Nenah Sylver,
The following is one article that states that 635nm
light will control or inhibit the growth of most
harmful bacteria. However, this is not killing the
bacteria it is controlling the growth through
biomodulation. Biomodulation turns activities of cells
on or off thereby controlling their activity and
function. This article states that 635nm has the most
significant deactivation effect on bacteria. At the
same time 635 has the greatest activation effect on
mammalian tissue. So you can activate the healing
process and control the overgrowth of bacteria at the
same time. Being able to control bacteria is more
powerful than killing it and leaves less dead cells
for the body to clean up and detox.
You can also use frequencies. As you know there are
many frequencies that you put in the laser to kill a
specific pathogen but there are also biomodulating
frequencies that will control bacterial growth. The
choice is up to the operator and how able to patient
can handle the therapy. Many times I use both types of
frequencies but the frequencies that I placed into the
LazrPulsr are all targeted as biomodulating
frequencies and not killing frequencies. I just refer
to your book for the killing frequencies.
Thanks
Dr. Gerry Graham III

Effects of 630-, 660-, 810-, and 905-nm laser
irradiation delivering radiant exposure of 1-50 J/cm2
on three species of bacteria in vitro.
Nussbaum EL, Lilge L, Mazzulli T.
Rehabilitation Services, Mount Sinai Hospital and
Department of Physical Therapy,
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
e.nussbaum@...

OBJECTIVE:
To examine the effects of low-intensity laser therapy
(LILT) on bacterial growth in vitro.

BACKGROUND DATA:
LILT is undergoing investigation as a treatment for
accelerating healing of open wounds. The potential of
coincident effects on wound bacteria has received
little attention. Increased bacterial proliferation
could further delay recovery; conversely inhibition
could be beneficial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and
Staphylococcus aureus were plated on agar and then
irradiated with wavelengths of 630, 660, 810, and 905
nm (0.015 W/cm(2)) and radiant exposures of 1-50
J/cm(2). In addition, E. coli was irradiated with 810
nm at an irradiance of 0.03 W/cm(2) (1-50 J/cm(2)).
Cells were counted after 20 h of incubation post LILT.
Repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey adjusted post hoc
tests were used for analysis. RESULTS: There were
interactions between wavelength and species (p =
0.0001) and between wavelength and radiant exposure (p
= 0.007) in the overall effects on bacterial growth;
therefore, individual wavelengths were analyzed. Over
all types of bacteria, there were overall growth
effects using 810- and 630-nm lasers, with species
differences at 630 nm. Effects occurred at low radiant
exposures (1- 20 J/cm2. Overall effects were marginal
using 660 nm and negative at 905 nm. Inhibition of P.
aeruginosa followed irradiation using 810 nm at 5
J/cm(2) (-23%; p = 0.02). Irradiation using 630 nm at
1 J/cm(2) inhibited P. aeruginosa and E. coli (-27%).
Irradiation using 810 nm (0.015 W/cm(2)) increased E.
coli growth, but with increased irradiance (0.03
W/cm(2)) the growth was significant (p = 0.04),
reaching 30% at 20 J/cm(2) (p = 0.01). S. aureus
growth increased 27% following 905-nm irradiation at
50 J/cm(2). CONCLUSION: LILT applied to wounds,
delivering commonly used wavelengths and radiant
exposures in the range of 1-20 J/cm(2), could produce
changes in bacterial growth of considerable importance
for wound healing. A wavelength of 630 nm appeared to
be most commonly associated with bacterial inhibition.
The findings of this study might be useful as a basis
for selecting LILT for infected wounds. J Clin Laser
Med Surg. 2000 Oct;18(5):235-40.



--- Nenah Sylver <nsylver@...> wrote:

>
> I've been doing some more research on lasers...and
> was wondering where the
> studies are that say that a 635 nanometer wavelength
> kills microbes. I
> couldn't find any.
>
> Thanks much.
> Nenah
>
>
>