LPF Donation via Stripe | LPF Donation - Other Methods
Links below open in new window
ArcticMyst Security by Avery
About lasers and wounds.
- Thread starter razeman
- Start date
Benm
0
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 7,896
- Points
- 113
Not much, the red light easily penetrates skin and flesh, so it goes fairly deep into the tissue and the heat is easily absorbed by the circulating blood.
Green and blue lasers are another story, they can cause burns more easily and could perhaps cauterize a wound - provided that blood isnt flowing out rapidly enough to take away the heat and any cells you burst using the laser.
Green and blue lasers are another story, they can cause burns more easily and could perhaps cauterize a wound - provided that blood isnt flowing out rapidly enough to take away the heat and any cells you burst using the laser.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 182
- Points
- 0
razeman said:
Not only will the red laser not burn you. Red lasers have been shown to actually speed healing. (Google- low level laser therapy.) It is commonly used for post-operative healing...
cheers,
kernelpanic
daguin
0
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 15,989
- Points
- 113
kernelpanic said:
Not only will the red laser not burn you. Red lasers have been shown to actually speed healing. (Google- low level laser therapy.) It is commonly used for post-operative healing...
cheers,
kernelpanic[/quote]
Do not try this if you have dark skin
A 20X driven at 416mA is NOT "low level" laser light. Plus, IIRC we have had someone in this forum report the pain associated with shining 250mW of focused red laser light on an open wound.
Peace,
dave
Really? Pain, who would of thought it could possibly hurt!daguin said:Do not try this if you have dark skin
Plus, IIRC we have had someone in this forum report the pain associated with shining 250mW of focused red laser light on an open wound.
Peace,
dave
Anyways I use blu-ray for stinging peoples skin now, much more effective.
--Jason
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 182
- Points
- 0
daguin said:Do not try this if you have dark skin
Plus, IIRC we have had someone in this forum report the pain associated with shining 250mW of focused red laser light on an open wound.
Peace,
dave
I am fair skinned and am completely unable to burn myself with any of my 650nm lasers, focused or not. Having dark skin would definitely change the equation. Thanks for pointing that out.
BTW 'low-level' as used in that phrase is only used to differentiate from high powered lasers (CO2, Argon, etc.) used in surgery. Lasers of up to 500mW (almost twice the output of a LD open-can) are common in LLLT devices. In the medical sense, 416mA of 650nm is considered 'low-level'. (At least until it hit's your retina...)
cheers,
kernelpanic
I have no problems with burning my fingertips. The skin there is quite thick as I'm working with my hands all the time. I almost doesn't feel anything. I have even engraved my finger with that laser - black tiny coal drawing, cool ;D
I have also engraved one nail with a 405nm...
I can take a picture of it....
Low-Q
I have also engraved one nail with a 405nm...
I can take a picture of it....
Low-Q
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 18
- Points
- 0
cool
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
kernelpanic said:
Yeah, they work about as well as magnets.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 182
- Points
- 0
Cyparagon said:
Yeah, they work about as well as magnets.[/quote]
Don't be so fast to lump LLLT with magnet-quackery. There are a lot of double-blind studies that show acceleration of tissue healing from exposure to light. Most doctors agree that it's not ready for prime-time as the mechanism of acceleration is unknown. But the effect is there...
cheers,
kernelpanic
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
How would one fake laser-treatment?
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 182
- Points
- 0
Cyparagon said:
It's not necessarily 'laser' treatment. LED's have been used also. Studies I've seen (that were on mice) suggest that while visible wavelengths in the red work ~800-900nm is the most effective range.
As to blinding to perform such an experiment double-blind, they did it.(probably by using only trivial amounts of light on the control group. But perhaps they actually just blinded all of the patients with the laser ;D )-->
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=DetailsSearch&Term=16706694
Stolen shamelessly from the wiki here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_level_laser_therapy
Lot's of interesting info there.
cheers,
kernelpanic
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
Crack pots - the lot of them. I get more than 10mW of light in that wavelength on a daily basis from both the sun and indoor lighting. By that logic, standing naked in a room of any bright lights would have an identical effect. At least then you wouldn't have an absurd medical bill or have "laser enthusiast" as a prerequisite.
The effect is psychosomatic.
The effect is psychosomatic.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 182
- Points
- 0
on rodents?! -->
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=17960752
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=DetailsSearch&Term=17374099
Rodent placebos- Rats of NIMH indeed!
No one is saying sunlight doesn't have the same effect. But if it can be reproduced in a sterile setting (i.e. Hospital) without bombing tissue with solar UV and it accelerates healing, what's the harm?
Anyway, it's doubtful I'll change your mind here. When I first heard about it I was skeptical as well. But there is credible evidence that light speeds healing. It's already well known that light helps the body generate vitamin D(an anti-oxidant).
Anyway, I don't want to threadjack... I'm done.
cheers,
kernelpanic
GooeyGus
0
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,669
- Points
- 48
It cures aids, cancer, and stupidity all in one exposure.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
kernelpanic said:
It's expensive. I'm not going to the hospital to have them shine light at me and charge me god-knows-how-much dough. There's no UV in an incandescent/halogen/LED/fluorescent etc.
kernelpanic said:
Close. It's only sunlight that generates vitamin D. Know why? Light bulbs don't emit UVB radiation. So you get vitamin D, tan, and an ever-greater possibility of skin cancer. Wohoo!
