MedLightPro.com
Technology
Technology Resources
| LEDs vs. "Cold Lasers" (Low Level Light Therapy) |
| "LASER LIGHT VS LIGHT EMITTING DIODES (LED). When this therapy reached the U.S. and Canada, both lasers and light-emitting diodes at 660 nanometers were being used. The LED diffuses; the single frequency laser does not. With this diffusion, the cell can actually be in control of the treatment and shut off the molecules when it was done. But with the laser, the cells are no longer in control; the doctor or the practitioner applying the laser is in control. If he does it too long or with too much strength, you would not only heal the tissue, but you would start a deterioration again. So basically, the use of light-emitting diodes eliminated the draw back of lasers, and light could be applied into such sensitive areas as the eyes and around the face. LEDs allowed this whole area to blossom into a much larger usage by average people in their homes. Tiina Karu, Ph.D. of the Laser Technology Center in Russia, and affiliated with the University of California at Berkely, probably the top researcher in the world on the use of lasers and light emitting diodes published a study in Health and Physics Digest called "Photobiological Effects of Lasers" which discusses photobiological stimulation without laser light. The article explains that you can do laser treatment without using laser light, by using light emitting diodes which are much safer. Since the cells are basically in control of the process, there is no way to overuse light." HEALING WITH SINGLE FREQUENCY LIGHT. by: Olszewski, David, E.E., I.E. Consumer Health, Consumer Health Organization of Canada, Volume 22 Issue 10 October,1999 |
| "Lasers, however, have some inherent characteristics that make their use in a clinical setting problematic, including limitations in wavelength capabilities and beam width. The combined wavelengths of the light for optimal wound healing cannot be efficiently produced, the size of wounds that may be treated is limited (due to laser production of a beam of light—a fact inconsistent with treating large areas), heat production from the laser light itself can actually damage tissue, and the pinpoint beam of laser light can damage the eye. NASA developed LEDs to offer effective alternatives to lasers. These diodes can be configured to produce multiple wavelengths, can be arranged in large, flat arrays (allowing treatment of large wounds), and produce no heat. It is also of importance to note that LED light therapy has been deemed a nonsignifucant risk by the FDA; thus, FDA approval for use of LEDs in humans for light therapy has been obtained." Effect of NASA Light-Emitting Diode Irradiation on Wound Healing. HARRY T. WHELAN, M.D.,1,6,8 ROBERT L. SMITS, JR., M.D.,1 ELLEN V. BUCHMAN, B.S.,1 NOEL T. WHELAN, B.S.,1,8 SCOTT G. TURNER, M.S.,1 DAVID A. MARGOLIS, M.D.,4 VITA CEVENINI,8 HELEN STINSON, B.S.,8 RON IGNATIUS,3 TODD MARTIN, B.S.,3 JOAN CWIKLINSKI, M.S.,1 ALAN F. PHILIPPI, M.D.,6 WILLIAM R. GRAF, Ph.D.,6 BRIAN HODGSON, D.D.S.,4,5 LISA GOULD, M.D., Ph.D.,2 MARY KANE, B.S.,2 GINA CHEN, B.S.,2 and JAMES CAVINESS, M.D.7 Journal of Clinical Laser Medicine & Surgery Volume 19, Number 6, 2001 Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Pp. 305–314 |
| "Light technology has come a long way since the innovative development of lasers more than 40 years ago. Other monochromatic light sources with narrow spectra and the same therapeutic value as lasers—if not better in some cases—are now available. These include light emitting diodes (LEDs) and superluminous diodes (SLDs). As the name suggests, SLDs are generally brighter than LEDs; they are increasingly becoming the light source of choice for manufacturers and researchers alike. The light source does not have to be a laser in order to have a therapeutic effect. It just has to be light of the right wavelength. Lasers, LEDs, SLDs, and other monochromatic light sources produce the same beneficial effects. Simply stated, light is light. The dose and wavelengths are critical. At present, it is believed that appropriate doses of 600 to 1,000 nm light promote tissue repair and modulate pain." Therapeutic Light. by Chukuka S. Enwemeka, PT, PhD, FACSM, Rehab Management, the Interdiciplinary Journal of Rehabilitation, January/February 2004. |
near IR Light and Human Tissue Penetration
| "The depth of near-infrared light penetration into human tissue has been measured spectroscopically (Chance, et al 1988). Spectra taken from the wrist flexor muscles in the forearm and muscles in the calf of the leg demonstrate that most of the light photons at wavelengths between 630-800 nm travel 23 cm through the surface tissue and muscle between input and exit at the photon detector. Our laboratory has improved the healing of wounds in laboratory animals by using NASA LED light and hyperbaric oxygen. Furthermore, DNA synthesis in fibroblasts and muscle cells has been quintupled using NASA LED light alone..." The NASA Light-Emitting Diode Medical Program – Progress in Space Flight and Terrestrial Applications, Harry T. Whelan, M.D.1a,2,3, John M Houle, B.S.1a, Noel T. Whelan1a,3, Deborah L. Donohoe, A.S., L.A.T.G. 1a, Joan Cwiklinski, M.S.N., C.P.N.P.1a, Meic H. Schmidt, M.D.1c, Lisa Gould, M.D., PhD.1b, David Larson, M. D.1b, Glenn A. Meyer, M.D.1a, Vita Cevenini3, Helen Stinson, B.S.3 1a Departments of Neurology, 1bPlastic Surgery and 1cNeurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, 2Naval Special Warfare Group TWO, Norfolk, VA 23521, 3NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812. |
| "Since coherence is a major characteristic distinguishing lasers from light emitting diodes (LEDs) - lasers being highly coherent and LEDs not so coherent - there has been a tendency to frown at the notion that LEDs and polychromatic light are viable alternatives to lasers. By nature, lasers are highly coherent sources of light. They produce light and create, with their mirrors, a parallax of photons that travel lockstep in time and space. Such a high level of coherence is not readily available with other light sources. However, a distinction must be made between this type of coherence (coherence of light) and coherence following interaction with biological tissues. In general, light is scattered and distributed diffusely as it penetrates tissue. Theoretical computations indicate that lasers, LEDs, and polychromatic light do not scatter and diffuse in the same manner within biological tissues. Whereas longitudinal coherence, and hence the potential for greater depth of penetration, is theoretically longer for lasers, less so with LEDs, and even less with polychromatic light, there is no evidence that this factor makes a difference in tissue response, particularly at the molecular level. Indeed, evidence from specifically designed studies indicate that coherent and noncoherent light of identical wavelength, intensity, and irradiation does provide the exact same biological response, an observation which continues to gain support from recent studies. Coherence may influence light distribution in tissue, and it can be demonstrated that lasers produce light speckles or pockets of intense light within tissues; noncoherent monochromatic and polychromatic lights do not. However, this physical difference has not been shown to produce any additional benefits in favor of treatment with lasers." The Place of Coherence in Light Induced Tissue Repair and Pain Modulation. Chukuka S. Enwemeka. Photomedicine and Laser Surgery. 2006, 24(4): 457-457. doi:10.1089/pho.2006.24.457. |
DISCLAIMER Resources listed on this page are for informational and educational purposes only. Statements and claims made by others relating to possible other medical applications are not endorsed by MedLightPro, LLC. (independent distributor), Younger America, Inc. (YNGR), or Life Without Pain, LLC, the MedLight™ 630 Pro device is only for indications for use cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration 510(k) K042814. The information contained on this site is general in nature, readily available, and is not meant to substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other health care professional. |
| Compare the FDAs clearance papers for our MedLight™ 1630, over-the-counter use, nIR LED to that of other "cold lasers" for yourself; These all have similar or identical indications for use, all have regulation number 21 CFR 890.550, and all are Class II infrared lamps: (note that the MedLight does not require a prescription) |
| For Example: According to FDA papers: The TerraQuant MQ2000 Laser Therapy Device (which sells for $3,495) is "substantially equivalent" to the Quantum WARP 10 Light Delivery System (NASA studies device) AND The MedLight™ 630 Pro (1630) (which we sell for <$200) is also "substantially equivalent" to the Quantum WARP 10 Light Delivery System (NASA studies device) |
| "LASERS ARE NOT MAGICAL All too often the laser phototherapy literature is written as if a laser is magical. Lasers can seem magical if their unique properties of micro-dot focusing, high intensity, possibility of ultrashort pulses, coherent radiation (i.e., the light waves are all in phase), and monochromaticity are all made use of. If the first four properties are not useful in a particular application, as is the case for laser phototherapy, then a laser is just an expensive light bulb, whose emitted radiation follows (except for coherence) all of the same laws of physics and chemistry that the same wavelength of radiation from a conventional (non-coherent) light source follows." "Furthermore, there is no significant difference whether the light used to stimulate growth was generated by a laser or from non-coherent light of the same wavelength from a filtered incandescent lamp. These results further support the conclusion that lasers are not magical; it is the light that they produce that yields the biological effect. More and more papers are appearing in the therapy literature using non-coherent light sources such as LEDs. In general, they are less expensive than lasers, and as discussed above, in phototherapy it is the wavelength of the light that is important, not the coherence or lack of same." Laser and LED Therapy is Phototherapy. Kendric C. Smith, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Radiation Oncology (Radiation Biology), Stanford University School of Medicine, Founder and First President of American Society for Photobiology. Smith, K.C. Phtotomedicine and Laser Surgery, 2005, 23, 78-80. |
Linking Policy and Disclaimer of Endorsement: MedLightPro.com links to many Web sites created and
maintained by other public and/or private organizations. MedLightPro.com provides links to these sites
as a service to our users. The presence of a link is not an endorsement of the content of the site.
maintained by other public and/or private organizations. MedLightPro.com provides links to these sites
as a service to our users. The presence of a link is not an endorsement of the content of the site.
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |