Foregen- A new face-They need your support

[Plush1992]

On the old site Foregen wasn't a very well received organization at the time, due to lack of trans-parity and lack of advancements and just general confusement and blinded hate towards them. They're is still probably alot of hate for them still. Long story short I truly believe Foregen will end the circumcision debate once and for all when they succeed. How could anyone argue when thousands of circumcised men regenerate their foreskin and inform society on how much sensation loss has occurred due to this brutal practice.

Back to the topic at hand, Foregen has completely renewed themselves just as this site has renewed itself. They are much more transparent, constant updates, they recently added a monthly goal bar of $20,000 and update it daily as to the amount they have received so far. They are promoting, co-staring and help funding a documentary about circumcision www.foregen.org/foregen_and_pwob and here is a link to donate to help make it happen (ive donated) http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pi...-documentary#/ On their Facebook page you can see their latest post showing their expense breakdown for 2014, they are planing on doing one for 2015 expenses. They have met with and studied with Dr Anthony Atala (you all should know his name very well) at his study program. They have been warmly invited to urology conferences to talk about the foreskin. They have met and talked with millionaire and billionaire investors. They have their own lab and their own source for foreskins to study upon. They have successfully de-cellurized a bulls foreskin and have now moved onto other steps in their research. They are very actively and pursuing and achieving their goal of foreskin regeneration and Will achieve it.

They need more funding for very specific reasons. The main reason is so they can do constant medical research because of now they do research in spurts because they cant afford to do constant research due to the sheer funds it takes.

If Foregen cant count on the support of the foreskin restoration guys, then who is going to support them? I hope you will become a donator and help make this happen, even small monthly donations are welcomed. All you have to ask yourself is if you want to be a part of and help achieve this amazing goal and maybe be able to regenerate your foreskin with nerves and everything?

Please comment if you plan on donating. Thank you for your time

[Guest]

I don't think you can call critical thinking "hate", especially when we compare what you are saying above, and what Foregen has said in the past, with what Dr Atala himself has said about where the experimental research into tissue regeneration currently stands.
http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment...-living-cells/

Your statements, Foregen's statements, and his, are now a matter of just reading the public record. We didn't fabricate your post, and Dr Atala didn't fabricate his statements, we are just reading them and making that comparison. When you think about it, calling the comparison "hate" is an example of.......well, if not itself hate, then at least a form of oblique character assassination. Why would you do that? We aren't haters. Nobody appreciates that kind of characterization hiding behind the safe haven concept; that isn't what it's here for. My objection to your characterization isn't hate, either. it's just an objection.

And I think you'll find that the regen section is alive and where it's always been. I think your post above belongs there.

Some people believe what your group says, and some don't. Many don't, actually.

[parsecskin]

If what you said is true, good! They listened to our constructive criticism. I'll have to go check out the new website.

[Guest]

......

...........Can you leave a link to the regenerative section please? Or a moderator could move this thread to that section if it is more appropriate.

http://foreskinrestoration.vbulletin...reconstruction


Personally, I have some experience in reading scientific publications, and some experience in the issues that biological research focuses on (from several directions, actually), and I know how to read abstracts and listen to the actual words used by researchers, including the conversation I linked to.

Add to that the fact that I've been around awhile and I've seen more than one company's PR image spiff itself up, but in words only, when valid criticism gave it the wording to do that. So I have to say that I could find myself suspicious about any changes in a PR image presented to the public, when it isn't accompanied by peer review publishing. Videos and websites have no meaning in the scientific world, just published results; that's what they live for, and that's what the smart money is waiting for.

Another point to make: you've asked, who other than "foreskin restorers" to make donations? Tuggers are the definition of proactive. Those of us who have, and those who still are, doing this thing won't wait for somebody else to do something, we do for ourselves, first and foremost; that's the heart and soul of tugging. And not surprisingly, that's pretty much how the two groups, ie the believers and the doers, separate themselves on forums. So maybe this fact will give you a little perspective in your question. Actually learning a little bit of what a real foreskin is, and what we do and don't have anymore, gives some of us an idea of all the many steps (most of which haven't even been approached yet) science has to first do before anything like an artificial foreskin can be produced, attached (surgical scars are anathema to us), and be made available to the general public by everyday clinical providers (NOT experimental researchers, but clinical providers).

[Smertrios]

Be interesting when/if this works out. Way back when I first heard about foregen I donated $50 and it was sent to another country so after everybody took their piece of my cash foregen actually got something like $32 if I remember correct I know it was 30 something. WTF =) The way donations are made is much different now tho. I know I would like a true foreskin back but I also truely believe FR and educating about the effects of circumcision are the way to go especially in the US. We need to stop doing this and get an enforced law past... merely having a mans body protected by law is not enough!

[parsecskin]

Its funny because they already have anti-female mutilation laws stating that you cant do anything to a newborn females genitals, but when it comes to boys, the mentality is, just snip away, this sexism towards boys is disgusting, boys should be free from mutulation aswell.

Circumcision is already illegal under the 14th amendment which provides for equal protection under the law regardless of sex. This is cut and dry. All that is needed is someone to take the bull by the balls (the circumcision industry) and file suit in the SCOTUS. Peter Adler of ARCLAW will be that man. He already has his plan laid out. He's just waiting for the right time. Recent events with Justice Scalia have thrown a bit of a monkey wrench into this. If the traitorous POTUS appoints a muslim to the SCOTUS, kiss it good bye.

[Guest]

.... I know I would like a true foreskin back but I also truely believe FR and educating about the effects of circumcision are the way to go especially in the US. We need to stop doing this and get an enforced law past... merely having a mans body protected by law is not enough!

Hah! Interesting phrase, "true foreskin"; interesting partly because it's a new one on forums. Needs to be looked at. "True"? Highly unlikely for many reasons, most of them completely unaddressed so far.

Nobody, least of all Foregen, has described what is intended in a so-called regenerated "foreskin"; no actual description of tissue types at all (let alone how experimental research will attach them to each other and to a penis in vivo). Shouldn't we start there; what they intend to have commissioned by experimental research, vs the real thing as nature grows, and THEN, if any results happen, however many years after that (assuming this actually works), describe the actual/practical result, assuming there will be one?

In the meantime, what to call it. "True"? Nah. "Partial replacement"? "Pseudo"? "Artificial"? "Facsimile"? Depends; depends on a product being there, which depends on commercial interest, which depends on successfully passing the reg agencies, which depends on something in hand to assess, which depends on promising results, which depends on an outcome of some........practical result ... which depends on successful experiment after experiment. Lotta ifs involved here. And, assuming all those ifs (and many more, actually), have been met, then how that 'whatever' will be attached will probably affect what it will be called by science, medicine, and what any commercial industry is mandated to call it, assuming something ever makes it to the commercial/clinical area. One thing is for sure: we will all call any result "expensive", because it will be out-of-pocket; no medical insurance carrier will ever accept it as anything but experimental and investigative, even if it looks like it might work for some individuals, and then, if the industry accepts whatever the product actually turns out to be, it will be "cosmetic", without a doubt. Again......out-of-pocket.

So.....it certainly won't be the original, that's gone. Even if your own stem cells are used it won't be the original. Will it be "true"? Nobody knows because nobody's even tried to to describe it. All that the so-called "bull's foreskin" implies is an experimental collagen matrix, assuming that path works, NOT a true foreskin with all its combination of tissue types, which nobody has described even in theory, with their individual functions, and the necessary enervation involved.

Want a different way to look at it? Dr Fronk-un-schteen and his goggly-eyed sidekick Eye-gore haven't even robbed a grave yet, let alone done all that sewing, and set up that impressive capacitor/generator to capture lightening. And ... he's a home-built kinda guy, not a big gun

[parsecskin]

I have to somewhat agree with INFO here. Even if they do succeed in growing one in the lab, I would assume they would have to at the very least remove your existing remnant at the corona all the way around and all the way around just below your circ scar. THAT IS A LOT OF TISSUE AND THE STUFF WITH THE MOST NERVE ENDINGS. Then there's the issue of hooking up the nerves to the lab grown foreskin and the issue of your brain learning how to interpret these new sensations so you can actually feel it. There are a lot of hurdles to over come and I certainly don't want to be the guinea pig and end up with less feeling than I already have. I'm sure they will be able to have good results cosmetically with minimal scarring. heck i had a hernia repair several years ago and you cannot even see the incision line any more. That one took several years for the skin around the incision to regain all its feeling, but it eventually did.

[Canadajuice]

I think that foreskin regeneration is a noble goal and something that is seriously worthy of funding and experimentation, but I have to admit that I'm skeptical that a foreskin created by a reseeded ECM or 3D printed matrix would be able to effectively integrate itself into the nervous system, at least with existing technology. Isn't that the entire point of regenerating an anotomically complete foreskin? To return normal sensation? But if it can't integrate into the nervous system then you're basically left with a numb foreskin anyway. I would like this project to succeed as much as anyone, but in all honesty if it ever gets off the ground I think it likely won't be available for at least 10-15 years. A lot can happen in a decade, and the science could advance to a point that near full implementation and regeneration is a possibility, but in the meantime I think restoration is the best option.

[Guest]

[URL] ...

I think restoration is a great option, im really not trying to deter from that, all im saying is the more funding that is given the less time, its going to take to achieve our goals. "something that is seriously worthy of funding" You said it yourself haha all Foregen needs is $10 from 2000 people to achieve their $20,000 a month goal to achieve constant research experimentation because of now they can only do research in spurts due to lack of cash. Thats the cost of one cup of coffee a month.

I've seen this pitch in the past, on the old forum: the "money equals time" thing, as in more money equals less time to reach results. That is just not true. Isn't even logical. It's an example of magical thinking, it's certainly not how research works.

You start with an hypothesis, and you take it to its end if you can. It either worked or it didn't. Vast majority of attempts don't work, but failure's ok because it can lead to another hypothesis; one that is a tad more focused/informed. That is what scientific research is all about. So you go on trying other hypotheses. Probably won't work; again, most don't. You try to discover why things aren't working by breaking the experiment down into component parts and working on those. This equals more time involved. And so on. Throwing money at this has no effect in the long run. It can pay for equipment that you didn't know you needed, but that doesn't automatically equal less time. In fact it usually means MORE time because it takes you down more roads. In a nutshell, as a researcher you have to experiment and analyze the results of every attempt, most of which is failure. The very nature of the scientific process is repeated failure, so it takes time, and not a little luck. Money doesn't directly affect any of that.

Research results equal time. Money's effect on time?: not so much; in fact, not really at all. You can't pay the tissues and techniques to work. Money does not mean you will find success in your attempts. So, you have to wonder what the hell people who promote this myth are talking about (it's a common pitch from charities).................and why.

And as far as your links go (the second one of which I provided this forum), you only have to compare the NPR/Dr Atala discussion, and what he said about the challenges (he gave a hierarchy of them), with what Foregen seems to try to take credit for by trying to stand next to what has been attempted thus far (by research they have nothing to do with). Look for words like "prototype" and "partial" on that webpage. That should put things into perspective for anyone who is interested.

[Plush1992]

I really dont see how Foregen being severely under funded is going to help them achieve their goal in the same time as if they were properly funded. Without the proper funding they cannot do research. If they cant do research, then nothing is going to happen. As simple as that. When a hypothesis doesnt work, you need more funding to fund the next hypothesis.

"it can pay for equipment that you didn't know you needed" Yes that does not equate to less time, but it does equate to being able to proceed with the experiments and having the proper research labs and equipment.

Medical research costs 3 things. Money, money and yet more money. Without money, there is no research, without research it is going to take alot longer to accomplish what we want to accomplish.

Everything started out as a prototype. Im pretty sure everybody is already under that impression and everybody understands this technology does not fully exist yet and is not ready for clinical trials. Your stating the obvious.

[Canadajuice]

For the record, I'm currently a Foregen supporter, but I only donate a very modest amount every month. I know I might get some flack on here for admitting it, but you're right, something like this needs funding and research. However, I would have to agree with Info that regenerative medicine is still in its infancy and true foreskin regeneration is unlikely to occur for years, regardless of the level of funding. A lot of questions still need to be answered, and honestly I'm skeptical that a regenerated foreskin would be as good as the real thing. There's also the possibility that it could be worse than a restored foreskin, but I suppose we shouldn't speculate too much.

The rabbit penises and vaginas that were regenerated, as far as I know, weren't identical to true genital tissue and instead were functional (albeit, far from perfect) imitations of genital tissue that were Constructed using muscle and skin tissue.

I think Foregen is in pursuit of a noble goal, but the organization isn't going to be the one to regenerate the foreskin; they'll need to convince other biomedical companies to do that, or get some serious investment from wealthy donors.

I don't have experience with research, but I don't entirely agree with Info on his argument regarding research. I can understand how more money thrown at a project won't guarantee results and can potentially lead researchers "further down the rabbit hole" before a final product is developed, but if a research project lacks the funding to get the ball rolling it's inevitably going to slow progress. More money won't guarantee results but it certainly wouldn't hurt. Getting that funding is the first big problem, doing the research is the second, providing promising results to offer investors (and donors) a sizeable return on their investment is the third, which brings us back to the first problem.

Regardless, if there isn't interest to regenerate a foreskin it's not going to happen. Keep pushing, you never know what'll happen.

[Guest]

I'm not knocking money, as I'm sure you know, I'm saying that the "more money equals less time" pitch is false; it's a pitch, a hook, not reality. It was your statement and it's false; it's always false because that isn't how research works. Think of it this way: some research group has all the money they need (your best case scenario), and they continue to fail, experiment after experiment, no viable results are reached in a projected time (all experiments have a time limit). Will money help this? Nope. The science, and successful technique just wasn't there. See what I mean? Money does NOT equal success, and it certainly does NOT equal LESS TIME in finding success, which was your statement, and what I objected to. You can't buy off a scientific impasse. So-called 'foreskin regeneration' (never actually defined by Foregen or anyone else) can, and probably will (for a number of reasons) reach an impasse. Money alone won't help that.

But let's take a closer look at what is implied in all of this:

1. Foregen doesn't do research. They aren't researchers, and they aren't representative of science in general, let alone the embryonic field of tissue regeneration. They only collect money. But the misunderstanding that Foregen is a research entity continues on. This, too, is not reality. I think it's important to stop assigning Foregen that ability, when they don't do research themselves at all.

2. The money guys are primarily the military (government), and some of the universities/med schools who do research have military backing as well. Atala refers to this, and it's been a well known fact in the field for many decades. I remember Distalero making this point on the old forum years ago; I learned it from him, confirmed it with online research, so you and everyone else should know it. Authentic research needs money, sure, but who has the deep pockets in the barely established field of regeneration? The military. Real research does not go (and I quote Distalero) "trolling for nickles" from the general public. Charities do, however, and many (maybe most) get called on how much they actually spend on research, and how much they take for "overhead". This is an everyday fact. So the implication, again, is that money is no guarantee of anything.

3. The deep pockets (whoever they may be) fund research when they present a request for research into a SPECIFIC need of THEIRS, or, after they are presented with a detailed proposal which is based on at least some limited success towards that need. So the operative concept is: specific. I hope everyone here realizes this. Yes, some work has been done in research into war-related genital trauma, but does that automatically mean foreskins? Not so far, or at least not that anyone has stated. But even if it is, that would be the military, funding related research done by the recognized research groups, and NOT Foregen. There isn't some sort of osmosis there, only specific request by specific entities, of a specific research group.

So.....in other words, research entities present what they've found thus far, hypothesize an outcome towards what was requested, and ask for initial and ongoing funding. Pure research, when it needs funding, DOES EXACTLY THE SAME THING. That's how it all works. So you have to ask yourself: how can a money collection group insert itself into the stream of research and funding, especially when they aren't a research entity themselves, and most especially when they've stated that they consider themselves separate from mainstream research, and are not interested (according to their statement) in being aligned with mainstream research. It doesn't make sense to me; it's disconnected from everything that is in place.

[Plush1992]

I actually completely agree with your comment. Like you stated, without funding Foregen (or any research organization) goes no where. However funding does not guarantee results and clinical regeneration of any kind is in its infancy stages, but at least it is there and regeneration is possible. But like everything else, you got to take everything one step at a time. Problems with regeneration today might be overcame tomorrow.

The rabbit penises had about 60% function of the smooth muscles and only 8 out of 12 managed to ejaculate properly. Thing is you can look at this in a positive or negative way. Info looks at this in a negative way of, they dont function properly, they're not as good as the real deal, this technology is far off. I choose to look at this in a positive light of, regeneration is actually possible, Atala is making Huge strides in the regeneration field and although not yet, someday regeneration of the foreskin or penis is going to be possible. We all need to be skeptical, which is a good thing, but my god, so many people are wayyyy past being skeptical and are just plain pessimistic towards Foregen or regeneration in general. I think your the perfect in-between, your a bit skeptical of them but still fund and believe in them.

Im just glad there is an organization out there interested in fixing our problem.

I think Foregen should try to convince other medical organizations to look into regeneration of the foreskin like you said. If they could get a major medical company to research this instead, that would be great.

I think Foregen is in pursuit of a noble goal, but the organization isn't going to be the one to regenerate the foreskin; they'll need to convince other biomedical companies to do that, or get some serious investment from wealthy donors.

Regardless, if there isn't interest to regenerate a foreskin it's not going to happen. Keep pushing, you never know what'll happen.

[Plush1992]

More money definitely does not equate to less time. You are accurate in what you say so im not going to ellaborate on your points because they are pretty dead on.

However, what does more funding for Foregen mean? They already have access to a lab and they have access to a research crew and they have already started doing experiments. More funding means they can do constant research all year round, instead of just doing it in spurts because of lack of funds. They have to wait until they have enough funds, then do research, then wait some more for the funds to grow again. More funding will eliminate this huge waste of time just waiting. This is why Foregen Needs our support so they can do research all year long.

Like you said medical research organizations typically get funding from other organizations when they propose to solve a Specific problem of Theirs. When they have a specific request. That is why the military is backing Atala. This is why we should back Foregen. Foregen is proposing to solve a Specific problem of Ours. Now of course im not going to give money to just anybody who claims to "solve my problem" but Foregen does have a medical lab, research crew, access to foreskins to research on and many other things. They are serious and committed to restoring the foreskin.

Yes Foregen themselves are not a research organization, what they are is a group of managers, advertising team and finance team. They are a group of financiers. We give them money, they finance foreskin regeneration research, as simple as that. Without them, who are we going to fund to finance foreskin regeneration research?

However as soon as they get enough funding then they will morph into a true research organization and all their time will go into research. Right now they have to do things like advertise, and support film documentaries and things like that because they are crowd funded and need to do things to get more funding before they can go balls deep into pure research.

Foregen started out with one guy. Now after a few years they have an entire crew, medical labs, they've done research, de-cellurized a bulls foreskin, they have invigorated the spirit of people like me. They have done quite alot by seeing what they started out as.