Smooth as a baby's...?
Image: ISTOCK/DASHEK
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
With each passing year, the crow's-feet framing your eyes and the creases lining your forehead grow deeper. And those pits and craters, constant reminders of junior high acne, just won't disappear. Cosmetic and dermatological companies have many potential fixes for your dermal woes—fillers to minimize the appearance of wrinkles, laser treatments to smooth imperfections, even injections of bacterial proteins (Botox) that paralyze your face muscles to prevent skin stretching.* And at least one company is searching for the fountain of youth in baby foreskins—yes, we're talking about that flap of skin sliced away during male circumcision.
About 150 patients in the U.K. have already received injections of Vavelta, a foreskin-derived skin treatment aimed at rejuvenating and smoothing skin withered with age or damaged by scarring from acne, burns and surgical incisions, according to a spokesperson for Intercytex, PLC, the Cambridge, England-based company that makes the product. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved Vavelta, nor have any other federal agencies outside the U.K., where it was introduced in June 2007.
Each vial of Vavelta (enough for treating about four square centimeters of skin, roughly the size of a U.S. postal stamp) consists of about 20 million live fibroblasts—cells that produce a skin-firming protein called collagen, which becomes increasingly scarce with age. Fibroblasts also make elastin, a protein that allows the skin to snap back to its original shape after being pulled or stretched like a rubber band, as well as hyaluronic acid, which locks moisture in the skin, keeping it supple and plump.
The fibroblasts in Vavelta are isolated from the foreskins taken from baby boys, given several months to grow and multiply in the lab, and then packaged into treatment vials that are shipped to a select group of U.K. physicians. Each vial costs approximately 750 pounds, or $1,000], according to the company spokesperson.
Once delivered into the skin, the fibroblasts begin producing collagen, hyaluronic acid and elastin (which build and reinforce it) orthey make enzymes called metalloproteinases to break down excessive amounts of proteins that accumulate in scar tissue, according to Paul Kemp, Intercytex's chief scientific officer.
The results? "I was treated on one side of my face last year [and] the treated side feels smoother and plumper," Kemp says. "However, the visible difference is quite subtle. In patients who have been treated for acne scarring, there has been a visible improvement in the texture and surface contour of the skin. Similarly, in patients with scar tissue the result has been a softening of the scar and, in some cases, a dramatic increase in flexibility."
Jeffrey Orringer, director of the Cosmetic Dermatology and Laser Center at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, says that the concept is "intriguing," but warns that a number of questions must be answered before the product goes mainstream. Among them: How long will the fibroblasts survive and function normally once they are injected into the skin? And will they produce enough collagen to produce noticeable results, or perhaps too much, causing unsightly thickening of the skin?
Ron Moy, a dermatologist at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, says that foreskin cells could potentially carry viruses. And although the company screens all the fibroblasts for contamination, he cautions there is "no test that's perfect."
The idea of using fibroblasts—including those swiped from baby foreskins—to repair skin is not new. Companies such as Organogenesis, Inc., in Canton, Mass., and Forticell Bioscience, Inc., in New York City already market such FDA-approved products to promote wound healing. But treating wrinkles with baby foreskins? The jury is still out.
See what we're tweeting about
33 Comments
Add CommentSciAm should know better than to describe Botox as "bacteria." The drug is the toxin made by the bacteria that cause botulism. If patients were injected with C. botulinum bacteria, I believe it would be lethal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisClostridium botulinum (names should be underlined) is ubiquitous in our environment (soil). It produces a neurotoxin that causes the symptoms of botulism (blurred/double vision, drooling, facial muscle paralysis, difficulty coordinating limbs, and untimately, paralysis of the diaphragm muscle that allows breathing). If the raw toxin is injected into patients, it causes serious side effects, such as those seen in the "Florida botulism case."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow can it possibly be legal in our society to commercialize human body parts amputated without consent? No infant ever gave permission to have his foreskin amputated. I'd be locked up if I tried to have my new puppy circumcised. Humans don't have rights surpassing those of dogs?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe need a law requiring disclosure of financial arrangements - between doctors/hospitals and the labs who develop products from amputated human body parts - to the familes and victims of senseless amputations. Any money should be placed in trust until the victim reaches 18 and can sue for damages.
If the parents knew that a baby's foreskin was worth about 50 bucks to the doctor, maybe they wouldn't be so quick to buy the lie that healthy normal genital tissue should be amputated.
Every mammal on earth evolved a prepuce before there was surgery or even soap. 95% of the non-Muslim world does not circumcise. Foreskin feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision.
well I can understand why something from a male penis would cause enlargement.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the "jury is out" on the idea of using cutlets from infant male genitals - is it also out on the idea of doing the self-same thing with infant female genitals?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere Here! VIOLENT cultures use knives on penises. There is a correlation between circumcision and WAR. Is there also a correlation between circumcision in a culture and higher rates of rape? I wouldn't be surprised.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's good to see a healthy dose of OUTRAGE at doctors who should (and probably do) know better than to cut bits off babies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisexcellent point, good sir! what a despicable double standard.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile I'm sure Americans would jump at the chance to use the product in question, it was developed in the UK.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHmmm...this treatment puts a new twist on the meaning of "dickhead".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVulgarity aside, this wrinkle treatment puts a new twist on the word "dickhead", don't ya think? : )
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy apologies for the double entry...wasn't aware the first one posted.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see the foreskin fundamentalists are out in full force.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI must say the comments on this article are by far the most amusing thing I've read in a long time. 'Nuff said
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs someone who was cut at birth ... wtf!? Honestly, I would prefer to have my foreskin still. The foreskin is not a birth defect it is just as natural as the clitoral hood for females.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat "flap of skin" has 20,000 nerve endings in it, a girls clitoris has about 8000; two and one half girls would have to loose their clitorises to equal the damage done to one boy to "donate"his foreskin to make some old biddy "beautiful"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCircumcision without a valid medical reason needs to be made illegal. It is a barbaric and disgusting thing to do. Cutting off a normal, healthy part of the body is wrong. The reasons people give for routinely cutting off the foreskins of baby boys are terrible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCutting off a newborn's foreskin for religious or cosmetic reasons is obviously not a good reason. Perhaps the man will not grow up to be part of the religion his parents have chosen. Maybe the man would rather have his body intact. The choice should be made by the individual once he can think for himself. Parents should not take away the man's right to make his own decision.
Routine circumcision at birth for medical reasons doesn't make sense either. There is a less than 1% chance that circumcision will ever be medically necessary. If only one out of a hundred boys will require circumcision later, why then should the remaining 99 be automatically circumcised? Circumcision, like any surgery, has risks such as infection and even death.
There is a very good chance that everyone will have cavities or decay in at least one tooth to the point that it must be removed. Do we remove teeth immediately when they come in because it might have to be done later? Of course not. That would be stupid.
Many parents don't even know why they are agreeing to cut off part of their baby's penis. They do it just because it's commonly done.
And then there are these companies who buy foreskins from hospitals to make skin creams. What are they thinking? The companies who make these skin creams and the the people who use them make me sick.
TLCTugger has it right when he said in this thread, "We need a law requiring disclosure of financial arrangements - between doctors/hospitals and the labs who develop products from amputated human body parts - to the familes and victims of senseless amputations."
Profiting off the sexual mutilation of the body of baby boys needs to stop.
I researched several different surgeons and found Dr. Sheltons cosmetic dermatology in NYC, http://www.thenyac.com/ to be best suited for my needs. I was really impressed as Dr. Shelton took the time to explain which procedure would be best suited for me and why, as well as what to expect. http://www.thenyac.com/botox-dysport/index.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI researched several different surgeons and found Dr. Shelton’s cosmetic dermatology in NYC, http://www.thenyac.com/ to be best suited for my needs. I was really impressed as Dr. Shelton took the time to explain which procedure would be best suited for me and why, as well as what to expect. http://www.thenyac.com/botox-dysport/index.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"the foreskins taken from baby boys"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDisgusting. Why are there so many doctors that do this?
Baby foreskins are not intended as raw material supplies for the faces of vain women! The foreskin is an integral part of the penis, and it should be left attached. Total ignorance and greed are the cause of male genital mutilation. I was born at a time when circumcision was seen by many doctors as a cure-all. I didn't know until I was 11 years old that my entire foreskin had been cut off. When I got married I had a lot of difficulty entering my wife, and she found it very painful even with copious amounts of artificial lubricant. Bear in mind that my penis is very average in length and girth. When my son was born, I demanded that his penis be left alone, and it was, and he has had no problems whatever with it. I am now devoting the next several years to developing a sort of foreskin, and hopefully will be able to resume intercourse after an interval of nearly ten years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is why it is immoral to damage an unconsenting baby boy's penis, it is illegal to deliberately damage a baby girl's genitals, and every baby deserves that protection under the law, both in the UK and the USA. Boycott the "treatment" of your wrinkles which are natural results of aging, think yourself lucky to live long enough to have them. Cytex PLC should be stopped from making this product. If the British government will not take action, then Human Rights activists may take matters into their own hands. It could be the catalyst needed to end the theft of a baby boy's birthright.
I hope users of this "treatment" realise just how dirty foreskins are. Further, they are risking AIDS, cancer and a large variety of other problems. Foreskins are better left atached to their original owners.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe same results and benefits could probably be derived from female genital parts (labia, etc.) Why do males have to bear the entire burden of supplying the raw material for this product? With half the supply coming from females, the cost could be cut in half so most everyone could afford it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat???!!! Female parts are sacred??? And male genital parts aren't???
This needs to be re-thought.
.
yay science wrote: "We need a law requiring disclosure of financial arrangements - between doctors/hospitals and the labs who develop products from amputated human body parts"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are already court decisions about this. Years ago, a man went into a hospital for surgery. It was found his blood had an imunogen that was the basis for a medication that a drug company developed and made $$$ millions from.
The court ruled that the basis for this drug was the man's property and could not be used without his permission and compensation. The judgment was for the plaintif and in the millions of dollars.
I wonder if there are millions of dollars out there for every male child's foreskin sold to these companies?
.
“Circumcision” is a deprecated euphemism for the atrocity that is more accurately referred to as “Male Genital Mutilation.” It is the wanton amputation of a normal, healthy, functioning body part, which is certainly a second degree felony under Utah Statute 76-5-105, “Mayhem.” Infant Genital Mutilation also certainly falls under 76-5-109, “Child Abuse”. In particular, the following definitions given under 76-5-109(1) can be easily shown to be applicable:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this76-5-109(1)(f)(i)(B), “involves physical torture”;
76-5-109(1)(f)(i)(G), “any conduct toward a child that results in severe emotional harm, [...] or severe impairment of the child's ability to function”; and
76-5-109(1)(f)(i)(H), “any injury that creates a permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, limb, or organ”;
Given the true and factual information about the anatomy and physiological function of the male prepuce explained by the Doctors Opposing Circumcision Genital Integrity Policy Statement, along with the above definitions from the Utah Statutes, Child Abuse 76-5-109(2)(a) makes Infant Male Genital Mutilation a second degree felony. Other Utah laws that may apply include 76-5-107, “Threat of Violence,” 76-5-103, “Aggravated assault,” 76-5-106, “Harassment,”, Solicitation for Conspiracy to commit, Fraud by Deception, and Omission or failure to act. Genital Mutilation is not a “rite.” It is a crime.
Further, because this brutally harmful atrocity has seen such widespread and systematic practice in the United States of America, it truly fits the definition of a “Crime Against Humanity” as defined by the Rome Statute Explanatory Memorandum, which defines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute recognizes rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced sterilization, "or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity" as crime against humanity if the action is part of a widespread or systematic practice.
I believe that anyone who is still in favor of circumcision is either (a) uneducated, (b) ignorant, or (c) dangerous to the public. In the United States, Anatomy textbooks do not display or describe the male prepuce. It has been cut out of the picture, and they are performing surgery on infant males to make them match the faulty diagrams. They have been managing people's perceptions of genital mutilation by managing the information they have available to them on the subject.
It is certainly NOT a mere "flap of skin."
So, would you trust a rich snob with a knife next to your son's penis?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think I prefer to age gracefully, rather than having eu de baby penis rubbed on or injected into my face. Also very glad that my sons' foreskins are on their bodies and not in some bottle of face cream.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSkinMedica is a skin care product right here in the U.S. that uses neonatal foreskins. The U.K. isn't alone on this one; but it's surprising to see a country with such a low hospital circumcision rate producing this. I wonder if they import their -- er, materials.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe level of depravity is almost unbelievable… How many of the foreskins used in these products came from men who suffered permanent sexual dysfunction or even death? How could the violence behind such products be ignored in the name of vanity? Also – if such a product works so well: and I’m sure they do: just imagine what is robbed from the former owners of the foreskins (AKA innocent non-consenting infants).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnly a sick, depraved pedophile would think too make a market of human rights violations done too infants. There is a special place in hell for these types.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI can't express enough the disgust I feel after reading this advertisement. Oh yes, for Mother's Day reward her with some anti-aging cream made from the foreskin that she had amputated from your body. Gee son, I decided you could do without that very erogenous, functional and important part of your reproductive system, so I had it chopped off. Now be good to mommy and give her some of that mutilation cream so my tired greedy face can look younger! GROSS! GREEDY! VIOLATION OF BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS! Shame on anyone would purchase or use products from this company.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEveryone please help end this madness by endorsing the Male Genital Mutilation Bill at www.MGMBill.org. Hit the "take action" tab and follow the instructions to send letters to your local and federal reps, state gov and the president.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"yes, we're talking about that flap of skin sliced away during male circumcision."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is misleading to refer to it as a flap of skin. It is an integral part of the penis, a mobile sheathe around the entire penis made of specialized tissue that has a great many nerve endings.
To amputate it from an infant or child's penis, it must first be cut and peeled off the glans, to which it is attached like a fingernail to its bed until--usually--sometime between the ages of 10 and 18.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/myths-about-circumcision-you-likely-believe