No announcement yet.

Foregen- A new face-They need your support

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Haha yes a little angry is correct. Im trying to extend an olive branch to you fella's but maybe im doing it in the complete wrong way? Im actually quite sure that you do know alot about regeneration, and im sure you know more than me, im not an expert at all but you making that claim on your own behalf is a cheap way to dismiss peoples arguments. Im no expert so im not the person to be asking if regeneration is possible or not, all I can do is throw in my 2 cents. In no way though am I a representative of Foregen, lets make this clear (im too brash for that any how) all the info ive gotten is through basic internet searches and staying tuned in. I probably should of started this thread in a completely different manner (so I take blame for this). The whole point of this thread was to state that they need more funding to do constant research and at $10 a person all they need is 2,000 people to support them to make this possible (according to them). Its not much to ask for a organization that has shown much growth over the past 2 years, and yes theres a reason I wasn't donating to them 2 years ago, but now I am.

    Frankly I thought you guys would be thrilled to know theres a group of people out there trying to regenerate a foreskin for us, so yes I thought it would be easy to get you guys on board. When I seen you had some good questions to ask thats why I wanted to open a thread that simply states the facts of what they are doing and have done, as-well as having links that show the advancements thats been made in the field and links like yours that shows the current problems, to give people a basic idea of whats going on because I feel that alot of people have outdated information on this subject.

    Stones have been cast on both sides. You label me as a bully, you label Foregen supporters as hopeful believers who follow blindly which is belittling with in itself, you've put words into my mouth over me bringing up the thread ideas and you vaguely call yourself a medical professional yet fail to state what profession in the medical industry your apart of and what degree you have and im the only one whose lost credibility and alienated groups of people? This is all in my defense, so lets just get down to the actual info, Info.

    To be frank I dont care if Ive undercut some credibility ive had with strangers on a forum because my answers are considered too vague, im just stating what I know and thats all I can do. I think you are right though, this is a restoration site not a regeneration site, and lets be honest, its probably not right to promote Foregen and regeneration on this site to begin with.
    Last edited by Plush1992; 03-08-2016, 08:33 PM.


    • #32
      1. Foregen has been around for years now. They've made their pitch for money in various ways, in various venues, and those pitches found their way onto Ron's old forum over that time. I would imagine that just about everybody on this forum knows about Foregen, then, because it's my impression that most of the members here were members on the old forum, So if most of us here know about them, you have to ask yourself, why hasn't any more than a few members, and that jerk Info, reply? Here's why I think that's true:

      2. The discussion there was similar to this thread; pitches from guys who thought they were the first to "bring Foregen" to the forum. An infamous member there tried to input much of the same information that I have here. He knew what he was talking about, and he had experience similar to mine, so he asked good questions. His questions, and his oblique answers to his own questions, were his credentials. I agree with that. It's important to ask questions. He felt it isn't enough to just ask for money without getting a little information in return, and he could see that the guys who were proponents of Foregen didn't have any information. And they had that odd approach; odd compared to how things work in research into this field.

      3. The information the old forum got has never been specific. The big guys (the professional researchers) have come out with the incremental advances in this field. When that member asked what specific Foregen was proposing, the usual reply was "Foregen wants to protect their copyright".so no information was given (except for the "bulls foreskin" thing and a few other things about how money was being collected, and of course the HUFO thing). That infamous member, Distalero, knew that wasn't the way things work for anything at this stage of the embryonic/highly experimental field of tissue engineering, so he saw through that right away. And he said so.

      4. So some members there did start a "no negative thinking" thread, which really meant they only wanted to hear about what they hoped would happen "someday", or "not more than 10 years", or......whatever the timeframe du jour was. They believed this was, and is, possible, based on..........what? Certainly not on what the big guys were talking about. These members didn't even seem to have a grasp on the basic anatomy of foreskin tissue (which is made of a number of tissues). This is why I use the term "hopers and believers"; no knowledge about any aspect of this whole issue, just hope and believe. With one laudable exception, those members did not want to engage in discussion, they just wanted to, as Distalero used to say, engage in "fantasy". I have to agree with him because very little has ever been described, and what has been stated by Foregen has been scarce and sometimes contradictory.

      5. The big guys are trustworthy for a number of reasons, but certainly by their reporting of believable, in-scale advances. When that happens, the discussion picks up, and more members join in. That's all it takes: reporting.

      6. I can't agree with your use of the word "pessimist": this discussion has gone on so long, with very little having happened or explained, that some of us see this discussion as done to death. So you can take that as pessimism, if you choose to; I take it as better perspective on what the issues are. The other word for that is knowledgeable.

      I should say, thanks for the piechart. That's more than I've seen in a long time. Of course it puts more perspective to Foregen's internal workings, which may or may not be appreciated by some members here, but it is information.
      Last edited by Info; 03-08-2016, 09:26 PM.


      • #33
        Thank you for the eloquent reply. "pitches from guys who thought they were the first to "bring Foregen" to the forum." I feel like this pretty much defined what I was trying to do. To be honest I feel like your comment has opened my eyes a bit and gives me understanding as to why some don't support Foregen. Ive re-read your comment like 4 times now because what you say is pretty spot on and it shows me an aspect of how you guys on this site view Foregen supporters, people who are more hopeful and optimistic than they should be, people who provide too little information and have little grasp on the actual regeneration techniques.

        This thread most definitely has gone on long enough (dead thread). However I will say this, if I do decide to make another thread it will have all the information I can possibly attain both negative and positive aswell as having a basic brief of their history with current updates. I will have a better grasp and better understanding of the techniques that are planned on being used to regenerate the foreskin if or when I do this. If I do choose to create this thread im going to do my best to make sure its as objective as possible and different from all the other threads that you've seen in the past. It wont be a "pitch" thread either, just a thread stating who and what Foregen is, because lets face it, they are a bit of an oddball organization so some clarity is needed.

        In any case this wont be for a while, so I can get my ducks in order and if I do I will screenshot everything and let you take a good look at it all for your input, opinion and edits before posting, if you like. You seem to know alot more than most on here about these topics and ask good questions.


        • #34
          Good! If you do I'll look for it, always interested in new information.


          • #35
            If someone is truly interested in Foregen, he can ask questions either on Facebook where Eric Cunningham answers most of them pretty quickly (usually within 12-24 hours) or here:
            Its a community driven reddit, but most of your questions can be answered there. or you find them in the FAQ

            See ya


            • #36
              Originally posted by Narktor View Post
              If someone is truly interested in Foregen, he can ask questions either on Facebook where Eric Cunningham answers most of them pretty quickly (usually within 12-24 hours) or here:
              Its a community driven reddit, but most of your questions can be answered there. or you find them in the FAQ

              See ya
              Thanks. I for one appreciate any additional information when it's available. When I get a chance (or I'm given the chance, now that I'm saying this) I'll come back and address this, 'cause.........with a cursory look there are flaws in that second link.
              Last edited by Info; 04-08-2016, 09:46 PM.


              • #37
                You know, on second thought, I won't address this link. Tired of this at this point. Almost the entirety of it is inaccurate, half truth, with some of it totally false, as stated, and frankly it's tiring to deal point by point with the whole mess, so I ain't a gonna. Anybody interested can read it for themselves. You'll find it is a mess from a scientific view. You may be able to see that as you read it, or you won't, depending on what kind of background you have, I suppose. I think Foregen is counting on 'won't'. Thanks for the link, though, it continue to bear out my suspicions.

                But I'll say this, because it hits home for this forum: When I read Foregen's website, I found a reference to us, we tuggers, and how we "stretch" our skin. Yep. A moment for putting my head down on my desk and letting out a plaintive moan . Think about it. If you can't get the science of long-established and long-proven skin expansion right, then how the hell are you gonna convince anybody (with any sense) that you have real intent, let alone any kind of ability in all of this. What I read was anything but scientific, including "stretch(ing)".

                And, add to that another description of us, or rather of what we do, which also caught my eye: it was said about our results from tugging (and I quote them) that we produce an "abnormal" amount of blood vessels in our new skin. "Abnormal"? Really? Anybody here give somebody a tissue specimen to analyze?

                So....abnormality based on what? Think about this: if it's an increased amount of vessels, why not call it that, or call it 'highly vascularized ' if you're scientifically literate. I say this because the scientifically literate have called it this. But Foregen didn't, they call it "abnormal". Such a strange way to put it. Could this be one of those not-so-subtle shots at tugging, which by the way is the only technique proven and in place (naturally) to create more skin?

                What that characterization probably refers to is a basic misunderstanding of the results of clinical single epidermal layer expansion, which (if it's done slowly,) usually results in highly vascularized tissue (my emphasis, but also a quote from a research paper) over that balloon implant. Of course we don't do it that way, Foregen, and we don't expect results in 8 weeks or so. But if you don't actually understand what this means (or maybe if you have an agenda towards tugging, whatever else you say), then I guess you'd call it "abnormal". But it is not "abnormal" (certainly under the classic meaning of the word). There are some abnormalities found with rapid expansion, but we don't ever see them because we go much slower in our expansion. So.....I've brought you more actual science in this paragraph than they do in the link.

                So what gives, Foregen PR hacks? I know why you don't you seem to understand the complexities of so-called "regeneration" "medicine" (it doesn't exist), or the complexities of stem cell research (no routine medicine there either), and certainly not the entirely separate world of multiple agency approval of a product before it can be used (the steps of which are known, despite what the link says), but why can't you get the very basics, or hell, the pre-basics, right?
                Last edited by Info; 04-09-2016, 05:54 PM.


                • #38
                  Info - well said, Foregen is proving to be another business scam for preying on peoples false hopes and desires - to extract .... cash.
                  Simple as that - no matter how badly they try to white wash it while playing the shell game.
                  There are others who are doing real regenerative medicine and no they are not doing foreskins yet.