RED AND INFRARED LIGHT THERAPY: WHICH ONE?

Written by Angelo

Categories: Healthcare

January 8 2019

Studies increasingly show how light manipulation is critical to human health.
In some contexts, it even matters much more than food and physical activity, why?

di Angelo and Alessio

It is a factor common to all living beings, from the first elementary organisms that populated the earth billions of years ago, to the more complex organisms that have followed one another over the course of geological eras, having evolved exposed 24/24 to sunlight ...
Assuming that nothing can ever be substituted for the sun, we too support in particular cases the importance of assisting conventional therapies with photobiomodulation, an auxiliary tool that is becoming increasingly important.

This is widely debated and argued in the book by Angelo Rossiello INSOMNIA. THE EVIL OF THE NEW CENTURY, available here:

INSOMNIA. THE EVIL OF THE NEW CENTURY

But how do you understand which technologies can help us, which are useless and which are even potentially harmful?
We were forced to answer this question first for a question of fairness towards those who want to buy a red light lamp for themselves and their family, but above all to answer friends who ask us about the differences with the competition to better calibrate. purchases.

This is because some doctors are recommending improvised purchases… To their unsuspecting patients. Some of these less naive patients are contacting us for clarification.

We must reiterate that in this sector the doctor can certainly recommend a therapy, the instrument cannot even remotely conceive it as he would have had to study electronics, physics and much more.

For once in our life and after 30 years of humiliation, we can therefore take away the whim of saying to a doctor and with authority, knowledge and without fear of denial: YOU ARE NOT ENGINEER, WHY ARE YOU TALKING?!?!

But let's go back to the topic that we want to deal with:

As we said, it is necessary to have a background as physicists and engineers to fully understand the deeper implications that the choice of a technology has compared to the others, otherwise you risk being screwed by those represented with their speech ... And little else.

In recent days, many are asking us what is the best technology for red and infrared light lamps.

We reiterate that: laser technology is that used by specific medical equipment, and has advantages and disadvantages.
The advantage lies in the quantum coherence of the light emitted and in the greater linearity of the transfer function, which translates into greater effectiveness in the face of a restricted area to be treated.

REFERENCE: , promising

However, when we want to treat the whole body safely at home and by ourselves, the laser becomes superfluous and even potentially harmful due to the high intensity of the radiation.
Therefore, LED technology represents an excellent compromise between effectiveness, safety and costs.

But which LED technology to choose? How do you extricate yourself from an ever-widening offer?

Leaving aside some low-cost devices that are also found on Amazon (save money, the infrared emitted by your partner's hug are far more effective and free ...), some Italian super-doctors recommend technologies such as platinum RED therapy.

Let's see what it consists of:

it is a simple assembly of 3W LEDs, which we can easily buy either on Amazon or from the electronics store near the house, at a cost of about 30 cents.
You got it right, with less than 50 euros you can build a lamp at home that sells for around 400 euros, excluding shipping costs!

Or take 4-6 low cost lamps like these and put them together at various angles obtaining a certainly superior effect… In short, with 100-150 euros you could have the exact same technology available!

Imagine how much they can cost to the company that produces them, buying the material in stock ... maybe 5-10 euros at most.

Instead, the lamps of our design have a central 200W LED and only the 3W auxiliary LEDs.
Furthermore, the powerful central LED is equipped with an electrostatic secondary lens which reduces dispersion by over 30%.

In addition, our lamps are equipped with a safety lock, in case you fall asleep in the warm embrace of the light, and the integrated thermostat prevents overheating, increasing the life of the device.

The sapientino on duty at this point raises his finger and exclaims: the power of the competitors' lamps starts from 300 W, while yours is 248 W! Case closed, do they beat us? Reductionist reasoning as usual ...

The declared power is a random parameter… what matters is the intensity of radiation.
Here is that of the competitors:

Much higher !!

Now, let's take an example with ours PLUTO: the radiated power at 15 cm is 200 mW / cm2, while at 30 cm it is 85 mW / cm2 and at 60 cm it is 52 mW / cm2.

Therefore, the nominal power, in their case, does not translate into the intensity of radiation, which is the real parameter to consider ...
It is useless to mount the engine of a Ferrari on the chassis of a Panda, you will have 700 horsepower that you will never be able to use!

Then the same sapientino above, points out that our lamp is smaller and therefore radiates less body surface ... NO! Our lamp has inclinations that allow radiation at 60 degrees! Which means, with one application, you can irradiate 50% of your body! Combining, among other things, the practicality of handling !!!!
But how does the competition not declare 90 degrees? But it is a hoax because the intensity of radiation is lower, and at 50 cm it practically no longer radiates anything

Let's move on to the frequencies: our PLUTO works on wavelengths of 670-830-850 nm, while with the competitor lamp you have to choose between the 660, the 660-850 mix and the 850 nm near infrared.

Only from these data we can deduce the clear superiority of our technology ...

From this graph, you can see that the peak of light absorption by the cytochrome c-oxidase enzyme occurs at 670 nm (our lamps all have 670 nm), while the competition is limited to 660 nm, where the absorption is significantly lower.

Plus, ours adds 830nm in the same product, reaching another peak.
Competition then goes to 850, where absorption is further reduced.

So, in summary, we are already at a nice 6-0 for ours ...

To get to 7-0, we guarantee the total absence of flicker effect, a flickering due to the intermittence of the beam which has already been shown to have negative effects on the retina (well explained in the book Insomnia, the evil of the new century), but presumably also on the skin, since the photosensitive pigments of the opsin family have the same quantum structure and functioning.

Do you want the 8 to 0? Ok ... The firewave is already absent from a minimum distance of a few centimeters in non-native electromagnetic waves that are harmful to the human body ... And what do we do? Do we go into contradiction?
Does the competition guarantee all this? I don't think so since the starting powers are much higher ...

Okay you will say, you like to win easy ... But the 9-0 also comes from the electricity consumption due to a lower power ...

The final blow and goleada, comes from the price, with 400 Euro (shipping costs included), you will receive our product comfortably at home, much more performing, compact and avant-garde compared to a low-cost LED assembly.

What are you waiting for then? Click below and reserve your red light lamp!

PLUTO

Good day everyone.
Angelo and Alessio.

Recent articles ...

GAMMA WAVES AT 40Hz AND ALZHEIMER'S

GAMMA WAVES AT 40Hz AND ALZHEIMER'S

GAMMA WAVES AT 40Hz AND ALZHEIMER'S The studies of the MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, we are practically talking about...