IowaDavid
10th January 2006, 01:44 AM
Ok, I'm going to start a fresh thread because I'm trying to understand how the different light therapies work.
Dr. Nase wrote:
"We have at least 7 verified rosacea treatments targetted for late 2006, so all of this is good news.
My sincere concerns before things went south were that minor changes in these systems can completely change the effect on the skin. For example, in the Diabetes center at IU, we have multiple light systems like these that are medical grade:
1. The grow skin back in wounds that down to the fat pads.
2. Other light systems are antibacterial, much like several of the versions that Dr. Chu has tested, so I do have fairly extensive knowledge of these light systems. Irradiation with this light knocks out bacteria and other microbe strains with great efficacy.
3. They have antiinflammatory light systems that knock down inflammation in the skin ......... but these all cause flushing because most light systems that cause anti-inflammation have to increase blood flow to release the neutrophils and cell adhesion molecule that have set up camp and the area being treated needs oxygen and nutrients. So the question for rosacea sufferers is do we know enough yet about these light systems and most importantly, who do we tell to fight through a temporary flushing response and hope they dont get worse. I think these are sensible questions. Questions that I have considerable background in the medical arena. I would like to see more studies by Dr. Chu and also be light system engineers because I do believe they can design something that may be quite beneficial for rosacea sufferers down the line. "
For the antibacterial systems, I think Dr. Nase is referring to blue light, there? I haven't read much about this, and I don't have any need for antibacterial actions on my skin (as far as I know :D ).
I'm interested in red light, and the different effects it has on skin, because, before I built my LED array I was concerned about making a unit that was too powerful. I didn't want to harm myself, so I was scouring the net for information, but I couldn't find anything that spoke to my question: Why medical grade red light units used for diabetes (as Dr Nase mentions above) stimulate blood flow and why the unit I'm using tends to calm my redness and raise my flush response threshold.
How much energy is being delivered in the medical grade units used for diabetes, and what wavelength is used for these machines?
I couldn't find any information detailing how red light acts on skin when the energy is measured in ujoules/cm2; I could only find information on red light that was generally over a joule/cm2 in its energy delivery, up to around 4 joules/cm2.
So, is the energy level the difference in the actions of these different devices? What other differences could account for their differing actions on skin/vasculature?
I'm just trying to understand this all a bit better.
David
Dr. Nase wrote:
"We have at least 7 verified rosacea treatments targetted for late 2006, so all of this is good news.
My sincere concerns before things went south were that minor changes in these systems can completely change the effect on the skin. For example, in the Diabetes center at IU, we have multiple light systems like these that are medical grade:
1. The grow skin back in wounds that down to the fat pads.
2. Other light systems are antibacterial, much like several of the versions that Dr. Chu has tested, so I do have fairly extensive knowledge of these light systems. Irradiation with this light knocks out bacteria and other microbe strains with great efficacy.
3. They have antiinflammatory light systems that knock down inflammation in the skin ......... but these all cause flushing because most light systems that cause anti-inflammation have to increase blood flow to release the neutrophils and cell adhesion molecule that have set up camp and the area being treated needs oxygen and nutrients. So the question for rosacea sufferers is do we know enough yet about these light systems and most importantly, who do we tell to fight through a temporary flushing response and hope they dont get worse. I think these are sensible questions. Questions that I have considerable background in the medical arena. I would like to see more studies by Dr. Chu and also be light system engineers because I do believe they can design something that may be quite beneficial for rosacea sufferers down the line. "
For the antibacterial systems, I think Dr. Nase is referring to blue light, there? I haven't read much about this, and I don't have any need for antibacterial actions on my skin (as far as I know :D ).
I'm interested in red light, and the different effects it has on skin, because, before I built my LED array I was concerned about making a unit that was too powerful. I didn't want to harm myself, so I was scouring the net for information, but I couldn't find anything that spoke to my question: Why medical grade red light units used for diabetes (as Dr Nase mentions above) stimulate blood flow and why the unit I'm using tends to calm my redness and raise my flush response threshold.
How much energy is being delivered in the medical grade units used for diabetes, and what wavelength is used for these machines?
I couldn't find any information detailing how red light acts on skin when the energy is measured in ujoules/cm2; I could only find information on red light that was generally over a joule/cm2 in its energy delivery, up to around 4 joules/cm2.
So, is the energy level the difference in the actions of these different devices? What other differences could account for their differing actions on skin/vasculature?
I'm just trying to understand this all a bit better.
David