Photobiomodulation Training Course Testimonial:
New Braunfels, TX, USA
“The seminar last Sunday in Austin was excellent. I learned tons and am so excited to use my laser to it’s fullest capacity. I will be ordering the 810nm probe soon. I would very much like to attend another seminar so I can get more out of the volume of information presented. Thank you again!”
Meagan is a National Level Weightlifter who competes frequently. See her story and experience below after sessions on the NovoTHOR whole-body light pod. PR stands for Personal Record.
Muscle Snatch Triple off a riser: PR working weight at 42 kg… Up 5 kilos from last week where I could only hit 37kg for working weight.
My 3/6 front squat/back squat combo I added 3 kilos from the previous Thursday- which is the most working I’ve ever done for this exercise at 91kg.
THEN I went on to do several reps of cleans and hit a 95kg Clean PR (9 kilos more than I did last week- heaviest clean I hit last week was 86kg.) This was halfway through my workout after doing a total of 117 reps. In Weightlifting a lot of volume can make your body feel tired & wrecked, so there was no explanation for why I was able to hit a PR on this exercise when my legs were fried.
Saturday 3/19: I hit a 3 kilo PR on my Power Clean & Jerk at 83kg
I added 2 kilos to my snatch triples from the blocks (59kg) from last week where I could only do 57kg.
I also did the most working weight I’ve ever done for Clean & Jerk Doubles at 83kg.
Sumo Deadlift triple: 127kg PR (up 5 kilos from last Monday 3/14 I only could hit 122kg for 3)
Snatch Deadlift 5 rep: PR working weight for 5 at 91kg (2 kilos more than last Monday.)
Push Press+Push Jerk + Split Jerk Complex: 75kg (up 2kg from last Monday’s workout)
This part of my training cycle has been very strength intensive, so for me to even be coming close to hitting PRs is a huge deal. My body should be more fatigued and worn down from the strength work, but I actually feel recovered and fresh.
130 new LLLT papers for you including a systematic review on shoulder tendinopathies, a lovely article review in an orthopaedics journal by Howard Cotler, four systematic reviews on orthodontic tooth movement, a trial showing LEDs improve sperm motility, another systematic review on oral mucositis and much more.
As reported here in 2013 there are no licensed drugs for non-specific neck pain because “there isn’t much specific research that shows drugs help neck pain”. For LLLT/PBM however, there are at least 16 (mostly positive) RCTs and a positive systematic review published in The Lancet. Despite this unequivocal evidence, the 2014 revised patient advice leaflet from the BMJ fails to mention LLLT/PBM but states “your doctor may recommend one or more of the following” and goes on to list pain killers, NSAIDs, antidepressants and muscle relaxants”.
This 15 minute video starts with an overview of Photobiomodulation and low level light therapy. Later in the presentation James introduces the Lumithera treatment for Dry Age related Macular Degeneration (AMD).
The VA, Boston University and Harvard Medical School published the results of a Transcranial LLLT (LED) pilot study on mild Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). Incredibly; TBI is a leading cause of death and disability among children and young adults in the United States. Each year an estimated 1.5 million Americans sustain a TBI, 50,000 people die as a consequence, 230,000 are hospitalized and an estimated 5.3 million currently live with a permanent TBI-related disability (because there is no cure). This study showed significant improvement in Executive Function, Verbal Learning, Long Delay Free Recall and fewer post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Participants and family reported better ability to perform social, interpersonal, and occupational functions. This was a small pilot study on just eleven patients with chronic mTBI, there was no placebo control group so further studies are necessary to truly establish the effect size.
The paper “High-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial” Kheshie et al 2014 pitches the 3B BTL laser against the HIRO class IV “High intensity” laser. The results appear to show that the HIRO class IV “High intensity laser” was more effective than the “Low Level Laser”. HOWEVER, the HIRO class IV “High intensity” laser was delivered over a large area (not adequately defined but approx 100cm2 by my estimation) so the intensity was actually very low (about 13mW/cm2 which is less than most LED systems), and the 3B BTL “Low Level Laser” was actually very high (4 x 200mW small, high intensity beams) and were held stationary on the patella for over half an hour, YES, HALF AN HOUR IN ONE SPOT! This is insane.
This paper leads people to think that the class IV Hiro laser was more effective because it was higher intensity when in fact the beam distribution meant the average intensity distribution was low (13mW/cm2). The 3B laser was not so effective because it was held stationary such that it would cause an overdose. If the 3B laser treatment had been delivered in using same scanning technique as the class IV then they would likely have achieved the same result. (I am not a fan of scanning because you can never be sure how much energy you have delivered to an area, better to use a low intensity device and hold it still in my view).
This paper misdirects the reader towards favouring class IV lasers rather than 3b or LED by misinforming the reader.
TV, radio and newspapers all over the world got very excited last week reporting that “laser regenerates teeth” following a Harvard study. The study showed that LLLT stimulates the stem cells resident in the tooth pulp to form dentin (for details click below). This is the highest profile announcement for any LLLT paper ever and will add significant awareness and credibility for everyone in the field. Congratulations and huge thanks to the author Dr Praveen Arany B.D.S., M.D.S., M.M.Sc., Ph.D. who is now a Clinical Investigator at NIH.
The title of last months PMLS editorial was Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) and World Association for Laser Therapy (WALT) Dosage Recommendations. Written by the Scientific Secretary Prof. Jan Bjordal. He describes how far we have come and the importance of the WALT dosage recommendations. No abstract is available for editorials so I have prepared one for you below. Continue reading →
A paper titled ”The Effectiveness of Therapeutic Class IV (10 W) Laser Treatment for Epicondylitis” [ref] showed that 10 Watt Class IV laser (mixed 8W 970nm, 2W 810) was successful in reducing pain and improving function in an RCT with 15 patients, and that there was good statistical significance at 6 months following a course of 6 treatments.
The claim by class IV laser manufacturers is that class IV lasers are better (faster, deeper and more effective) than Class 3b and LED systems. Conversely the 3B laser and LED manufacturers argue that less power density is more effective because delivering energy too quickly can overdose tissues and class IV lasers might burn the skin.
Throughout this paper there are marketing messages claiming the advantages of shorter treatment times than low power LLLT systems and of course the title shouts “10 Watt Class IV laser” just in case the reader is in any doubt that more power is what you need.
Regular readers of this column know my obsession with irradiation parameters, particularly dose rate effects (W/cm2) and will not be surprised to learn that I deconstruced the irradiation parameters used in this trial . Surprise, surprise they were the same low irradiance levels typically used by 3B lasers and LED systems, if not less and the treatment time was longer too.
Yes, it was a 10 Watt laser and yes, 3,000 joules was delivered, however it had a large beam area and treatment was delivered over (45cm2) in a “painting fashion”. The fluence (dose) was 6.6 Joules/cm2 and the power density was a tiny 22mW/cm2, consequently treatment time was a hefty 5 mins.
The average irradiance was not disclosed in the paper and the reader is directed to think that more power is quicker.
P.S. research trials with 3B lasers are typically 30 seconds to 3 mins and our recommended treatment is 1 min with a large LED cluster to the lateral epicondyle and 30 seconds for any related trigger points.
David Sengeh has been developing powered limbs at MIT for amputees (like the bionic man). Where the powered limb attaches to the body (the stump of the original leg) it gets very sore. David has been using our standard THOR products to heal the stump and reduce pain. It works very well, though it takes a lot of time to treat the whole area. I am in Boston now to help David start clinical trials with a new device we designed that will treat the whole stump. The amputee puts the the leg stump into the LED treatment cylinder and gets a complete treatment in just one minute :-)
Available only to people who have attended a THOR training course in the last 3 years. All treatments are based on our four step method which includes treatment of the injury, trigger points, lymphatics and nerve roots.
Take a look to see how it works and let us know what you think.
“I was diagnosed with bilateral breast cancer in August 2015. My treatment plan was chemotherapy, double mastectomy and radiation therapy. Valerie is a friend from church who began discussing light therapy with me after I finished my chemotherapy treatments, before I had surgery. Valerie explained to me all the research that had been done and how light therapy has benefited many people.
I was very open minded about trying the treatment, so Valerie recommended visiting with my oncologist. I visited with my radiation oncologist, and he gave me permission to do the light therapy.
I did my first session prior to surgery, based on Valerie’s suggestion, to promote quicker healing. At first, prior to the surgery, I really couldn’t tell much difference. After surgery however, my surgeon was surprised at how quickly I was healing. I attribute this to the light therapy I had received prior to the surgery.
Another thing I noticed that made a huge physical difference as a result of doing the light treatments was that after surgery I could feel the fluid building up in my lymph node area. Immediately after a light therapy treatment, the fluid was gone! That’s when I realized the biggest difference the light therapy made.
I will definitely continue with light therapy until I am completely healed.”
“I have undergone a hip replacement and the THOR treatment managed to close the incision in less than a week so I could go in the hot tub.
I had no bandage on from that point. I continued treatment for more 2 weeks. The result is that I will have my next hip this coming Monday, 2 months ahead of schedule!
The standard interval between replacing hips is 3 months. This is based on speed of healing as seen on radiographs, test of mobility, level of pain and the possibility of coagulation problems for the next surgery (thrombosis). I have no pain in the hip, no limp and all the testing shows great results.
Thanks to THOR I’m having my second one after only one month.”
Tor Gotun, DDS, General Dentist
Austin Smile Creations
Austin TX, USA
Photobiomodulation Training Course Testimonial:
Val Finnell, MD, MPH
Division Chief, Applied Technology and Genomics Center, United States Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine
Sto-Rox Neighborhood Family Health Council, Inc., PA, USA
“The training course was excellent and delivered the right amount of material. It also served as an excellent foundation for further study on the topic of photobiomodulation. I highly recommend this course to anyone who is thinking of using LLLT in their practice.”