. Someone asked if the dermis would have to be removed to regenerate skin. My response must have been combined, but yes, you have to remove the dermis. It's apparent you don't know how the scarring process works if you can't understand this basic FACT. Quit being such an emotional person. My second response was simply relating another FACT, which is that they always remove dead tissue with burn
  6. It's doubtful unless they have something to add that is different. SkinTe will have a patent.
  7. Look up scar. The only reason you get a scar is because the dermis was damaged. That's why first degree burns don't scar. It's kind of common sense although you have two hands and can google it yourself. Who are you talking to? No, they would, they always scrape.cut off the dead flesh and clean the raw tissue to kill bacteria and prevent infection. Many people used to die due to infection. This is part of the reason they graft, to prevent infection and to prevent too much water loss. T
  8. This isn't true. They were recreating a full thickness burn. In the cases of most full thickness burns they debride all of the burned tissue. That means they remove all of the burned flesh in order to seal the wound via graft, dressing etc... They do this to stop infections etc... Once the dermis is compromised epidermal regeneration isn't possible anymore.
  9. There is no evidence it will. You all just need to be patient.
  10. You won't be able to. They will test it at burn centers first. Then for other wounds and facial reconstruction. For people with really bad scars. Then they will try and make it available for cosmetic use.
  11. Anyone interested in a skinte thread?
  12. I'm simply trying to point out that the timeline they give is purposefully optimistic. Really, all we can do is wait and see. I'm optimistic overall because of the surgeon's credentials and the first animal test.
  13. This presentation contains forward-looking statements and projections. The company makes no express or implied representation or warrant as to the completeness of this information or, in the case of projections, as to their attainability or the accuracy and completeness of the assumptions from which they are derived, and it is expected that each prospective investor will pursue his, her, or its own independent investigation. It must be recognized that estimates of the company’s performance a
  14. bullshit He's kind of right, I'm not doubting the efficacy of the treatment like him because he is a debbie downer and just a pessimistic twat in general BUT, let's be honest they need money, r and d costs money, they aren't at a point where they can do human trials yet, it's planned more hypothetically right now. They wouldn't be the new google because insurance companies control the fate of people in the United States. It's not pie in the sky, the pie in the sky part is that in 2-3 yrs t
  15. Christ all mighty. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What part of the fat disclaimer about forward looking statements doesn't resonate with you lot? JFC. This isn't coming out commercially in 2018. Can any of you read?