Acne Lamp all-red unit

[IowaDavid]

Hi group. I've had around 20 laser treaments with various systems. Kristen recommended the AcneLamp all-red light unit as an adjunct to laser therapy. She made a post regarding the benefits of this light therapy on the support site, I think (maybe R-K). It is supposed to help wound healing, inflammation, the processes that produce inflammation (can't remember now), and _maybe_ telangiectasia.

I have been in very dire straights from this disease--barely able to cope with 60 degree air-conditioned rooms--and, of late, since I have been using the AcneLamp, I have noticed that it inhibits the superficial redness, and even the appearance of a flush, even if that flush causes a burning/painful sensation. It's humid and in the 80 degree range here, and though I don't tolerate this well, my condition is a far cry from where I was 2 summers ago.

**I am NOT attributing all of this, or most of this progress, to the AcneLamp. I stopped putting anything on my face save purified water over a year ago. I still use clonidine, I am on Clarithromycin, and I have been spacing my laser treatments out to 7 or 8 weeks to allow full healing.**

But, I am surprised at what the AcneLamp tends to do for my face: It calms it, such that the superficial vessels don't respond to a flush as violently. It's like that chemical "net" that clonidine pulls tight on your facial vasculature that tones down flushing.

I think Kristen mentioned that NASA had been interested in this technology; she referred to it as Low-Level Light Therapy (L.L.L.T.).
Anyway, I'd be interested to hear others' comments on this topic.

David

[Bihbicat]

Hi David,

I too got an all-red LED lamp and have been using it for the last few months. Trouble is it's hard to tell how much it's helped because I began using it right after I finished a round of 6 IPL treatments. My skin is better than it was before I started the IPL I think but how much of the improvement is due to IPL, the lamp, and diet resistrictions (since I discovered a few major triggers), and supplements I can't say. I suspect the lamp does help keep the paps under control but won't know for sure unless I stop it and see how I go without it, which I'm reluctant to do as it takes 8-12 weeks to start showing benefit so I'd have to stop for a stretch and then wait for a long time for the perks to kick in if it turns out it does make a big, positive, difference. It would be more scientific to just be doing one of these things at a time but as we all know one just wants relief so you go for whatever you can. Still, the lamps are so cheap compared to IPL I'm surprised more ppl don't give them a go. I use it as 20 mins of meditation time.

Cheers, B

[drnase]

I finally looked into the LLT and see benefits of using it in certain cases. In most cases, its use should be adjunctive to other treatments to get the best results.

By itself, it is probably best used to MAINTAIN clearance or rosacea remission.

Please keep us posted on its ability by itself to knock down the rosacea inflammatory response.

They are indeed now using the LLT for treatment of hair loss -- it stimulates healing and reduces fibrosis in the scalp.........if this had an anti-fibrotic effect on the scalp then it should also have that effect on the facial skin and may explain, in part why it may be effective. Aso, another possibility is the wound healing aspect -- this theoretically goes to the epidermis and helps it heal. Epidermal thinning, inflammation and ability to heal is off kilter in rosacea. So, it does start to make sense why LLT may work.

Keep us all informed please and thank you for the post.

[IowaDavid]

For Bihbicat: Yes, it is a decent price considering what some doctors toss around for more powerful laser treatments. I have been using this off and on, then, more on, of late. I know it's very difficult to separate a given factor that may be helping the rosacea in one's life, but, I posted because the AcneLamp has helped, then when I stopped for a couple of days before my last aborted laser treatment (my car died in downtown Chicago, but I had shaved the night before and stopped the AcneLamp sessions a few days earlier so I could flush better), I noticed a change after re-starting it.

Dr. Nase--I posted in R-S about, "When I close my eyes, my superficial redness goes away." It's strange, but it's like my facial vasculature is a series of blood reservoirs; sometimes the redness just comes in there and it will take a shiver or closing my eyes for a bit to drain these vessels. Otherwise, everything else is the same in the sitution save the above two actions.
I have noticed I look much paler, pinker/whiter after consecutive use of the acnelamp. It's like that draining of blood when I close my eyes and take a deep breath, but it holds on...sort of like a flushing doorstop.

I don't know. This is all anecdotal, but, I thought I'd share my experience and open the topic up for discussion in this forum.

David

[cactus]

Does the Acnelamp have any drying effects on your skin and does it emit heat or just light? I am trying to figure out if there are any contraindications for its use on rosacea sufferers?

[Bihbicat]

I haven't noticed any drying from the lamp at all Cactus. I did get that reaction from IPL but the lamp is fine.

[Peter]

I was the original user of all red light treatment for rosacea as I converted a Dermalux acne red / blue lamp into all red about 7 years ago.
It has been the main reason for my rosacea being under control although I also used Dixarit for a couple of years and Dalacin T topical in combination with the lamp.

I still keep in touch with Kristen and she still uses the all red Dermalux unit plus an LED device as well. Her condition is more severe than mine but I think she considers both lamps have helped her. Perhaps she will join this forum so we can get her opinion.

Interested in comments from others who have tried all red lamps.

Peter

[snwbdrloco84]

Hi,

Which model are you guy's/gal's using? I see there are many different models for sale on the site. It seems that the more expensive models just offer more coverage area. Thanks in advance for any comments.

Cheers,
Ray

[Peter]

Ray

Which site were you looking at ?

The one I have used for 7 years is the original Dermalux red / blue which I converted to all red after a few months. This is the ony model they produce as far as I know but they will convert to all red for you and despatch worldwide if required. Two years ago it was about £240 to send to the USA.

Another company supply a similar lamp for acne but with 3 red / 3 blue tubes but you would need to contact them to check about an all red conversion. I believe their replacement tubes are cheaper then Dermalux. The company web address is www.beautyskinuk.co.uk

Not sure on the current range of LED models available.

Peter

[snwbdrloco84]

Hey Peter,

The site I am looking at is http://www.acnelamp.com/order_acne_lamp.html
They have many different models available and the prices are not that bad. Why are you using all red bulbs? Does it make a tremendous difference?

Thanks,
Ray

[Peter]

Hello Ray

Thanks for that. Well this site is for LED's of which I have no personal experience of. The Dermalux lamp I use is made up of 4 fluorescent type tubes which emit a red light outside the harmful ultraviolet spectrum of light at 660 nanometres. If you go onto their website at http://www.dermalux.com you will see a picture and details although it will be the red / blue.

The red / blue gave me good results but I decided to change to all red as it was felt that this form of light had a greater anti-inflammatory effect and also aided skin healing. After changing I saw more improvement and therefore concluded all red was better. Kristen wrote several very detailed and excellent reports on her experiences and views on red light treatment for rosacea on the RSG. If I still have them I could try and cut and paste them in if there is an interest ?

The problem is it worked for me but like many treatments for rosacea you cannot always guarantee it will help another person. The only thing I can say is that if you can afford the expense then it could well be worth a try. If it didn't work for you then you could always try and sell the lamp on for another person to try. For any women reading this then red light does prevent wrinkles so that is another incentive to perhaps try one :lol:

Hope this helps.

Peter

[Erika_in_Michigan]

Hi Ray-

It is my understanding that blue light kills bacteria, while the red is anti-inflammatory. The combo is supposed to help acne, but rosacea isn't a bacteria thing. So, it makes sense to just load up on red bulbs.

[IowaDavid]

I am using the all-red acnelamp unit with the three heads. The blue light unit is mainly for acne lesions--bacteria and things that are associated with normal acne (I _think_ this is correct).
The all red unit is the one you'd probably want for rosacea as it helps us with, inflammation and wound healing and, as Dr. Nase said, epidermal thinning. I don't understand the process. OH! Hang a bell...

A post from Kristen:
>>>>
Hi again Scott-

<Kristen,
Once again.. another helpful post. Now tell me what light lamp do you use?? You mentioned using red light, and not blue light. All the acne lamps contain both red and blue light. Any info that you might have on this, I'd appreciate.
Thanks, Scott >

Always glad if I can help....

Never a simple answer with me ;) .....I have both the Dermalux fluorescent based light ( you can request an all red unit), and the Dima-Tech LED acne lamp (again you can get all red).

Now-I had been using the Dermalux since May of last year. I noticed benefits in scars, healing acne, but with my severe flushing-didn't expect it to put much of a dent in that. I was right but always said- I bet this thing is helping more than I know....

Visible red light in these at home devices work on don't penetrate far past the epidermis, but even if your flushing is severe-I still think the at home lights are better to have as an adjunct to laser than not at all. Better to be doing something than nothing inbetween txs imho. And because they are non damaging, they won't disrupt healing from lasers.

In general-LED is far more effective than fluorescent. Why-because LED is neither coherent nor incoheren light (fluores is incoh.). This means it's one step below lasers (though is not thermal nor damaging), in terms of how much photons are delivered to the skin. More photons=more of a biological response. It's why lasers show results so much faster since the photons are much more concentrated.

Anyway-I got the Dima tech(LED) about 1 1/2 months ago, and stopped the Dermalux cold turkey. I can not definitively link this phenomenon to the cessation of the Dermalux-but my skin sensitivity sky rocketed soon thereafter. Mind you, I had just gotten over a fever I never had with my severe flushing, so it's not prudent to assume the LED caused the sensitivity. Although, because of the higher photon delivery-your skin will likely be a bit more flushed/sensitive after LED as opposed to fluorescent. However you will be flushed a bit post all light tx-and it is a "temporary" increase in blood flow and is how the blood vessels get replaced/repaired. (whole other post :)> )

With the LED I did notice an even more rapid healing in my scars-and a seemingly more consistent clarity in the tone of my skin when not flushing, as well as a further improvement in acne. Bonus to LED is because it is neither coherent nor incoherent, unlike fluorescent, it has the potential to help address telangiectasia.

It takes approximately 3 months to build enough energy in cells before results from these low level devices. Like sitting in the sun for 3 min vs 3 hours in terms of energy absorption......I add that Peter Waters told me it took approximately 2 years to see maximum healing from his daily Dermalux use, and it was in conjunction with clonidine which played a big role.

A photon is a photon is a photon, so I assumed there wouldn't be any loss of that "build up" in switching from one device to another,but I do not know. So perhaps the Dermalux was indeed helping with sensitivity, and I have not yet hit my 3 months with the LED for it to "kick" in if you will.... Maybe the Dermaluxs more even light field was more effective-I can't be sure. So at this time I am currently alternating days with the Dermalux and Dima Tech .When I reach 3 months with the Dima (led), I may stop the Dermalux again.

I felt it was important to tell that story because it is a personal decision as to which device to go with. Again, there were many factors involved in my situation, and do not believe my change in sensitivity was caused by the LED per se. Both the LED and fluorescent give off the same amount of energy - 4 joules pr minute. And LED has been mentioned in the same sentence with having a calming effect on rosacea.

You can get the Dermalux at:

http://www.dermalux.com

It's British and American imitations do not allow for all red units. It is about $400 USD+ a $50 120V/plug converter. Depending on useage-tubes require replacement every 1.5-2 years and are a tad expensive.

and the Dimatech-LED at

http://www.acnelamp.com

1,2, and 3 heads retail from $129-219 USD. No replacements and LEDs often go for 10,000 hours.

HTH and good luck in what you decide.
Kristen
---------------------------

<Now my question is, how do you rebuild that collagen?? >

Folks will love this answer in being facetious ;o - but laser and light therapy are the primary ways you can stimulate collagen production. That's actually the main purpose for many light treatments.... Collagen may be able to be stimulated by some topical applications to my understanding, but for rosaceans this route is not recommended. Retin A, alpha and beta hydroxy and a few others may stimulate minimal collagen production, but not to the degree light treatment will and of course will irritate....Most don't realize those all red acne lamps ppl hear me pushing (LOL I'm a light pusher ;) ), stimulate collagen non- invasively and without damaging surrounding tissues....Yep fountain of youth- since starting the acne lamp my beginning lines have all but disappeared. And daily use of the light keeps the turnover going. Other than that radio frequency is being used to stimulate collagen but light's benefits are more multi faceted. Anti-inflammatory, healing without damage, hydration, increased water/oxygen/nutrient delivery, blood vessel replacement, lymphatic assistance (i.e. reduces swelling) etc. I make the distinction between the home devices (acne lamps-Dermalux fluorescent and DimaTech LED) as these are non- invasive non-thermal devices which work by stimulating healing. High energy thermal devices (IPL and lasers), work by causing damage to signal repair. <<<<<

And another series of posts she made that I cut-and-pasted:
>>>>>
Hi Aurelia, Dr. Nase et al...

After my answer to the Softlaser post I realized I was misleading in that the acne lamps couldn't be potentially useful to the superficial vasculature. So I gathered some info from my past posts and hope I can help out a bit more, maybe address some of your q's in the process Aurelia, if it helps..

This is a dilly of a long post-sorry-but I wanted to be thorough in providing a convenient source for this information...

< It certainly would not be appropriate for rosacea redness, but possibly spot treatment of isolated papules. If it's too small and low-powered for skin with full-blown flushes, might it work as a preventative for rosaceans still at the 'invisible flushing' stage?>

Something as tiny as that laser device wouldn't cover enough surface area to be of value for that aspect...

< And any ideas on whether it might help acneform rosacea generally, rather than just "isolated papules"? (Or would the red/blue lamps be better?)>

Imho amalgamating the efficacy with the economics, the all red acne lamps would be a better investment. Also very simply for the issue of if you're a person who has a lot of p&p's, it would be time consuming to treat each one individually, when a single 15 min. acne lamp tx could cover your whole face.

It's not to say the Softlaser wouldn't be good for spot tx as Dr. N mentioned, I think that's a good idea, but the lamps have the potential to assist with the superfical vasculature and other things which I'll detail in a moment...

< The website says "it need only be used for 3 to 5 minutes per day for optimum results". Surely these best possible results could only be achieved from such a short time with skin that was already in very good condition?>

I hadn't looked closely at the details about the Softlaser, but if it is truly a laser, it sets it apart from the acne lamps w/ different properties...So I couldn't say how quickly it would act on p&ps, but I can take a guess from what my reasearch on low level light therapy has indicated to me..

Acne lamps, LED& fluorescent-are low level non-thermal energy- meaning they don't cause thermal insult & work by causing damage to signal repair. Instead they just deliver photons and stimulate healing.

Lasers, regardless if used at low power, are high energy thermal devices and work by damaging to signal repair.. There actually should be a warning on Softlaser cause like a laser pointer, it could cause eye damage.

Either way, acne lamps or low energy laser tx, take much longer to work than standard high energy laser txs. Cells have to build up energy over the course of several months daily to elicit a substantial biological response. Like I mentioned though, this being a laser may help quicker zapping the bumps.

Here's some information on why all red light in particular, and the all red acne lamps, have the potential to not only assist with p&p's, but the superifical vasculature, and other symptoms including burning, nerve reactivity, and expression of neuropeptides... Dr. Nase in specifics, setting LED apart from fluorescent based acne lamps, is LED's potential assistance with telangiectasia due to their more efficient light and energy delivery... LED's are actually the most effective source of light at delivering energy pr. cm2, which assists with depth of penetration because less energy is scattered across a surface and within tissues.

I say the acne lamps are for superficial vasculature because visible red won't get deep enough to assist with moderate to severe flushing, but that's where I believe infrared LED's have potential at a certain wavelength...

Red Light more in depth:

-anti-inflammatory/calming effect on epidermis
-increases circulation to replace damaged bv's
-stimulates collagen
-stimulates ATP(energy of a cell, increases cells nutrient absorption and waste removal)
-increases lymphatic activity
-increases DNA/RNA synthesis
-*reduces excitabilty of nervous tissue
-stimulates fibrolastic activity
-increases phagocytosis(clean up of dead cells)
-stimulates tissue granulation
-stimulates acetylcholine release(this causes vasoconstriction which I'll include an abstract below)
-Readily absorbed by the mitochondria and therefore potentially stimulatory
-Excellent source of stimulation of a range of growth factors
-(Visible)Red Light does not penetrate very effectively below the skin surface and into the tissue below so(Visible)Red light is the best for wound healing or superficial conditions but is not the most effective way to treat deeper injury

LLLT/low level light therapy stimulates the following- referring primarily to red/infrared light:

-Growth factor response within cells and tissue as a result of increased ATP and protein synthesis
-Improved cell proliferation
-Change in cell membrane permeability to calcium up-take
-Pain relief as a result of increased endorphin release
-Increased serotonin (possible(?) connection to increased flushing during depression due to lower serotonin levels. (Low serotonin is also said to be responsible for bv dilation in migraines)
-***Suppression of nociceptor action*** (VERY interesting) In a past post, Dr.Nase mentioned the probability that type C nociceptors are implicated in Rosacea. They are the nerve fibers responsible for pain, burning/itching sensations and release a great number of dilatory susbstances to the cheeks, nose, chin&forehead.( It is message # 1299 in rosacea knowledge)
-Strengthening the immune system response via increasing levels of lymphocyte activity and through a newly researched mechanism termed photomodulation of blood.
-photoactivation of enzymes-Red light has been shown to increase levels of SOD (superoxide dismutase most powerful antioxidant) Other than SOD's role in protecting from free radicalization, the following abstract illustrates how SOD levels drop after skin is exposed to irritants:

European Journal of Dermatology. Vol. 8, Issue 1, January - February 1998: 8-12, Investigative Reports

Summary: Oxidative stress is known to be implicated in the inflammation induced by the anti-psoriatic irritant, dithranol. In this study, we wished to investigate whether this is reflected in the levels of the antioxidant enzyme, Cu,Zn-superoxide dismutase, as detected by quantitative immunocytochemistry, and whether similar changes also occur following exposure to an irritant not normally associated with reactive oxygen species generation, namely sodium lauryl sulphate. Analysis of biopsies from patch test sites revealed that significant reductions in the epidermal levels of Cu,Zn- superoxide dismutase were induced by both dithranol and sodium lauryl sulphate, although the time course of diminished activity was different for each irritant. Our findings suggest that oxidative stress plays a general role in the pathophysiology of acute irritant contact dermatitis.

Heart Vessels. 1997;12(4):179-91.

Acetylcholine-induced vasoconstrictor response of coronary vessels in rats: a possible contribution of M2 muscarinic receptor activation.

Nasa Y, Kume H, Takeo S.

Department of Pharmacology, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Science, Hachioji, Japan.

A mechanism by which acetylcholine (ACh) may elicit vasoconstrictor response in coronary vessels was studied in rat hearts perfused at a constant flow rate. In spontaneously beating hearts, bolus injections of ACh and carbachol (CCh) produced biphasic changes in coronary perfusion pressure (CPP): a transient increase at the initial period followed by a sustained decrease. In KCl-arrested hearts, ACh and CCh produced a monophasic increase in CPP, which was attenuated by either removal of endothelial cells by saponin or cyclooxygenase inhibition by diclofenac sodium. In the spontaneously beating heart, ACh-induced vasoconstriction was almost abolished by atropine (0.1 microM) and was markedly attenuated by an M2 antagonist, methoctramine (0.1 microM), but not by an M1 antagonist, pirenzepine (1 microM). Arecaidine propargyl ester (APE), an M2 agonist, produced coronary artery constriction which was attenuated by methoctramine (0.1 microM) but not by pirenzepine (0.1 microM) in both spontaneously beating and KCl-arrested hearts. McN-A-343, an M1 agonist, increased CPP in both beating and KCl-arrested hearts, but to a lesser degree than APE. These results suggest that the release of vasoconstrictor prostaglandins from endothelial cells contributes to the vasoconstrictor response to ACh in perfused rat coronary vessels, and the response to ACh appears to be mediated, in part, via the M2 subtype of muscarinic receptors.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9559968&dopt=Abstract

So in summary,LOL-get to the point Kristen! ;) I really think mild to moderate cases have a great chance of getting their rosacea in relative check through useage of all red lamps daily and indefinately. Taking into account and referring to Peter Waters story, it took him 2 years to achieve maximum effect, and it was in conjunction with clonidine...

Moderate to severe cases wouldn't see a dent in deeper flushing with acne lamps, so more aggressive means like the Yag may be necessary, but none the less, the potential assistance with superficial vasculature still makes them worthwhile imho.. Quicker results are always going to be seen with lasers and IPL, but I feel the acne lamps could possibly even help slow degradation after laser txs. All in theory, but worth trying in my estimation. And again mentioning LED based lamps have a potential advantage of addressing telangiectasia.

I am actively investigating the employment of infrared LED's for moderate to severe cases.

Thanks for listening and HTH!

Kristen
---------------------------------------------

Hey Aurelia-

Sure I'll try to clarify if I can for ya...I'm not sure if you sent this to the group as well, so if you have I can just post this hopefully to clear up any confusion. Or confuse more :O Long one ahead...I apologize for the length.

Okee where to start..

First it would have to be distinguishing the term "photodynamic therapy"-PDT. This can apply to a broad range of things, sort of a generic term for the use of light, whether it's light alone or light + the useage of a chemical topically or systemically. All of Matija's abstracts you included seem to be the latter w/ a topical...

Having said that, using a chemical topically in conjunction with light, or systemically, Visudyne for example for the tx of wet macular degeneration, Psoralen for psoriasis, is an entirely different animal than just light alone...

Aminolevulenic acid as you mentioned is another one.. These chemicals, whether internal or external, are essentially activated by the light as I'm sure you deduced, but this also changes their chemical structure and reactivity, actually making them "oxidizing" or toxic, hence why PDT is becoming employed in the tx of cancer... These chemicals also sensitize the skin over all to light in addition to making cancer cells or blood vessels "targets" for example, which is a concern I'll touch on in a min..

Amino, if I'm not mistaken, also structurally changes the sebaceous glands. Aside from Accutane, I think it's one of the only ways to permanently change their structure. Maybe great for spot tx, but imho, may be an aggrevator to the rosacea full facial in the long run.. Course in the case of rhinophyma or sebaceous hyperplasia, one could argue there's already structural change.

A long time ago I had briefly touched on PDT with Dr. Nase in the treatment of rosacea-on rk maybe? I had felt in contradiction I think to him, PDT didn't look promising for us because of its photosensitizing effects, and oxidizing properties.

My feeling was in rosacea the environment is already overwhelmed by oxdization our body can barely handle. Our immune system isn't defective, but I'd say the normal response is definately and actually working against us...A chemical agent magnifies oxidizing effect by I don't know how many 100 fold, regardless of if "activated" by non thermal light (acne lamps), or thermal-lasers. I'm thinkin these chemicals just might cause too much oxidization, causing our immune system to send in more troops and compound the issue.

Oxidization obviously occurs getting light tx done at all, but particularly with lasers because they work by damaging to signal repair, unlike the fluorescent and LED based lamps which simply stimulate healing w/o causing damage...The idea is to cause just enough to signal repair, too much damage ( like with too high joules), I feel makes things worse. So to me, it illustrates what may happen if too much oxidization occurs from chemicals. I dunno, just a theory.

As I mentioned the additional photosensitizing effect on the skin overall concerns me..Blue light in acne lamps is very close to UV, and some ppl have found sensitivity with it. Even with red photosensitization would enhance the power or the light... So with increased oxidization from a chemical, and increased light power-I'm not sure what the effect would be.

I had theorized I felt the best analagous model for rosacea's pathiogenesis was wet macular degeneration.. I'm by far not an expert on any of this, don't mean to seem like I am ;O , but it was actually the use of PDT on WMD that turned me on to believing red light had promise for us (though Peter is the one who pioneered it). So I looked into PDT through trials at QLT (pioneers of PDT) in Canada. Preliminary findings were very promising for WMD, about 60% of the cases improved, so you'd think because I felt WMD is a model for rosacea, I'd be for it for us. However, given we do not know the other factors in addition to a blood vessel defect, and the reasons I mentioned, I remain weary. Plus that other 40% was either reaction to the drug/chemical, an increase in rapidity of vision loss, or no change. This was systemic though.

So in summary of that diatribe ;) , perhaps PDT may be be great for hyperplasia or rhinophyma spot tx, but I'm not so sure to "non- structurally" changed areas with the underlying rosacea, like in the case of employing PDT for a standard tx of p&p's ...

Cutting oil gland activity in excess, like too many courses of Accutane or PDT txs perhaps, I'd think might cause a trickle down effect of making skin more dehydrated, imbalanced, & vulnerable.. I have no point of reference for just how much it changes the with each tx (I'd have to make sure it's amnio that does this too)... And I still can't find out from my doc if Yags permenantly change glands :O I think non chemically, Smoothbeam and ClearLight have just a temporary 6 month shrinkage, and acne and oil return.

I do know though there was a person whose rosacea worsened with Clearlight (operates at the blue wavelength on Peter and my lamp- though we use all red), and Dr. Nase expressed concern I thought over Smoothbeam worsening rosacea because it heats water at sebaceous gland level (1400nm)....

Let me get to your specific q's though...

<If fluorescent light (as in red & blue lamps) is the weakest, then IPL and lasers are far stronger, how come they're now being used as if they were interchangeable? Or have I misunderstood something?>

Any of those sources could activate the chemicals and the power isn't really a factor...It's just the photons are needed. Depending on what or where is being targeted, then you may need a certain light source or wavelength.

Fluorescent and LED aren't weaker per se. It gets confusing because it all has to do with how much energy is being delivered pr cm 2. Lasers and IPL zap a cm2 with 24 joules (for example) in a pulse pr second, fluorescent and LED would take sitting in front of them for 6 minutes to get that same 24 joules (4 joules pr. min)...As you can see, that quick shot of concentrated energy is gonna have more of a punch. That plus the heat IPL and lasers emit- one little cm2 is getting hit with photon energy and thermal energy in a finger snap.... The lamps spread that energy out and they are non-thermal, therefore they do not insult the tissue and structures...they simply deliver the photons.

As far as "weaker", the order has to do with how much photons they deliver, how far they penetrate, and their power.... Ironically, lasers are less effective than LED's, IPL, and fluorescent at delivering photons to target over a range of depths because their concentrated nature makes them scatter within tissue, and their disadvantage is a finite depth. Yet because of their power, they pack a big punch with the photons they do deliver.

IPL and fluorescent are classified as "incoherent" light, meaning photons are spread farther apart, but light travels easier across the surface, and therefore photons can reach a broader range of depths and more photons sneak through if you will.

LED's fall in between lasers and IPL/fluorescent. Ironically again, LED's wind up delivering the most photons to target and penetrating best because their photons are not so incoherent a lot gets lost in travel, or so concentrated that they scatter. They are just "incoherent" enough to travel easy across a surface. So over all, they win for the most efficient photon delivery...

Then independently, IPL and lasers can be grouped together as "thermal devices" high energy (also delivering heat), and fluorescent and LED are non-thermal low energy.

They all do the job but in different ways and times...I argued in a post "the inefficiency of IPL" on rk or rs, IPL may be less effective or have such varying results because while it reaches a range of depths due to its incoherency, depending on the filter and settings used, there were too many colors within the light pulse. Red is what is best absorbed by our target-hemoglobin, therefore it will elicit the best biological response for us. If light has other colors-green targets melanin, blue porphyrins etc, and most of the light is not red, it's not gonna help us much because it'll be absorbed by other structures. We need to excite the hemoglobin in order to stimulate a change within the vessel.

Hope I didn't confuse the hell out of you! ;O

<Secondly, is this the same kind of blue light as the Dermalux lamp?>

If it's fluorescent produced blue it could be. If it's laser it wouldn't be.....

< I thought the fluorescent lamps were only to be used on dry skin (?)>

Doesn't matter I don't think. All red light-regardless of the source, actually increases nutrient delivery to the skin. This includes oxygen and water, so it should help with hydration.

>I wonder if there's anything a bit milder(for PDT) that one could buy to get a stronger response from the red or blue lights for home use. What do you think?<

I wouldn't say so... it's not something I'd want to mess with at home. Nothing that's going to change any structure chemically is something I would consider mild.

Lordy I wrote a discertation - LOL!!!! I hope that helps out though... I always go on when I'm explaining something cause this info is so hard to find in one place and it gets confusing. If ppl are like me, I appreciate undestanding how things work. So I'm more than willing to help you understand.

Hope ppl aren't asleep! LOL!

Kristen

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

Anyway, I emailed her back and forth before I got mine, and decided that, for me, the acne lamp led all-red unit was the best option. I got the three-head one for the best clearance and time saving. (www.acnelamp.com) If you're going to buy the LED lamp, just get a three-head. You really need all three to cover the butterfly pattern in the centrofacial region. I'm considering getting a second lamp and rigging it up so I can treat my forehead and chin and the spots were the three head lamp doesn't have enough light area to cover. Not sure on this one, though. We'll have to see.

Hope this helps some people.

David

[Peter]

Hello David

Thanks for pasting in Kristen's notes - saved me a job. As you can see she certainly does her research.

As far as choice of lamps go to try it's really your call but the Dermalux type worked for me. Keep us posted how you get on but if you need any help let me know.

Hello Erika - How are you ?

Your description of the effects of red and blue light in the acne unit is excactly right. To get more technical the pro-pionibacterium bug which is responsible for acne is called an anaerobic bacterium because it can only live where there is a minimum amount of oxygen about. It is however very unusual in that it naturally uses a chemical called porphyrin to help it breath. Porphyrins if they are exposed to certain wavelengths of light (found in blue) will become excited and produce oxygen that will eventually lead to the death of this bacterium. The red wavelength influences the healing of tissues by stimulating the white blood cells to produce fibroblasts, the building blocks from which new tissue is created thus healing any abrasions. In rosacea it is felt that the red light also has an anti-inflammatory action similar to that say of using an antibiotic.

Hope everybody has kept up with this thread and isn't zzzzzzzzzzz

Best wishes

Peter

[IowaDavid]

Thanks for that information, Peter. I would just like to add that I got a Gemini treatment yesterday, and just used the LED red lamp today. It's strange, but I can actually feel the light doing whatever it's doing--stimulating the production of fibroblasts? Anyway, it does help with the inflammation. It should be interesting to see how daily use of the lamp will affect my healing after this last laser treatment. I'm beginning to think it may be very helpful, and I didn't use it regularly until a few weeks after my last treatment. Anyway, I'll keep the board posted.

David

[Peter]

David

No problem. It is difficult to explain but try and keep a look out for subtle improvements / changes to your skin that might not be obvious. I noticed after a few weeks how much softer my skin became and it has remained that way like a baby's bum and wrinkle free :lol: Keep everybody posted with your progress and good luck.

Peter

[umd18]

Is there a way to simply buy a red LED bulb as opposed to buying one of the units? What is the power of the bulbs used in the acnelamp? Just a thought.

[Peter]

I would imagine Dermalux or Beauty Skin would sell you one tube but not sure what you would gain by this as you would still need a way of powering it up. Suggest you contact them via their web sites and ask the question.

The spec: I have for the Dermalux AV is:

Voltage:- 230V AC
Frequency:- 50Hz
Power:- 75 Watt
Fused at 3A
Philips type 2 starter

Peter

[Max]

Is there a way to simply buy a red LED bulb as opposed to buying one of the units? What is the power of the bulbs used in the acnelamp? Just a thought.

the lamps that are based on LEDs should be easy to build. i'm pretty sure the use ordinary red leds.

but on the other side - building it all on your own will be a lot of work. i've seen led based red lamps for low price. maybe only question is if they are bright enough...

just googled a bit, found bulb replacements built on led technology for 5 bucks each. so you can put them in ordinary reading lamps...

This sounds very interesting.

I'm not sure i would be disciplined enough to make sure i used it everyday. I feel as though i'd end up putting it to the back of the cupboard with my thigh trimmer and electronic pulse thingies :oops:

[IowaDavid]

Sally--I've begun to notice that, if used regularly, at least in the early stages, you can notice the difference after using it. It's like a 15 minute calming session for your face, but this calming and tendency not to flush, or resist flushing, and have a clearer baseline pink/redness, is what has gotten me interested in using it regularly. I did, however, not use it much the first couple of months I had it. Just my experiences with it though, I'm sure it varies from person to person like the rosacea.

[Bihbicat]

So what, you guys think it's okay to use the lamp right after IPL or (Genesis) Laser tx? I've never been 100% sure about that.

[IowaDavid]

Kristen said she did. I just did today. I'll be a guinea-pig-in-progress until I start breaking out in welts.... ;)

[Max]

So what, you guys think it's okay to use the lamp right after IPL or (Genesis) Laser tx? I've never been 100% sure about that.

i guess there's really nothing to worry about. you can think about that as light from an electric bulb where all wavelengths above and below red light are filtered.

[umd18]

the lamps that are based on LEDs should be easy to build. i'm pretty sure the use ordinary red leds.

but on the other side - building it all on your own will be a lot of work. i've seen led based red lamps for low price. maybe only question is if they are bright enough...

just googled a bit, found bulb replacements built on led technology for 5 bucks each. so you can put them in ordinary reading lamps...

Thanks. Probably too much work.

[IowaDavid]

Peter--I think Kristen said it was okay to have some of the red LED light hit one's open eyes. Is this correct given your understanding of the red LED light? I don't look directly into the light source while I treat myself, but it's nice to have my eyes open and look in a small mirror to make sure my flush zone is being covered by the light during my session with the lamp.
Thanks.

David

[Peter]

Sally

In my case I found that using something that controlled my rosacea and was side effect free was sufficient motivation to use it daily. It is a bind sitting in front of a lamp for 15 minutes but eventually it becomes routine just like washing and applying a topical or taking a pill. I find now I can not use it for a week and my skin condition doesn't deterorate. At the end of the day it is up to the individual how they want to get back to trying to live a normal life again but certainly sitting at home waiting for a cure or for it to go away wasn't on my agenda. Easy for me to say this as I know it is very difficult for those with severe cases but I still think you have to be proactive to find a treatment that suits you and actually works.

David

I know Kristen did experiment with the LED directly into her eyes but I don't think it was successful and I certainly I would not advise trying this without expert medical advice. I use a different form of light source but I always wear the goggles provided. What you say about the calming effect on your skin is interesting because in the early days I always checked in the mirror after the lamp session and my face looked pale.

All the best to you both.

Peter

[umd18]

Here is something I found that might make building your own device a little cheaper.

http://www.kaliszincolor.com/color-therapy/P_dichro_floods.htm

The link describes a dichro bulb that you can get in either blue or red. It apparently has a lense that filters the light to produce the proper wavelength. The model they refer to is made by GE. The model # for the red is 150PAR/FL/R. Blue is 150PAR/FL/B.

Here is a link of what the bulbs look like:

http://www.bulbman.com/browseproducts/Index5.html

This seems to be cost effective to try. These bulbs seem to be relatively powerful. All you would need is a ceramic socket and a bulb.

Any thoughts?

[IowaDavid]

Interesting. I'll have to read some more about those bulbs and compare them to the acnelamp's specifications. It would be great if I could add on a bulb to treat my forehead at the same time as my central face. Thanks for the links. :D

[IowaDavid]

I found this link. Any physics people in here? I'm trying to figure out what the joules/cm2 these lights would have at a given distance (say, 6", as when looking at the acnelamp.

http://www.superbrightleds.com/MR16_specs.htm


I don't know much about this area. I'm assuming that rigging up a mulitple LED-bulbed unit wouldn't be that difficult; I would like to figure out how much energy would be emitted, though. And is 655-665nm standard for red light?

Thanks.

David

[Adam]

Dear all:

Once I posted to another support group, asking questions about acne lamp with no response. Now I learn a lot about what I want to know from this forum. Thank you all for these helpful posts with depth!

Cheers,
Adam

[Peter]

Hi Adam

Glad the information on the thread was useful. Both Kristen and myself wrote extensively about the use of red light for treating rosacea on the RS group and as some of Kristen's posts have been pasted in I think most of the questions will have been covered.

It is really up to the individual to decide whether or not they are prepared to make the initial cost for a lamp and then experiment to see if it helps their rosacea.

If I can help further let me know.

Regards

Peter

[Adam]

Peter:

Thank you, it's very nice of you! Your posts and IowaDavid's, Kristen's covered most of the questions. I like the format and design of this forum, view and search all postings as easy as 1-2-3 :)

I browsed dermalux.com and acnelamp.com, these two types look different, perhaps both can work effectively with no side-effect. See if I can find and get one from the store.

Nice avatar, Peter. You have a cool summer.

Adam

[Peter]

Thanks Adam

There is also the Beautyskin site:

http://www.beautyskinuk.co.uk/contact.htm

This is the same as the Dermalux I use but has 2 extra tubes = 6 so therefore is bigger. For acne with red / blue they do offer a money back offer if it doesn't work, so you could always try red / blue first to see if it helps your rosacea.

If you try a lamp let us know how you get on but remember to give it a couple of months daily use before deciding if your skin is improving.

Good luck

Peter

[Bihbicat]

This question just came up on another thread to do with preventing re-growth of the vessels post IPL/laser. People were saying that we should avoid taking vit E, grape seed etc, as these help heal the veins and we don't want that after tx -- we want them to be weaker so they collapse in the face of the tx. They were saying we should avoid all this for some time after tx. So, that got me wondering about the all-red lamps. My understanding is that they are healing to the vessels too. Does this mean we should lay off them for a period after a laser/IPL tx to avoid them keeping vessles alive or have I got this wrong somehow? Anyone know enough about all this to comment?

[IowaDavid]

I thought the reason to stop GSE, anti-inflammatories, and Ester-C was because they thin the blood.

As far as the acnelamp goes, my understanding is that it does help with healing, but, if a vessel is damaged by a laser treatment, I would think that the lamp would heal the vessel, not promote angiogenesis. It has anti-inflammatory properties and should, if I understand the science correctly, shorten your down-time after a laser treatment.

Kristen said she used hers the day after getting a treatment. So far, I've been using it after my treatment (started the day after). It has a calming effect on the redness and flushing for me.

I suppose you'd have to ask a specialist in the red light therapy to really find out what its action is following a thermal laser treatment.


David

[Bihbicat]

I admit I got good and confused over on the other thread about the supposed reasons for why we stop certain supps so I'm really not sure anymore. I guess the lamp would only be a problem if the "healing" interfered in some way with the demise of the vessels that got knocked out by treatment. The suggestion over on the other thread seemed to be that this demise took time, that the vessels that got good and zapped didn't just die and disappear right then and there but did so over time so that you want not to interfere with that process. I feel out of my depth here but would hate to find out later that using the lamp post tx was diminishing results. Let's see if Peter or Dr Nase shows up to shed some light.

[IowaDavid]

I may be wrong, but I think that once a vessel is damaged sufficiently by a thermal laser, it isn't that it can "revived" (through supplements or the red light therapy) but that it take a few days for the body deal with this now "dead" tissue, reincorporate it into the waste channels or whatever and dispose of it. Just as you wouldn't expect a scab to disappear overnight, same with these vessels. But, I, too, am out of my field of knowledge here so perhaps we can clear this matter up when someone who knows more than either of us. :D

[Adam]

Peter:

Thank you very much for your help! I have a few pimples on my chin, a very small area. The small lamp available online is still too big for me :) It would be great if I can find a mini lamp target at that small area. Next month I'll have time to go shopping in the west side of the States, but play no role in West Side Story :P

Have a great weekend,
Adam