| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Aug 26, 2013 5:52 pm  |
From the article cited above:
"But scientists do not yet know enough about stem cell cytokines to reliably predict everything they will do when rubbed into the skin; they could interact with healthy skin cells in a completely unexpected way, just as the unintended interplay between calcium hydroxylapatite (Radiesse®) and stem cells produced bones in the Los Angeles woman's eye."
and
"These aren't your typical drugs. You can stop taking a pill and the chemicals go away. But if you get stem cells, most likely you will have some of those cells or their effects for the rest of your life. And we simply don't know everything they are going to do."
 |
_________________
✪ My go-to products: MyFawnie.BigCartel.com ✪ |
|
|
|
|
Mon Aug 26, 2013 7:41 pm |
| There was the same kind of info about cytokines and growth factors in Dr T's book. Some benefits were seen, but there may be some risks as well. |
_________________
No longer answering PM's due to numerous weird messages. |
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 6:36 am |
A few days ago, I put the new books by Des Fernandes on my Amazon "watchlist" for price drops. I am also planning to purchase the Thornfeldt book. I have similar books on my list also arriving. As the colder weather arrives, I go back to research again.
In the past, I've gained a lot of valuable knowledge reading information written from the perspective of one industry professional to another or to students, even though the texts are more expensive. For me, it's been worth it.
Depending on what happens here, I may be permitted to share what I learn or not. For those who want to stay in contact, you know how to reach me.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:02 am |
| I look forward to seeing the results of your research BFG. Always informative and practical. |
_________________
✪ My go-to products: MyFawnie.BigCartel.com ✪ |
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:22 am |
Thank you fawnie. I won't be silenced.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
 |
Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:36 pm |
| Barefootgirl wrote: |
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=stem-cell-cosmetics
BFG |
I remember reading this last year and posted the link over to DrJ at bareface. It got deleted.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:41 pm |
| heheh Kath ... why am I nawt surprised? |
_________________
✪ My go-to products: MyFawnie.BigCartel.com ✪ |
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:47 pm |
| fawnie wrote: |
| heheh Kath ... why am I nawt surprised? |
I really thought it would’ve been a neutral springboard in helping him to finally reveal/disclose, at the very least, the effects of the % of inflammatory cytokines that were in the product. You know, educate & reassure the consumer and all that.
Guess Not. -   |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:47 pm |
imagine that though...growing bone where there should only be tissue! creepy Frankenstein stuff.
It's one thing to sell snake oil (apparently now more popular than ever LOL) quite another to endanger health with untested ingredients ...
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:37 am |
Its quite scary, I have been using anti age and do like it, unfortunately I also use lots of other stuff so being silly I dont really know which is making the difference.
I guess thats what comes from being impatient .
But it is making me do a rethink, maybe not an everyday usage, back to what I was doing before, and only after rolling or tria use.
Thanks for that BFG |
_________________
46 got (PMD,Caci,QuasarMD,Tria , skin spatula) Using, environ , myfawnie serums, lacsal, retinol, GHk probably more but too embarrased to say |
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:48 am |
| I am also using anteage but I think this will be my last bottle - it's disappointing that they deleted the article at barefacedtruth -- I thought that was a forum for open scientific discussion |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:24 am |
| LizzieG wrote: |
| open scientific discussion |
I think that only exists in online communities for the researchers themselves.
Get a temporary ID sometime and check them out - they share info on which lasers don't do anything or which products are useless, etc.
It's an eye opener.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:26 am |
| Interesting - what's the name of their forum? |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:42 am |
You can search using their professional orgs - eg. American Academy of Plastic Surgeons, North American Dermatologists, etc. etc.
once you are on the site for the professional group, request membership to the forums..
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:15 am |
BFG, I don't think anybody is trying to "silence" anybody around here, unless it's the stopping of oblique innuendos and insinuations. Those aren't conducive to harmony anywhere you find them.
The problem many have with "science" here is not with the actual science (far from it!), but rather the interpersonal dynamics that seem to surround it. Anecdotal experiences that run counter to scientific publications that have been discussed are basically dismissed and derided. Or if you say anything that runs counter to a posted scientific publication, and then you persist in saying it, you run a very real risk of being branded as a crackpot or a shill. Which, such "branding" can also be seen as a means to silence alternative viewpoints. And on and on it goes, with everyone becoming more wary and semi-hostile to one another.
Then if you have the bad taste and terrible manners to persist in pointing these crazy dynamics out, you are branded as a PITA.   Oh well.
Myself, I really appreciate the article you posted. I quit using Lifeline because it gave me zits. But in the meantime, before I stopped altogether, I was having thoughts about introducing outside unknown genetic material into my system. This article is great food for further thought. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:28 am |
| I know Hannah of skinactives is not v popular among many at eds but she gives great info. I forgot what that ingredient exactly was, may be cytokines ( or not ), but her comment was something like that she hopes the manufacturer is lying n has not added such to the product as it can have serious side effects n unknown, unintended consequences. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:10 pm |
Shows how easily people are intimidated by titles and scientific terminology, even when they're only part of a plot to sell you stuff.
It's only logical that a. new technologies are not tested for cosmetical purposes, they're developed to save lives, not faces and b. such new technologies are very costly and require a lab, scientists, etc. and are unlikely to end up in a jar of face cream.
The cytokines in creams and gels and the like are most probably lab waste, and who knows what has been growing in it and with what purpose. The poor woman with the boney eyes probably smeared culture medium on her face that was used to experiment with growing bone tissue. At the very least, considering this horrible story, it's logical that the user should know where the stem cell soup comes from and from what kind of culture it is a by-product. But even so, I would not care to use it anyway - too much snake oil, too little data on safety, origin or efficacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:32 pm |
But the stem cells/cytokines were from her own body fat, not some indeterminate waste from an unknown experiment and an unknown donor. The likely culprit in the bone growth was her stem cells interacting with the dermal filler which was basically calcium. Probably this was just a really ufnortunate isolated incident that serendipitously could be used as a shock intro to an article such as this. But the article does have some points about not knowing exactly what to expect from stem cells/cytokines once they're applied, regardless of where they come from. That combined with the expense is good enough to get me to cut back on Lifeline, although I will probably use it again. I do like the way it makes my skin feel, a lot. But between the zits, the expense, and the growing doubt about possible long-term side effects, my enthusiasm is waned a bit.
If I had the $$$ I'd probably try the U Autologous, though. The founder of the company apparently has enough confidence in them to use them on himself even before the study. Doubleplusgood. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:14 pm |
| Yubs wrote: |
| But the stem cells/cytokines were from her own body fat, not some indeterminate waste from an unknown experiment and an unknown donor. The likely culprit in the bone growth was her stem cells interacting with the dermal filler which was basically calcium. Probably this was just a really ufnortunate isolated incident that serendipitously could be used as a shock intro to an article such as this. But the article does have some points about not knowing exactly what to expect from stem cells/cytokines once they're applied, regardless of where they come from. |
In the article it states:
In this case the doctors extracted mesenchymal stem cells — which can turn into bone, cartilage or fat, among other tissues — and injected those cells back into her face, especially around her eyes.
So injected, not topical application. And it was actual stem cells injected, not the (waste?) conditioned media that is used when making those cytokine topical creams. Those topical products never contain actual stem cells. |
_________________
Born 1953; Blonde-Blue; Normal skin |
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:26 pm |
| Lacy, I just wanted to say thanks for your attention to detail...you always have something valuable to add! |
_________________
No longer answering PM's due to numerous weird messages. |
|
|
|
|
Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:34 pm |
| I'd be hard pressed to imagine a topical stem cell product creating bone growth on your face. |
_________________
Enjoying dermalogica with my ASG and Pico toner ** Disclosure: I was a participant without remuneration in promotional videos for Ageless Secret Gold and the Neurotris Pico Emmy event. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Aug 29, 2013 3:47 am |
Thanks too Lacy , I hadnt noticed that!
It all helps in making an informed decision  |
_________________
46 got (PMD,Caci,QuasarMD,Tria , skin spatula) Using, environ , myfawnie serums, lacsal, retinol, GHk probably more but too embarrased to say |
|
|
|
|
Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:32 am |
For me, of course, the jury is still out and I am reading the recommendations of researchers, not sellers (again no surprise).
I hardly consider Scientific American to be sensationalist journalism, as compared to oh, say, Allure 
As others have experiences with these, I hope they come forward.
Maybe someone can refresh my memory - where did Dr.J say they obtained their stem cells? discarded fetal tissue or similar?
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:59 am |
| Lacy53 wrote: |
| Yubs wrote: |
| But the stem cells/cytokines were from her own body fat, not some indeterminate waste from an unknown experiment and an unknown donor. The likely culprit in the bone growth was her stem cells interacting with the dermal filler which was basically calcium. Probably this was just a really ufnortunate isolated incident that serendipitously could be used as a shock intro to an article such as this. But the article does have some points about not knowing exactly what to expect from stem cells/cytokines once they're applied, regardless of where they come from. |
In the article it states:
In this case the doctors extracted mesenchymal stem cells — which can turn into bone, cartilage or fat, among other tissues — and injected those cells back into her face, especially around her eyes.
So injected, not topical application. And it was actual stem cells injected, not the (waste?) conditioned media that is used when making those cytokine topical creams. Those topical products never contain actual stem cells. |
Perhaps I should have chosen the more generic word "used" instead of "applied", which implies topical use. It's hard to be precise when you've got half an eye on a job you're supposed to be doing when posting.
The larger point is that this unfortunate woman's problem was likely due to the calcium from the filler reacting with her stem cells...it's unlikely the bone growth was due solely to the stem cells themselves. Although her results do kind of give you pause about cosmetic injections of stem cells at all.
Further, the article itself seems to conflate use of actual stem cells in the intro anecdote with "chemicals derived from...stem cells" used in topical preparations, the potential hazards of which seem to be the main point of the whole article, despite the use of an anecdote describing the injection of actual stems cells as the lead-in. The article itself actually seems to conflate apples and oranges by interchanging injectables with topicals. I admit when reading it I was a little confused about what the lead-in had to do with the main point of the article. But journalists are not scientists, and it's all about grabbing people's attention with an angle.
Anyway, that's no excuse. Apologies if anyone was taken aback by my seemingly shocking ignorance or apparent lack of linguistic precision when posting. I was not in ignorance about the difference between the two, and I will try not to let it happen ever again.  |
|
|
|
|
| Mon Feb 10, 2025 6:21 pm |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
