You know, after Tamara's recent succcess with the demodex slaying Z cream,

and others speaking of theirs with the red LED lamps, it would be an

interesting experiment to put some of the lil' buggers under red LED light

for awhile and see what happens to them...   decrease in vitality or life

span, effects on reproduction, etc. etc.



If it did negatively impact them in someway, it would certainly be another

significant indicator for demodex as a root cause in rosacea.

Unfortunately, I do not as yet possess an LED array nor a microscope.  Not

even a petri dish, lol.   So someone else would have to conduct it.



Fry you little bastards, fry!!!  ; D





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Intense pulsed light appears to kill Demodex mites around hair follicles and

sebaceous

glands.... Dr. Sadick of Cornell University, New York, conducted an

investigation in which

24 patients with a mean age of 47 years and Fitzpatrick skin types I-IV were

treated with

an intense pulsed light device (Quantum SR, ESC-Lumenis, Palo Alto, Calif.),

which emits a

noncoherent, multiwavelength of light of 500-1,100 nm. All patients were treated

monthly, up to five times, using an average fluence of 25-45 J/cm2....



"If you treat patients with intense pulsed light, you can eradicate almost all

the

organisms," he said.



The findings help explain the results already observed with intense pulsed

light, Dr. Sadick

said. They also suggest that the patient who will benefit most is the person in

his or her

mid-40s who wants to reverse early sun damage but does not need dramatic rhytid

improvement.



...Killing of the Demodex organisms, and consequently toning down inflammatory

processes, probably explains why intense pulsed light improves redness. Many

patients

believe that they have a decrease in pore size, and this may be due to shrinkage

of the

sebaceous glands. Normalization of the elastin fibers may improve elasticity and

account

for some of the smoothing of texture that is seen. Decreased melanin production

accounts

for the improvements in dyschromia...."



Source >



http://rosacea-control.com/html/iplkillsmites.html



More on IPL and other light emitting devices >



http://rosacea-control.com/html/ipl.html



Demodex Editorial >



http://rosacea-control.com/html/demodex.html



Brady





--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Shaffner" <brianshaffner@...>

wrote:

>

> You know, after Tamara's recent succcess with the demodex slaying Z cream,

> and others speaking of theirs with the red LED lamps, it would be an

> interesting experiment to put some of the lil' buggers under red LED light

> for awhile and see what happens to them...   decrease in vitality or life

> span, effects on reproduction, etc. etc.

>

> If it did negatively impact them in someway, it would certainly be another

> significant indicator for demodex as a root cause in rosacea.

> Unfortunately, I do not as yet possess an LED array nor a microscope.  Not

> even a petri dish, lol.   So someone else would have to conduct it.

>

> Fry you little bastards, fry!!!  ; D

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

The possibility of RLT killing Demodex has crossed my mind, too. Would

be easy to look at someone's skin after several months of RLT use to

compare. Maybe Peter's skin is squeaky clear of Demodex. Maybe killing

Demodex is just one benefit along with the anti-inflammatory and

collagen effects. Lots of maybe's, but very interesting to

contemplate!



Quick, someone grab Peter and a microscope ;)



Artist



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "Brady Barrows" <brady@...>

wrote:

>

> "Intense pulsed light appears to kill Demodex mites around hair

follicles and sebaceous

> glands.... Dr. Sadick of Cornell University, New York, conducted an

investigation in which..........

Brian, This is indeed a definite possibility as it has been known for a while

that Blue Light can kill Propionibacterium Acnes. (P.Acnes).



Blue light is FDA approved for killing P.Acnes.



Apparently it was initially discovered when some scientists were trying to count

the number of ¡bugs¢ on surface tissue. The bugs fluoresced when illuminated

with the blue light. This was due to the reaction with porphyrin which the bugs

used as part of its respiratory chain, the fluorescing was the porphyrin

producing oxygen, the bugs did not like too much oxygen and consequently die.



There are many support articles for the destruction of P.Acnes with LED light.



http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/499713_2



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus&list_uids=17111415&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus&list_uids=16766484&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_DocSum



Blue has been proven to be the most affective for killing the P.Acne, but it has

also been noted that Red Light also kills P.Acne, and can penetrate deeper into

the skin, destroying P.Acnes that the blue light cannot reach. The two studies

shown above list combination treatments with Blue and Red.



I did some quick googling but couldn¢t find what the demodex mite uses for its

respiratory chain. But it is possible that it has the same affect.



Matt

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\

------



You know, after Tamara's recent succcess with the demodex slaying Z cream,

and others speaking of theirs with the red LED lamps, it would be an

interesting experiment to put some of the lil' buggers under red LED light

for awhile and see what happens to them... decrease in vitality or life

span, effects on reproduction, etc. etc.



If it did negatively impact them in someway, it would certainly be another

significant indicator for demodex as a root cause in rosacea.

Unfortunately, I do not as yet possess an LED array nor a microscope. Not

even a petri dish, lol. So someone else would have to conduct it.



Fry you little bastards, fry!!! ; D



Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Did a little more research. Unfortunately without more background knowledge it’s

only speculation, but seems to be heading somewhere.



There is a gram negative bacteria found within the Demodex Mite called Bacillus

Oleronius.





The following is an article on LLLT and Gram Negative Bacteria. It mentions two

other types of Bacteria, being the Gram Negative Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the

Gram Positive Staphylococcus aureus.



They classify the difference as follows. Gram-negative bacteria are those that

do not retain crystal violet dye in the Gram staining protocol. Gram-positive

bacteria will retain the dark blue dye after an alcohol wash, whereas

Gram-negative bacteria do not. In a Gram stain test, a counterstain is added

after the crystal violet, which colors all Gram-negative bacteria a red or pink

color. The test itself is useful in classifying two distinctly different types

of bacteria based on structural differences in their cell walls.



Here is a quote…



“All energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect on

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and inhibitory effect on Staphylococcus aureus.

Similarly, SHG Nd:YAG and He-Ne lasers with chosen energy densities were again

proliferating for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and inhibitory for Staphylococcus

aureus“



http://www.springerlink.com/content/e072158g52487462/



This shows that LLLT definitely has an affect on Gram-Negative/Positive

bacteria.



Unfortunately you have to purcahse the article to see it in its entirety. If you

look at the google search though it mentions something about Gram negative

Bacteria with higher amounts of porphyrins, so it gives a teaser to possibly

releasing some information there.



http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=gram-negative+bacteria+respiratory+chain\

+porphyrin&meta=





This article mentions Bacillus, Porphyrin and respiratory chain but there was

soo much medical jargon it was hard to put it all together. Maybe Dan could

decipher this one for us if he has a spare minute?



http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=197023





This article from the Rosacea Archives relates a possible cause to Bacillus

Oleronius also.



http://www.rosacea.org/press/archive/20040503.php



Hmm, All I can add is that LLLT definitely has an affect on bacteria. But for

Bacillus Oleronius specifically though,  I am unsure.



Matt.



-------------------------------------------------------------



Matt wrote: "I did some quick googling but couldn't find what the demodex mite

uses for its respiratory chain."



Hi Matt,



Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on this topic, which was of

course rather more detailed than the snippet above. ;)



I wonder if anyone else might like to take up the challenge and locate a study

with this information? You never know, someone might have a bit of time on their

hands and want to demonstrate their superior abilities with search engines. No

harm in cautious optimism, is there? :)



Kind regards,



Aurelia



Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Matt,



Thanks for posting this info.  I found it very interesting,

particularly since most articles I've read haven't mentioned naturally

occuring porphyrins in bacteria, but rather concentrate on application

of additional porphyric substances in addition to light therapy.



I couldn't dig up too much more that helped explain this, but here's

an article discussing light therapy (mostly laser, but again, I don't

think the light source is all that important here) and porphyrins.

It explains pretty well how they work together, namely,  "Light energy

is absorbed by bacterial porphyrins, triggering production of toxic

singlet oxygen which damages or destroys the bacteria":



http://www.shorelaser.com/LaserAcneRx.html



So with your articles and other suggesting that certain bacterial seem

to have naturally occuring porphyrins, potentially light therapy can

be antibacterial for these bacteria even without the use of additional

photoactive substances (like ALA, etc).



Along these lines, the only thing that worries me is the statement

"all energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect on

Pseudomonas aeruginosa".



Does this sort of answer your questions?   If not, let me know and

I'll take another stab at answering...



Thanks again...



Dan





  --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@...> wrote:

>

> Did a little more research. Unfortunately without more background

knowledge it's only speculation, but seems to be heading somewhere.

>

> There is a gram negative bacteria found within the Demodex Mite

called Bacillus Oleronius.

>

>

> The following is an article on LLLT and Gram Negative Bacteria. It

mentions two other types of Bacteria, being the Gram Negative

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the Gram Positive Staphylococcus aureus.

>

> They classify the difference as follows. Gram-negative bacteria are

those that do not retain crystal violet dye in the Gram staining

protocol. Gram-positive bacteria will retain the dark blue dye after

an alcohol wash, whereas Gram-negative bacteria do not. In a Gram

stain test, a counterstain is added after the crystal violet, which

colors all Gram-negative bacteria a red or pink color. The test itself

is useful in classifying two distinctly different types of bacteria

based on structural differences in their cell walls.

>

> Here is a quote…

>

> "All energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect

on Pseudomonas aeruginosa and inhibitory effect on Staphylococcus

aureus. Similarly, SHG Nd:YAG and He-Ne lasers with chosen energy

densities were again proliferating for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and

inhibitory for Staphylococcus aureus"

>

> http://www.springerlink.com/content/e072158g52487462/

>

> This shows that LLLT definitely has an affect on

Gram-Negative/Positive bacteria.

>

> Unfortunately you have to purcahse the article to see it in its

entirety. If you look at the google search though it mentions

something about Gram negative Bacteria with higher amounts of

porphyrins, so it gives a teaser to possibly releasing some

information there.

>

>

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=gram-negative+bacteria+respiratory+chain\

+porphyrin&meta=

>

>

> This article mentions Bacillus, Porphyrin and respiratory chain but

there was soo much medical jargon it was hard to put it all together.

Maybe Dan could decipher this one for us if he has a spare minute?

>

> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=197023

>

>

> This article from the Rosacea Archives relates a possible cause to

Bacillus Oleronius also.

>

> http://www.rosacea.org/press/archive/20040503.php

>

> Hmm, All I can add is that LLLT definitely has an affect on

bacteria. But for Bacillus Oleronius specifically though,  I am unsure.

>

> Matt.

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Matt wrote: "I did some quick googling but couldn't find what the

demodex mite uses for its respiratory chain."

>

> Hi Matt,

>

> Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on this topic, which

was of course rather more detailed than the snippet above. ;)

>

> I wonder if anyone else might like to take up the challenge and

locate a study with this information? You never know, someone might

have a bit of time on their hands and want to demonstrate their

superior abilities with search engines. No harm in cautious optimism,

is there? :)

>

> Kind regards,

>

> Aurelia

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

See the below study, which indicates Demodex is the carrier. I thought this

excerpt was pretty interesting:  "typical treatment for rosacea

initially includes oral antibiotics that destroy B. oleronius.

Interestingly, he said, antibiotics that are not harmful to these

bacteria generally are not effective in the management of rosacea. "

-Artist





The role of bacterial antigen(s) in the etiology and persistence of

papulopustular bacteria.

Dr. Kevin Kavanagh, Department of Biology, National University of

Ireland - Maynooth, and Dr. Frank Powell, consultant dermatologist,

Mater Misericordiae Hospital, Dublin.



Bacteria associated with microscopic mites known as Demodex

folliculorum may play a role in the development of papulopustular

(subtype 2) rosacea, according to the results of a study funded by a

National Rosacea Society grant and reported at the 2004 annual meeting

of the Society for Investigative Dermatology.



In the completed study, Dr. Kevin Kavanagh and colleagues found that

the bacterium Bacillus oleronius stimulated an immune system response,

inducing high levels of T-cell proliferation, in 79 percent of

patients with subtype 2 rosacea, compared with only 29 percent of

patients without the disorder. T-cell proliferation induces an

inflammatory response, evident as papules and pustules.



"This indicates that the Bacillus bacteria found in the Demodex mite

produce an antigen that could be responsible for the tissue

inflammation associated with papulopustular rosacea," Dr. Kavanagh

said.



The researchers located the bacteria in Demodex folliculorum, which

are normal inhabitants of human skin. Because these microorganisms

often occur in much greater numbers in patients with rosacea,

researchers have long theorized that they may play a part in the

development of the disorder.



The researchers offered several possibilities that may explain how

Demodex and bacteria interact to cause inflammation in rosacea. The

Demodex mites may carry the pathogenic bacteria into areas of the face

susceptible to the changes of rosacea, so that the increased mite

density in rosacea patients may result in a higher density of bacteria

that produce the papules and pustules. Alternatively, Demodex mites

may be attracted to an area of facial skin rich in these bacteria and

increase in numbers in this "fertile territory."



Another possibility is that the mites in rosacea patients are infected

with these bacteria, which in turn produce stimulatory antigens that

trigger the disorder in susceptible patients.



Dr. Kavanagh noted that the potential role for bacteria in causing

papulopustular rosacea is supported by the fact that typical treatment

for rosacea initially includes oral antibiotics that destroy B.

oleronius. Interestingly, he said, antibiotics that are not harmful to

these bacteria generally are not effective in the management of

rosacea.



Moreover, the possibility that antigens may play a role in disease

processes has been demonstrated in other disorders. For example,

antigens produced by Streptococcus and Staphylococcus bacteria have

been linked with such disorders as psoriasis, food poisoning and toxic

shock syndrome.



Dr. Kavanagh and his colleagues are now developing antibodies against

the antigen produced by B. oleronius to confirm its presence on the

faces of patients with papulopustular rosacea and to define its

relationship with Demodex mites.







--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@...> wrote:

>

> Did a little more research. Unfortunately without more background

knowledge it's only speculation, but seems to be heading somewhere.

>

> There is a gram negative bacteria found within the Demodex Mite

called Bacillus Oleronius.

>

>

> The following is an article on LLLT and Gram Negative Bacteria. It

mentions two other types of Bacteria, being the Gram Negative

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the Gram Positive Staphylococcus aureus.

>

> They classify the difference as follows. Gram-negative bacteria are

those that do not retain crystal violet dye in the Gram staining

protocol. Gram-positive bacteria will retain the dark blue dye after

an alcohol wash, whereas Gram-negative bacteria do not. In a Gram

stain test, a counterstain is added after the crystal violet, which

colors all Gram-negative bacteria a red or pink color. The test itself

is useful in classifying two distinctly different types of bacteria

based on structural differences in their cell walls.

>

> Here is a quote…

>

> "All energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect

on Pseudomonas aeruginosa and inhibitory effect on Staphylococcus

aureus. Similarly, SHG Nd:YAG and He-Ne lasers with chosen energy

densities were again proliferating for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and

inhibitory for Staphylococcus aureus"

>

> http://www.springerlink.com/content/e072158g52487462/

>

> This shows that LLLT definitely has an affect on Gram-Negative/

Positive bacteria.

>

> Unfortunately you have to purcahse the article to see it in its

entirety. If you look at the google search though it mentions

something about Gram negative Bacteria with higher amounts of

porphyrins, so it gives a teaser to possibly releasing some

information there.

>

> http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=gram-

negative+bacteria+respiratory+chain+porphyrin&meta=

>

>

> This article mentions Bacillus, Porphyrin and respiratory chain but

there was soo much medical jargon it was hard to put it all together.

Maybe Dan could decipher this one for us if he has a spare minute?

>

> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=197023

>

>

> This article from the Rosacea Archives relates a possible cause to

Bacillus Oleronius also.

>

> http://www.rosacea.org/press/archive/20040503.php

>

> Hmm, All I can add is that LLLT definitely has an affect on

bacteria. But for Bacillus Oleronius specifically though,  I am

unsure.

>

> Matt.

>

> -------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Matt wrote: "I did some quick googling but couldn't find what the

demodex mite uses for its respiratory chain."

>

> Hi Matt,

>

> Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on this topic, which

was of course rather more detailed than the snippet above. ;)

>

> I wonder if anyone else might like to take up the challenge and

locate a study with this information? You never know, someone might

have a bit of time on their hands and want to demonstrate their

superior abilities with search engines. No harm in cautious optimism,

is there? :)

>

> Kind regards,

>

> Aurelia

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.

yahoo.com

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

When first researching Rosacea I also ran across this fact - I read

that only antibiotics that worked against gram negative bacteria were

helpful for rosacea - reason unknown.



HUMMM



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "nurse_artist"

<nurse_artist@...> wrote:

>

> See the below study, which indicates Demodex is the carrier. I

thought this excerpt was pretty interesting:  "typical treatment for

rosacea

> initially includes oral antibiotics that destroy B. oleronius.

> Interestingly, he said, antibiotics that are not harmful to these

> bacteria generally are not effective in the management of rosacea. "

> -Artist

>

>

> The role of bacterial antigen(s) in the etiology and persistence of

> papulopustular bacteria.

> Dr. Kevin Kavanagh, Department of Biology, National University of

> Ireland - Maynooth, and Dr. Frank Powell, consultant dermatologist,

> Mater Misericordiae Hospital, Dublin.

>

> Bacteria associated with microscopic mites known as Demodex

> folliculorum may play a role in the development of papulopustular

> (subtype 2) rosacea, according to the results of a study funded by a

> National Rosacea Society grant and reported at the 2004 annual

meeting

> of the Society for Investigative Dermatology.

>

> In the completed study, Dr. Kevin Kavanagh and colleagues found that

> the bacterium Bacillus oleronius stimulated an immune system

response,

> inducing high levels of T-cell proliferation, in 79 percent of

> patients with subtype 2 rosacea, compared with only 29 percent of

> patients without the disorder. T-cell proliferation induces an

> inflammatory response, evident as papules and pustules.

>

> "This indicates that the Bacillus bacteria found in the Demodex mite

> produce an antigen that could be responsible for the tissue

> inflammation associated with papulopustular rosacea," Dr. Kavanagh

> said.

>

> The researchers located the bacteria in Demodex folliculorum, which

> are normal inhabitants of human skin. Because these microorganisms

> often occur in much greater numbers in patients with rosacea,

> researchers have long theorized that they may play a part in the

> development of the disorder.

>

> The researchers offered several possibilities that may explain how

> Demodex and bacteria interact to cause inflammation in rosacea. The

> Demodex mites may carry the pathogenic bacteria into areas of the

face

> susceptible to the changes of rosacea, so that the increased mite

> density in rosacea patients may result in a higher density of

bacteria

> that produce the papules and pustules. Alternatively, Demodex mites

> may be attracted to an area of facial skin rich in these bacteria

and

> increase in numbers in this "fertile territory."

>

> Another possibility is that the mites in rosacea patients are

infected

> with these bacteria, which in turn produce stimulatory antigens that

> trigger the disorder in susceptible patients.

>

> Dr. Kavanagh noted that the potential role for bacteria in causing

> papulopustular rosacea is supported by the fact that typical

treatment

> for rosacea initially includes oral antibiotics that destroy B.

> oleronius. Interestingly, he said, antibiotics that are not harmful

to

> these bacteria generally are not effective in the management of

> rosacea.

>

> Moreover, the possibility that antigens may play a role in disease

> processes has been demonstrated in other disorders. For example,

> antigens produced by Streptococcus and Staphylococcus bacteria have

> been linked with such disorders as psoriasis, food poisoning and

toxic

> shock syndrome.

>

> Dr. Kavanagh and his colleagues are now developing antibodies

against

> the antigen produced by B. oleronius to confirm its presence on the

> faces of patients with papulopustular rosacea and to define its

> relationship with Demodex mites.

>

>

>

> --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@> wrote:

> >

> > Did a little more research. Unfortunately without more background

> knowledge it's only speculation, but seems to be heading somewhere.

> >

> > There is a gram negative bacteria found within the Demodex Mite

> called Bacillus Oleronius.

> >

> >

> > The following is an article on LLLT and Gram Negative Bacteria. It

> mentions two other types of Bacteria, being the Gram Negative

> Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the Gram Positive Staphylococcus aureus.

> >

> > They classify the difference as follows. Gram-negative bacteria

are

> those that do not retain crystal violet dye in the Gram staining

> protocol. Gram-positive bacteria will retain the dark blue dye after

> an alcohol wash, whereas Gram-negative bacteria do not. In a Gram

> stain test, a counterstain is added after the crystal violet, which

> colors all Gram-negative bacteria a red or pink color. The test

itself

> is useful in classifying two distinctly different types of bacteria

> based on structural differences in their cell walls.

> >

> > Here is a quote…

> >

> > "All energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative

effect

> on Pseudomonas aeruginosa and inhibitory effect on Staphylococcus

> aureus. Similarly, SHG Nd:YAG and He-Ne lasers with chosen energy

> densities were again proliferating for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and

> inhibitory for Staphylococcus aureus"

> >

> > http://www.springerlink.com/content/e072158g52487462/

> >

> > This shows that LLLT definitely has an affect on Gram-Negative/

> Positive bacteria.

> >

> > Unfortunately you have to purcahse the article to see it in its

> entirety. If you look at the google search though it mentions

> something about Gram negative Bacteria with higher amounts of

> porphyrins, so it gives a teaser to possibly releasing some

> information there.

> >

> > http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=gram-

> negative+bacteria+respiratory+chain+porphyrin&meta=

> >

> >

> > This article mentions Bacillus, Porphyrin and respiratory chain

but

> there was soo much medical jargon it was hard to put it all

together.

> Maybe Dan could decipher this one for us if he has a spare minute?

> >

> > http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=197023

> >

> >

> > This article from the Rosacea Archives relates a possible cause to

> Bacillus Oleronius also.

> >

> > http://www.rosacea.org/press/archive/20040503.php

> >

> > Hmm, All I can add is that LLLT definitely has an affect on

> bacteria. But for Bacillus Oleronius specifically though,  I am

> unsure.

> >

> > Matt.

> >

> > -------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Matt wrote: "I did some quick googling but couldn't find what the

> demodex mite uses for its respiratory chain."

> >

> > Hi Matt,

> >

> > Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on this topic,

which

> was of course rather more detailed than the snippet above. ;)

> >

> > I wonder if anyone else might like to take up the challenge and

> locate a study with this information? You never know, someone might

> have a bit of time on their hands and want to demonstrate their

> superior abilities with search engines. No harm in cautious

optimism,

> is there? :)

> >

> > Kind regards,

> >

> > Aurelia

> >

> > Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.

> yahoo.com

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

Hi Dan,



     Yeah that confirms a few things.



When i was trying to find whether B.Oleronius contained naturally occuring

Porphyrins, I couldn't find any matches, so did a quick search to find if other

Negative Gram bacteria contained Porphyrins, but it seems to vary.



I think it is established that the production of singlet oxygen produced by the

light reacting with the porphyrin is destructive to the bacteria, However I

cannot locate if porphyrin is naturally occuring in B.Oleronius. Any ideas

there?



Yeah i share your concern about the statement that had the words "Proliferative"

and "Pseudomonas aeruginosa" in the same sentence. With consideration to the

fact that it is apparently an opportunistic bacteria that thrives in burns,

wounds and cuts.



http://textbookofbacteriology.net/pseudomonas.html



One of the major marketed uses of LED therapy is for wound healing. If it could

possibly have a proliferative affect on some form of gram negative bacteria this

could be a problem.



Matt.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\

----------------



Hi Matt,



Thanks for posting this info. I found it very interesting,

particularly since most articles I've read haven't mentioned naturally

occuring porphyrins in bacteria, but rather concentrate on application

of additional porphyric substances in addition to light therapy.



I couldn't dig up too much more that helped explain this, but here's

an article discussing light therapy (mostly laser, but again, I don't

think the light source is all that important here) and porphyrins.

It explains pretty well how they work together, namely, "Light energy

is absorbed by bacterial porphyrins, triggering production of toxic

singlet oxygen which damages or destroys the bacteria":



http://www.shorelas er.com/LaserAcne Rx.html



So with your articles and other suggesting that certain bacterial seem

to have naturally occuring porphyrins, potentially light therapy can

be antibacterial for these bacteria even without the use of additional

photoactive substances (like ALA, etc).



Along these lines, the only thing that worries me is the statement

"all energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect on

Pseudomonas aeruginosa".



Does this sort of answer your questions? If not, let me know and

I'll take another stab at answering...



Thanks again...



Dan



Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Matt,



I did some searching, but couldn't find anything on B.Oleronius and

porphyrins either.   I also did a search on the species and porphyrins

but did not find anything that would indicate that all members of the

species would contain porphyrins...



Dan



  --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Dan,

>

>     Yeah that confirms a few things.

>

> When i was trying to find whether B.Oleronius contained naturally

occuring Porphyrins, I couldn't find any matches, so did a quick

search to find if other Negative Gram bacteria contained Porphyrins,

but it seems to vary.

>

> I think it is established that the production of singlet oxygen

produced by the light reacting with the porphyrin is destructive to

the bacteria, However I cannot locate if porphyrin is naturally

occuring in B.Oleronius. Any ideas there?

>

> Yeah i share your concern about the statement that had the words

"Proliferative" and "Pseudomonas aeruginosa" in the same sentence.

With consideration to the fact that it is apparently an opportunistic

bacteria that thrives in burns, wounds and cuts.

>

> http://textbookofbacteriology.net/pseudomonas.html

>

> One of the major marketed uses of LED therapy is for wound healing.

If it could possibly have a proliferative affect on some form of gram

negative bacteria this could be a problem.

>

> Matt.

>

>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\

----------------

>

> Hi Matt,

>

> Thanks for posting this info. I found it very interesting,

> particularly since most articles I've read haven't mentioned naturally

> occuring porphyrins in bacteria, but rather concentrate on application

> of additional porphyric substances in addition to light therapy.

>

> I couldn't dig up too much more that helped explain this, but here's

> an article discussing light therapy (mostly laser, but again, I don't

> think the light source is all that important here) and porphyrins.

> It explains pretty well how they work together, namely, "Light energy

> is absorbed by bacterial porphyrins, triggering production of toxic

> singlet oxygen which damages or destroys the bacteria":

>

> http://www.shorelas er.com/LaserAcne Rx.html

>

> So with your articles and other suggesting that certain bacterial seem

> to have naturally occuring porphyrins, potentially light therapy can

> be antibacterial for these bacteria even without the use of additional

> photoactive substances (like ALA, etc).

>

> Along these lines, the only thing that worries me is the statement

> "all energy densities of Ar ion laser showed a proliferative effect on

> Pseudomonas aeruginosa".

>

> Does this sort of answer your questions? If not, let me know and

> I'll take another stab at answering...

>

> Thanks again...

>

> Dan

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

....Unless that bacteria likes to eat Demodex for dinner ;)  he he he

he!!



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Dan,

...........One of the major marketed uses of LED therapy is for wound

healing. If it could possibly have a proliferative affect on some form

of gram negative bacteria this could be a problem.

>

> Matt.

>

Too funny.   Demodex for dinner?    Is this another odd pregnancy

craving Artist?  ;-)



Dan



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "nurse_artist"

<nurse_artist@...> wrote:

>

> ....Unless that bacteria likes to eat Demodex for dinner ;)  he he he

> he!!

>

> --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Dan,

> ...........One of the major marketed uses of LED therapy is for wound

> healing. If it could possibly have a proliferative affect on some form

> of gram negative bacteria this could be a problem.

> >

> > Matt.

> >

>

Ewwww Dan that's gross! Hmmm....maybe if I put peanut butter on them..

and honey..   ha ha!



All the demodex and B.Oleronius talk is very interesting. Exciting to

see new ponderings.



Artist



--- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "dfries2003" <dfries2003@...>

wrote:

>

> Too funny.   Demodex for dinner?    Is this another odd pregnancy

> craving Artist?  ;-)

>

> Dan

>

> --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, "nurse_artist"

> <nurse_artist@> wrote:

> >

> > ....Unless that bacteria likes to eat Demodex for dinner ;)  he he

he

> > he!!

> >

> > --- In rosacea-support@yahoogroups.com, Matthew I <mtthw_i@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Dan,

> > ...........One of the major marketed uses of LED therapy is for

wound

> > healing. If it could possibly have a proliferative affect on some

form

> > of gram negative bacteria this could be a problem.

> > >

> > > Matt.

> > >

> >

>

Haha. I wish that were the case Artist. Maybe we can just breed something

specifically for the job. I'm sure you could take a pick from one of your many

options growing in my bar fridge on the balcony! Surely if you had a million

diffferent options one of them would have to do the  job!



Dan, I couldn't find any detailed information either on B.Oleronius either. I

tried to search for the the general Genus 'Bacillus' - but couldn't find any

good information either. Might need to go to some text books for this one. I

then starting thinking about the probitoics containing Lactobacillus that I

generally have once a day. Apparently 'bacillus' can be used to describe any

rod-shaped bacterium, however, when the word Bacillus is capitalised and

italicized, it refers to the genus bacillus. (thanks for the clear

classifications Mr scientists! real handy!) So silly me has no reason to worry

about dangerous inflammatory lipase enzymes in lactobacillus which are found on

B.Oleronius



Matt.



--------------------------------------------



....Unless that bacteria likes to eat Demodex for dinner ;) he he he

he!!



Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]