Intercytex / Hair Cloning, Follow-Up
I agree with you that cloning is not going to be available anytime in the immediate future, but why do you say 10 years just for safety issues? According to Intercytex, they have already completed the phase I safety trial. Also, isn’t the fact that scientists have successfully transplanted hair into mice and are now putting it into humans a breakthrought? According to Intercyted Seven human individuals from phase I trial currently have “cloned†hair on their heads. Isn’t that pretty huge?
If a doctor thinks that he can find a stem cell on you and move it to your head in the hope that it will grow hair (it actually might) then the doctor may be allowed to do this if he does this in his office. He has to pay attention to the medical licensing board’s rules on human experimentation, but he will not be going through a hospital-certified facility.
If he takes something out of your body (or even worse, from a mouse as you suggest) and then does something to it, following that by reinjecting it into you, then he is using a ‘drug’ which would then be covered under FDA regulations. Safety and effectiveness for a drug takes many years (15 on average) and cost about $800 million. Thousands of people must be tested and safety and effectiveness must be confirmed according to FDA rules and under FDA guidance. That is why I said 10 years. A cloned mouse hair on a human head fits that timeline for me, but if that happens on your head, be sure to stay away from cats.
lol, I’ll my sure to stay away from cats. I didn’t mean taking hair from mice and injecting them into humans. I was trying to say that I thought that the shift from cloning hair in mice (cloned mice hair into mice) to cloning hair in humans (cloned human hair into humans) is a big jump. I can see why you thought I was saying differntly because the post was very poorly written.
hu ….ho …ah ….
Mr Rassman, with all due respect you’re totally uninformed about the HM procedure. I find it odd and irresponsible from a doctor to claim HM is 10 years away and potentially harmful. It’s like you’re afraid that HM might ruin you HT business and try to convince people that HM is a bad thing.
>If a doctor thinks that he can find a stem cell on >you and move it to your head in the hope that it >will grow hair
actually it’s not some stell cell of your body, it’s hair cells (Dermal Papillae cells) that are used.
>if he takes something out of your body (or even >worse, from a mouse as you suggest) and then does >something to it, following that by reinjecting it >into you, then he is using a ‘drug’ which would then >be covered under FDA regulations
you’re making a confusion here. Apparently you didn’t understand the message of the original poster.
First, HM does NOT take anything from mice (cells, hair,, whatever). And researchers just made experiments to grow human hair on mice, not the opposite…(and they obvisously won’t use any mice hair for HM lol..)
Second, HM is an autologous procedure. That means it uses your OWN cells, so there is no question about rejection or using a drug injected into you as you say. There’s neither a risk of cancer and genetic manipulation. That’s total nonsense. In fact similar procedures already exists for face rejuvenation (Isolagen, namely) who culture keratinocytes. HM will come Dr Rassman, can’t do nothing about it. Be prepared for it :)
cheers
Once again, someone else with strong opinions, yet not quite strong enough to leave legitimate contact information.
The growing mice hair on human heads was a joke, by the way.
I’m not opposed to hair multiplication. I welcome it and anything else that will help balding people grow or retain their hair — as long as it is approved to do so. I have been following these things just as you have, by PRESS RELEASES. There is much that I am sure has not been made public, as it still is in experimental stages. If it becomes a standard procedure for anyone in the next few years, I will owe you an apology my dear anonymous commenter. Until that time, however, you have your opinions based on information supplied by the companies involved — I have my opinions based on medical history.
Dr Rassman, the day that one of the companies developing HM offers you a license to perform their procedure, will be the day that you stop ringing alarm bells about safety and saying that HM will take at least 10 years to be approved in the US. You know that. I know that. We all know that.
Slow down there, Murray. Do me a favor and get back to me when you do your own research and stop relying solely on press releases. You know that, I know that, we all know that.