Having problems with message search?
List,
My journey to better understand soft lasers for an article I'm writing has led me into some interesting territory.
Recently, I received a highly informative email from Gerry about the difference between cold lasers (which have biomodulative effects on the cells) and infrared lasers (which heat the tissue and therefore don't seem to have therapeutic effects). To me, "laser" has always meant "coherent red visible light of some wavelength or another" (though it’s probably old news to some of you that lasers are also classified as infrared). However, since my association with laser was always "red light," I was astounded by how one word ("laser") can be used to mean so many things -- because that lack of precision is so unscientific, considering that different wavelengths in the EM spectrum can do such different things.
I did a search to see if other sources made that distinction between infrared and red light -- and if not, why not, because those differences are crucial. A cursory glance did not reveal much. However, I did find, as far as I can tell, that infrared lasers range from about 860 nanometers to under 1400 nanometers. One micron = 1000 nanometers (nm).
All of the research I did for my book on sauna therapy shows that the far infrared wavelengths that correspond to the most biocompatible healing radiations range from about 9.35 nm to 12 nm. So the “infrared lasers,” which might be construed to be comprised of the best FIR wavelengths, might actually be beneficial -- except for one, highly significant detail. FIR wavelengths from the sun, and the FIR wavelengths from the best saunas, are INcoherent. The “infrared lasers” are made of coherent light. The $64,000 question is: Why would someone want to take something beneficial and screw it up?
On a slightly different but related note, I wanted to see if there were any studies that showed beneficial results from infrared lasers. A Google search on “infrared laser pain” pulled up the following abstract at
with the title, "The effects of infrared laser and medical treatments on pain and serotonin degradation products in patients with myofascial pain syndrome. A controlled trial."
I found the abstract a bit hard to read. If I understood it correctly what I got was that treatment using an IR laser made the body lose chemicals, compared to phony treatment using a pretend IR laser. Some of those chemicals the body loses are pain-causing, and some aren't. The abstract reads:
In this controlled study of 46 patients with myofascial pain syndrome, we investigated the effects of infrared (IR) laser application to trigger points and medical treatment on pain reduction and serotonin and its degradation products. Retaining double-blind trial principles, the patients were randomly assigned to two groups. The treatment group received IR laser treatment, whereas the control group received sham laser. However, both groups received medical treatment. In the treatment group, laser was applied once a day for 10 consecutive days at a dose of 1.44 J/cm2. The effect of the laser treatment on pain was evaluated by visual analog scale. Urinary excretion of 5-hydroxy indole acetic acid (5-HIAA) and serotonin + 5-hydroxy tryptophan (5-HT+5-HTP) was studied by column chromatography. At the end of the treatment, there was a statistically significant difference between the VAS values of the treatment and control groups. The 24-h urinary excretion of the 5-HIAA and 5-HT+5-HTP was significantly higher in the laser treatment group than in the placebo group. In conclusion, IR laser is an effective modality in the treatment of MPS which increases an important mediator of pain inhibition, serotonin.
5-hydroxy indole acetic acid is excreted to a significant extent in colicky babies and people with appendicitis. (Acetic acid comprises 4% to 8% of vinegar.) So you don't want that stuff in your system; it's apparently a waste product. However, serotonin + 5-hydroxy tryptophan (5-HT+5-HTP) are biochemicals that are vital for pain ++reduction++, beneficial sleep, etc. People with myofascial pain and fibromyalgia generally are deficient in those precious biochemicals.
So it seems to me that you'd want to keep serotonin and 5-hydroxy tryptophan in the system, not excrete them. This, then, points to two possibilities in the study:
(1) The infrared laser increases the +production+ of those biochemicals, so the body can afford to excrete the excess. However, this doesn't seem plausible to me (though I could be mistaken). (2) The infrared laser increases the +loss+ of those beneficial biochemicals -- but since it +also+ stimulates the loss of the 5-hydroxy indole acetic acid waste, the pain is reduced. This may indeed be the case (though again, I might be mistaken).
Stir into the pot, the fact that the people in this clinical trial were receiving "medical treatment." Does this mean medication? How did the "medical treatment" influence the test? The abstract doesn't say.
Back to the main issue… I'm astounded that two wavelengths that manifest differently, and thus could be considered to have radically different properties -- red light and invisible heat -- could both be called lasers (unless the definition of “laser” is limited to “coherent” beam, in which case both definitions would apply). If there’s anyone on this list who does use or make infrared lasers and feel that they are beneficial, I’d like to hear from you, because that means that my reasoning is faulty and I need to understand things better.
Thanks much,
Nenah
Nenah Sylver, PhD
http://www.nenahsylver.com
* The Handbook of Rife Frequency Healing
* The Holistic Handbook of Sauna Therapy
* products and services for wellness,
including Transfer Factor and VIBE
Offline 
Send Email