LED red intranasal light therapy
- Thread starter Lou
- Start date
Chris
Senior Member
- Messages
- 845
- Location
- Victoria, BC
@Sasha--sorry to hear no effect. I guess you are thinking of returning it in a little while. One thought--have you been using it once a day? You might try using it twice a day--well spaced--for a few days, just to see if that brings to the surface any effects, good and/or bad? But it does seem clear that responses vary, though I think I glimpse some patterns... I hope. Are you still finding it very uncomfortable, even painful?
Yes, thought I'd send it back in a few weeks if no joy.
That's a thought - I could try it twice a day.
It's still uncomfortable but I put it on first thing in the morning when I'm catching up on the internet, which is distracting enough to take my mind off it!
- Messages
- 36
Well, what a coincidence, I joined this forums several months ago for ME/CFS and didn't see this thread.
After hearing about Vielight/intranasal light therapy from a friend of mine about half a year ago, I passed this off as quackery/garbage but decided to do some research. I worked as an electrical engineer (but now retired because of CFS and brain fog) and very interested in the field of neuroscience - a basement scientist, as some might say.
On the surface level, the concept is very.. dismissable. However, after delving deeper, the idea is astoundingly groundbreaking and was quite disappointed to see it was already rigorously patented by Vielight. They certainly could do a better job of explaining the idea behind their devices.
The nasal channel is the channel with the least resistance to the brain (no skin / hair) and low level photons directly alter cells with mitochondria in a positive manner. It's quite genius to make the connection between neuron cells having mitochondria, "photobiomodulation" and the nasal channel.
I found this research link by the Institute of Chemical Sciences and Engineering in Switzerland from their Facebook page. It was a fascinating mathematical read through on the penetrative effects of NIR light and the effects on the human brain - (https://www.researchgate.net/public...d_NIR_light_dosimetry_in_the_human_deep_brain) These researchers seem to think that the nasal channel is the most effective channel for photobiomodulation of the brain with the benefit of reaching its deeper structures.
After hearing about Vielight/intranasal light therapy from a friend of mine about half a year ago, I passed this off as quackery/garbage but decided to do some research. I worked as an electrical engineer (but now retired because of CFS and brain fog) and very interested in the field of neuroscience - a basement scientist, as some might say.
On the surface level, the concept is very.. dismissable. However, after delving deeper, the idea is astoundingly groundbreaking and was quite disappointed to see it was already rigorously patented by Vielight. They certainly could do a better job of explaining the idea behind their devices.
The nasal channel is the channel with the least resistance to the brain (no skin / hair) and low level photons directly alter cells with mitochondria in a positive manner. It's quite genius to make the connection between neuron cells having mitochondria, "photobiomodulation" and the nasal channel.
I found this research link by the Institute of Chemical Sciences and Engineering in Switzerland from their Facebook page. It was a fascinating mathematical read through on the penetrative effects of NIR light and the effects on the human brain - (https://www.researchgate.net/public...d_NIR_light_dosimetry_in_the_human_deep_brain) These researchers seem to think that the nasal channel is the most effective channel for photobiomodulation of the brain with the benefit of reaching its deeper structures.
Last edited:
Chris
Senior Member
- Messages
- 845
- Location
- Victoria, BC
@IntelligentImpulse --thanks for adding another perspective. Have you thoroughly explored the mediclights.com website, where Lew Lim stores most of the research etc. on the topic of how this stuff works? I have been having other problems recently, but have not given up on making this stuff work for me/us. And still wishing that Lew would make available a separate version of the "super" version of the 810 that forms part of the Neuro. He is coming to Victoria later this month, and hope to be able to talk with him then.
@Sasha--the more I think about this stuff, the more I think that the 810 is a better unit for us than the 633--sorry!
@Sasha--the more I think about this stuff, the more I think that the 810 is a better unit for us than the 633--sorry!
I'm sending the 633 back today for a refund and have just started on drug therapy for my OI so don't want to complicate things by throwing a new intervention into the mix, but if Vielight are still developing things, I'll keep an eye on this.
- Messages
- 36
@Chris : Thanks for pointing that website out, I did glance at it initially but wasn't sure what their association with Vielight is. I learnt a lot from the educational video created by Lew on the Vielight youtube channel as well, featuring researchers from Harvard School of Medicine and the VA. I won't link it here, as I'm unsure if that is against the rules of this forum or not.
I agree that having a "super" version of the 810 would be nice, given that I think the intranasal diode is more important than the transcranial diodes, since the scalp possesses two naturally effective light barriers, hair and skin.
I agree that having a "super" version of the 810 would be nice, given that I think the intranasal diode is more important than the transcranial diodes, since the scalp possesses two naturally effective light barriers, hair and skin.
Chris
Senior Member
- Messages
- 845
- Location
- Victoria, BC
@Sasha, hope that stuff helps you--OI is one of my central symptoms too. Don't want to complicate things, but do you know Julia Newton's (well, she and her great group) little paper on "home orthostatic training", PMID 19912315 ? I did it for a while, and it did help, though did not make the problem disappear. Good luck!
Thanks - I did try the tilt training but find I very quickly hit a wall (no pun intended!). I've tried it three or four times. I'm glad you found it of use, though - and I don't rule out that some version of it might be useful for me, if I persist with different timings etc.
I'm sending the 633 back today for a refund and have just started on drug therapy for my OI so don't want to complicate things by throwing a new intervention into the mix, but if Vielight are still developing things, I'll keep an eye on this.
hi i'm new here.
i have made a vie light for for $2.... it's just a 660 nm 1 watt and 3 watt led bead from ebay.added a couple of resistors in series to keep the current to under 200 milliamps from a 5 volt powerbank bought for a pound or just connect to a 5 volt phone charger/adapter.
i don't actually insert into the nostril as this started mucous generation and drippy nose.
( i used the bionase initially for £5 from ebay but found the nostril tubes leading to drippy nose).
I leave the led bead it just at the entrance to the nostril.i fashioned a spring clip from a plastic coated paperclip.
Because the red light from these bead leds is very strong you don't need to insert it into the nostril.my whole nose light up red.i also bought 1 pound infra red 850 NM 1 watt led to try.i am also going to try 10 mm red/blue flashing leds and later color changing leds from xmas toys/decorations.
I am not ill but trying it for post nasel drip which leads to throat irritation especially due to temperature changes.
also i am going to attach the red bead led to my earlobes as well due to large blood flow in the ear lobe to see any useful effects.
Chris
Senior Member
- Messages
- 845
- Location
- Victoria, BC
@esecallum--good luck with your projects--I have no idea what the power ratings of your things would work out to, but the ratings given to the Vielights are in the range of 5-10 mW. I have found that the Vielights help with both nasal stuffiness and nasal allergic responses to pollen.
The power rating is much higher then 10 millwatts.i tested the BIonase and it passed 70 milliamps through TWO 660 nm leds in series.
It did not seem very bright to me when i contrasted it with a 1 watt 660 nm led with a current of 150 milliamps.
I would say it is at least 10 times higher.red light goes right through my fingers and i can see the veins in the fingers.the efficiency of these red led beads is much higher in producing red light from a given current.
Also i have put these red led beads in my mouth and closed it and i can see the red light in my eyes!
for those trying to get light through the skull i suggest you try these red led beads and direct the red light on to the roof of the mouth and you will see the red light in your eyes!
it seems the red light penetrates the much thinner bones of the roof of the mouth much more easily.
no doubt using 850 nm 1 watt infra red leds which penetrate twice as deep will be even more effective in the mouth.
my reason for putting in the mouth was sore gums and it seemed to work as next day they seemed normal.
if you are going to use these" plant grow leds beads" from ebay the current to use is 150 milliamps ...any higher will cause the leds to run much hotter..i have tried up to 200 milliamps..and it's fine as long as air circulates.
the current limit for a 1 watt red led is 350 milliamps.try to get one with a star shaped heatsink.
for a 3 watt 660 nm, led the maximum current is about 1 amp and you can see the red light right through your hand and all the veins at a current of .7 amps...it is really intense!!!
the leds i use are enclosed in glue so i don't get any current in my mouth.the leds cost about £1 or 10 for £4 from ebay.
i have about 50 to use in various red led therapy experiments
Is that safe?
well all i can say i have done it about 6 times for at least 30 minutes and i am still alive and fully compos mentis...
I'm worried about your eyes, especially!
well i put a 1 watt red led running at about 150 milliamps with the electrical connections encased in glue in my mouth and i could see the glow of the red light with my eyes closed.
my eyes are fine.
it may interest you to know as i turned the led around in my mouth in certain positions the red glow i could see in my eyes was much stronger as if there were pathways to the optic nerve or maybe certain areas of the mouth roof bone are thinner at some points
you may research that red light has been used to regain sight in mice that were deliberately blinded.
you may google it.
I'm not knowledgeable, only nervous!
I thought I'd read somewhere about the dangers of too high a power output with these things - but maybe it was a laser version. Perhaps others can remember.
You are correct.i would NEVER put lasers in my eye.
Just not sure that it was restricted to lasers...
Chris
Senior Member
- Messages
- 845
- Location
- Victoria, BC
@esecallum ; I would be very careful. There are now several good papers, by Hamblin and others, that describe a "hormesis" effect for doses of light--too little does nothing, too much does damage, you have to get your Goldilocks portion about right.
There are also now several papers that suggest strongly that part of this effect depends on pulsing--the light is absorbed largely (not wholly) by a chemophore that plays a key role in the mitochondrial production of ATP, the fundamental molecule of biological energy, but raising that also raises Reactive Oxygen Species, which can do damage if not mopped up by intracellular antioxidants like Glutathione, which we know is in slow and inadequate supply in ME/CFS. Just what the ideal pulse rate might be is not clear to me--Lew Lim uses 10hz and 50% duty cycle (% of time the diode is actually emitting photons) in his pulsed units (810, Neuro) and that seems to work, but the new German Repuls units use 2.5hz with the express intent of giving time for those ROS to be mopped up in between pulses--don't know the duty cycle. I have begun experimenting with a 6hz pulse and 40% duty cycle with my MED-X units, but have no real experience to share as yet.
The Repuls units are aimed at muscles and joints, not brains, and I have no idea how these pulse rates might interact with the normal range of brain wave activity--Lew Lim chose 10hz to mesh with a fundamental brain wave frequency, but wht relationship there may exist between that and the speed with which ROS get dealt with I have no idea.
Lasers have been used to improve some forms of eye damage--usually macular degeneration--but with tightly controlled energy levels, direction and spread of beam, etc. The fact that your diodes are sending light through the thin inner skull bones directly into either your retina or optic nerve may have consequences--but I do not know enough to say what they might be. But like Sasha I would suggest you be very careful--the higher the energy level, the greater chance of damage as well as healing. Sorry I don't have time or energy to properly document this stuff now, but there are a few relevant citations in some of my previous posts.
There are also now several papers that suggest strongly that part of this effect depends on pulsing--the light is absorbed largely (not wholly) by a chemophore that plays a key role in the mitochondrial production of ATP, the fundamental molecule of biological energy, but raising that also raises Reactive Oxygen Species, which can do damage if not mopped up by intracellular antioxidants like Glutathione, which we know is in slow and inadequate supply in ME/CFS. Just what the ideal pulse rate might be is not clear to me--Lew Lim uses 10hz and 50% duty cycle (% of time the diode is actually emitting photons) in his pulsed units (810, Neuro) and that seems to work, but the new German Repuls units use 2.5hz with the express intent of giving time for those ROS to be mopped up in between pulses--don't know the duty cycle. I have begun experimenting with a 6hz pulse and 40% duty cycle with my MED-X units, but have no real experience to share as yet.
The Repuls units are aimed at muscles and joints, not brains, and I have no idea how these pulse rates might interact with the normal range of brain wave activity--Lew Lim chose 10hz to mesh with a fundamental brain wave frequency, but wht relationship there may exist between that and the speed with which ROS get dealt with I have no idea.
Lasers have been used to improve some forms of eye damage--usually macular degeneration--but with tightly controlled energy levels, direction and spread of beam, etc. The fact that your diodes are sending light through the thin inner skull bones directly into either your retina or optic nerve may have consequences--but I do not know enough to say what they might be. But like Sasha I would suggest you be very careful--the higher the energy level, the greater chance of damage as well as healing. Sorry I don't have time or energy to properly document this stuff now, but there are a few relevant citations in some of my previous posts.