Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by natasa778, Dec 23, 2016.
Very interesting. I like this:
Here is the original published study.
This reminds me of the story in this thread of an ME/CFS patient who went to Costa Rica, and found his ME/CFS went into remission within 5 days (and when he returned to his home in Canada, he went back to having ME/CFS — this occurred several times). Very intriguing, but what the factors are in Costa Rica that led to this remission, nobody knows.
I thought that the strong sunlight or local diet in Costa Rica were most likely to be the factors involved. UV from sunlight on the skin of course provides vitamin D, but also generates:
Neuropeptide substance P
Calcitonin gene-related peptide
Alpha melanocyte-stimulating hormone
Immunosuppressive effects, through upregulation of cytokines TNF-α and IL-10
Increased activity of T regulatory cells that remove self-reactive T cells (which has anti-autoimmune effects)
See this post.
But now in addition, we can add the effects of the blue light within the sunlight on stimulating T cells.
I would absolutely encourage sunlight, it's photons are used by many cells, proteins and especially water.
However I would not use blue light in isolation. It is balanced in the sun by red light. On it's own it causes to much cortisol. This is why artificial lighting (tv, phones, etc) is bad for you.
I also would definitely believe the guy who went to mexico and got better. The more I read the more convinced I become of getting Sun and avoiding nnEMFs.
If you're interested this site https://www.jackkruse.com/ writes a lot about the science behind light.
I think that's more related to blue light entering the eyes and stimulating the retinal ganglion cells (RGC), which are blue-sensitive, and responsible for syncing the circadian rhythm (and thus the circadian cortisol secretion rhythm) to the ambient light levels (day and night cycle).
Whereas this T cell stimulation effect relates to blue light on the skin.
I went on a " mold" sabbatical in Tecopa Californis. I did not bring stuff from home. I was taking chokestytamine twice a day, after 10 days took a 3 mile hike in Death Valley with no PEM. I was good for about a month back in NewJersey but have slipped back but still marked improvement over previous baseline. I went from Oct20 to Nov2nd. Fall is always terrible for me . I wish I could go back. My kids are in high school . We are moving but for now I
Sunlight has always helped me a lot. My symptoms are bad from Nov to March. I got a sunlamp . Did not do much . I am considering going to a tanning salon.
I had gone to Jamaica a few times was able to be much more functional but climbed the " falls" and was a zombie for the rest of the day and had a bad incident at the airport.y
You are correct however blue light has a similar effect on the skin, just not as strong as eyes.
"Irradiation of beef-heart mitochondria and of cytochrome oxidase purified from beef-heart mitochondria with blue light inhibited electron transport from substrate "
Red light does the opposite. The sun has perfect balance between red and blue so I would recommend strong sunlight to get the T cell stimulation.
I think you will do really well when you move. To get some of the effects you could experiment with sun lamps for reptiles, or cheap 250w infrared lights.
I would highly suggest checking out posts on https://forum.jackkruse.com/index.php it will help you a lot I think.
It's not really similar, as it is a different mechanism. Light on the skin does not affect the circadian rhythm, as far as we know; it's only the retinal ganglion cells in the eyes that are the light sensors of this rhythm.
Retinal ganglion cells are not to be confused with the rod and cone cells in the retina; the latter are responsible for vision.
That is interesting. I was aware of the stimulating effects of red light and near infrared light on mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase, as I was experimenting with red / infrared light therapy of the brain; but I did not know that blue light inhibits cytochrome c oxidase.
But in any case, the mechanism of stimulation of T cells by blue light does not involve the mitochondria (it says this in the study), so what you say above about the opposite effects of red and blue light I don't think applies to this stimulation of T cells.
Trouble is, many of us don't know if we should be stimulating our immune systems or dampening them down.
I think II read that sunlight can exacerbate autoimunne diseases like Lupus. If MECFS is due to an overactive immune system, sunlight could make us worse too.
Its just hard to know. I think the too much vs. too little question is the big one that we all really need answer to.
Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant similar as in negative effects. Whilst it affects mito and not T cells I was just saying shining only blue light will probably do more harm than good.
Out of interest , what wavelengths is causing the stimulating effects?
Whilst you are correct, the theory goes that the autoimmune problems are caused by poor cell signaling (which uses light) and not enough light "charging" the immune cells/system. So if it is correct , light should fix the vast majority of issues.
My T cells must be crawling. It is definitely the bleak midwinter here.
The study says there are peaks at around 355 nm and 480 nm:
See also figure 2f.
Not enough light charging the immune cells/system causes autoimmunity? That sounds like pseudoscience. You wouldn't talk of "charging" the immune cells/system in a scientific context.
Do you think she might have seasonal affective disorder (SAD), also known as winter depression, a condition where the lack of light in the winter causes people to feel miserably depressed, and this lack of light has also been shown to reduce blood flow to the brain?
I have always suffered from SAD myself, so am quite familiar with this condition. Providing artificial illumination at a light level of 10,000 lux for 30 minutes daily (or if you prefer, 500 lux for 10 hours daily), fixes SAD.
You can by light meters to measure the light level in lux on eBay for around £15. These are very useful if you are setting up some artificial illumination in your room to create higher light levels.
What I do is use strong lamps to illuminate the white wall behind and around my computer screen, such that when I measure the lux level at the location where my eyes are, when sitting at my desk and working on my computer, the light level at my eyes is around 500 lux. That way, because I spend most of the day at the computer, I get my daily dose of light into my eyes, that keeps the SAD at bay.
I understand what you are saying but that is why I put charging in quotes. I only understand the theory at a very superficial level. I used charge as according to Pollack , water absorbs at 1400nm and 270nm (sun) in order to create an exclusion zone and electric potential (charge). However I'm not sure on the mechanics of how proteins / cells use photons in their absorption wavelengths to their advantage...
I'm still learning so don't be completely detered by my butchering of the theory.
Don't these lights have a lot of blue though? Also no IR/UV. I wouldn't be comfortable using these lamps...
You don't need infrared or UV for the purpose of treating SAD. For treating SAD, you are stimulating the retinal ganglion cells in your eyes, whose peak wavelength sensitivity is around 460 and 484 nm (which is in the blue part of the spectrum).
That means that artificial illumination with higher amounts of blue light will work slightly better for SAD purposes, because the retinal ganglion cells are most responsive to blue light.
So natural daylight bulbs (whose color temperature is around 5500 to 6500º Kelvin) will be slightly better for SAD purposes that regular "warm white" light bulbs (whose color temperature is around 2700 to 3000º Kelvin), as these "warm white" light bulbs contain relatively more red light, and relatively less blue light. That's why ordinary "warm white" light bulbs look a bit yellow when used during the day, compared to natural light coming through the windows, because they have more red light than natural light.
The "cool white" light bulbs (whose color temperature is around 3100 to 4500º Kelvin) lie somewhere in the middle of natural daylight bulbs and "warm white" light bulbs, in terms of their relative amounts of red and blue light.
I actually use "warm white" light bulbs for SAD purposes, because I find the strong blue component of the natural daylight bulbs too harsh at night (but natural daylight bulbs are fine during the day, where they blend into the daylight coming in through the windows).
In terms of infrared, I have a ceramic far infrared radiant heater, that heats your body directly via infrared radiation coming out of the heater (as opposed to electric blow heaters that heat the room air).
I find that if I bathe my torso (with my shirt off) in this far infrared heat for 10 minutes or so, it has an antidepressant effect. I am not sure why, and I am not sure if it is due to the light itself, or just the powerful body heating effect that this far infrared light has (it will make you start sweating after around 15 minutes; putting your body close to such a heater is kind of like using an infrared sauna).
Prof Martin Pall thinks that saunas can help create BH4 (tetrahydrobiopterin) in the body, and BH4 has antidepressant effects.
Far infrared and near infrared are of course naturally present in sunlight.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.