“Very much enjoyed the Thor Laser course held in Auckland. I found the presentation from James excellent and very informative. I love the potential well-being possibilities with PBMT especially if combined with the breakthroughs occurring with Stem cell therapy.”
Dennis Wells, BAppSc MOst
Blenheim Osteopathic Clinic
Blenheim, New Zealand
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
“Just a few words on the THOR Laser training course. James Carroll has such a passion for LLLT. , his excitement is contagious. I came to the lecture to learn more about LLLT and was so impressed with James, I bought the THOR Laser that day. I’ve used my THOR everyday and would be lost without. I highly recommend the THOR Laser to anyone who thinks ‘outside the box’ for routine treatment in the dental office and soft tissue injuries, including inflammation of anatomical structures of the body. A Loyal THOR User!”
Dr Lynn Lamon
Dentist
New Brunswick, Canada
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
LumiThera® Inc., a clinical stage medical device company focused on delivering non-invasive photobiomodulation (PBM) therapies for ocular disorders and disease, today announced it has been awarded the prestigious “MOST INNOVATIVE AND PROMISING MEDTECH & E-HEALTH COMPANY” during Biovision 2017 in Lyon, France.
This is great news for patients suffering from dry AMD who have no other treatment alternatives!
Read the full press release:
LumiThera Named Most Innovative And Promising Medtech & E-Health Company At Biovision 2017
Disclosure: I am an investor in Lumithera a) because it successfully treats an unmet medical need, (dry AMD) b) I think it will be the first billion dollar photobiomodulation company.
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.
Wednesday 3/16:
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.
Thursday 3/17:
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
Sunday 3/20:
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.
Monday 3/21:
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.
This is all thanks to the NovoTHOR light pod.
The US National Library of Medicine (NLM) plans to adopt “Photobiomodulation Therapy” (PBMT) as an official MeSH term in November 2015.
Why this is important?
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 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.
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.
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.
Access Treatment Protocol Library
“The THOR training course was great. James Carroll gave an up-to-date overview of what is known about the mechanism and clinical studies. We also got a chance to try the system itself. So overall I learned both about the theory and got a hands-on experience in 1 day. The atmosphere was friendly and the location was pleasant. I would be happy to do a refresher course.”
Dr Leah Gavish
Scientist Researcher
Israel
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
“Recently attended the LLLT course in Edinburgh. Well delivered course, good pace set, very practical with good evidence base. Would recommend.”
Victoria Reynolds
Physiotherapy Manager
Stockton on Tees, UK
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
A happy outcome from one of our customer’s patients:
Doctor Pershing,
Thank you for including me in your burn study using the NovoTHOR as a laser treatment for a third degree burn. I am amazed that my burn healed so quickly.
I have a background in medicine in that I am a former medic with some experience dealing with emergent wounds. I have seen burns from household accidents and car accidents as well as chemically induced incidences. In the respect that I have some experience in seeing these types of wounds, I understood the gravity of my wound.
I burned my thigh very badly cooking mashed cauliflower when I was transferring it from the stove to a serving dish when I spilled it down my leg. It was boiling actively at the time and was somewhat thick, having the consistency of grits or oatmeal. Thus, it was sticky and not easily removed. The burn I sustained was approximately 4 inches wide starting at the top of my thigh and extending to the bottom of my knee cap, around 12-14 inches long. It was clearly a third degree burn at the top of the wound and as it went down to my knee, it had degrees of first and second degree for the most part with varying degrees of blistering that ranged from 1.5 inches to .5 inches wide by approximately 8 inches long.
I sought out the opinion of a respected medical professional that recommended that I seek treatment for it through this study.
Following the initial assessment and recommendation that I use the NovoTHOR Laser therapy on a regular basis for the following 3-4 weeks, receiving treatment 3 times per week. Initially, I noticed that the part of the burn was drastically diminished after the first treatment. That was by far the most surprising aspect of the treatment. The part of the burn that was deepest was initially very painful. That virtually disappeared following the first treatment.
Then the healing of the wound started to become visible every time I had treatment. On the day of treatment, there was no visible change, however, the following morning showed great change very rapidly every time. The pictures show the drastic results. I was astounded as to the continued pain relief and rapid healing.
Another aspect that was unexpected, was that pain diminished and stayed gone for the most part following the first and most especially the second treatment. Having such a large blister and exposed skin, in the heat of summer should have been much more uncomfortable. I experienced nearly no discomfort for the duration of the treatment.
In addition to pain relief, scarring was diminished as well. The portion of the burn that was under the blister, was raised and tight, and I was sure that it would scar. As the burn healed, the raised part of the scar, was pulling the skin tighter and made fluid movement more difficult. A dramatic difference in that aspect of the wound was relieved in the last two weeks of treatment. At present, only a small raised section of the burn remains. On the last week of treatment, all tattooing from the burn disappeared. There is none whatsoever. I can’t convey how pleased I am to have no real visibility to the wound except for the small scar remaining on the deepest part of the burn.
I recommend this treatment for so many reasons, but the biggest two are the extreme relief of pain, and the rapid healing. I would have understood having a scar from the burn, but having seen the extreme and nearly complete healing including the esthetic aspects, makes this treatment such an amazing experience.
Thank you again for allowing me to be part of the process. I sincerely hope that this helps others to get this care.
Bethany Marinac
“It was such a pleasure and privilege to learn more about photobiomodulation from James, the ‘rock star’ of PBMT. The course was the right blend of theory and detail. I highly recommend it.”
Linda Edwards, RN, MSN
Neurofeedback Practitioner
New Jersey, USA
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
“I attended the course in March in Boston. We have been very pleased with the results our patients have on this medical device. It has helped in areas of concussion, joint tears, headaches where nothing has been able to help my patients prior to this. My patients are also chemically sensitive so are unable to tolerate chemical treatments for their pain and injuries. It is a marvelous tool and I cannot say enough about it.”
Jennifer and Stuart, Medical GP
Ottawa Environmental Health Clinic
Ontario, Canada
View current photobiomodulation therapy training dates in your location.
Abstract source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=28192789
Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, McLean RM, Forciea MA, Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians
From the American College of Physicians and Penn Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on noninvasive treatment of low back pain. Methods: Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and systematic reviews published through April 2015 on noninvasive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain. Updated searches were performed through November 2016. Clinical outcomes evaluated included reduction or elimination of low back pain, improvement in back-specific and overall function, improvement in health-related quality of life, reduction in work disability and return to work, global improvement, number of back pain episodes or time between episodes, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects.
TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with acute, subacute, or chronic low back pain.
RECOMMENDATION 1: Given that most patients with acute or subacute low back pain improve over time regardless of treatment, clinicians and patients should select nonpharmacologic treatment with superficial heat (moderate-quality evidence), massage, acupuncture, or spinal manipulation (low-quality evidence). If pharmacologic treatment is desired, clinicians and patients should select nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or skeletal muscle relaxants (moderate-quality evidence). (Grade: strong recommendation).
RECOMMENDATION 2: For patients with chronic low back pain, clinicians and patients should initially select nonpharmacologic treatment with exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, mindfulness-based stress reduction (moderate-quality evidence), tai chi, yoga, motor control exercise, progressive relaxation, electromyography biofeedback, low-level laser therapy, operant therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, or spinal manipulation (low-quality evidence). (Grade: strong recommendation).
RECOMMENDATION 3: In patients with chronic low back pain who have had an inadequate response to nonpharmacologic therapy, clinicians and patients should consider pharmacologic treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as first-line therapy, or tramadol or duloxetine as second-line therapy. Clinicians should only consider opioids as an option in patients who have failed the aforementioned treatments and only if the potential benefits outweigh the risks for individual patients and after a discussion of known risks and realistic benefits with patients. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
Ann Intern Med 2017 Feb 14
UK and Ireland dates
USA and Canada dates
Australia and NZ dates
Rest Of World dates
Featured Testimonials
THOR on Facebook
THOR on Twitter
THOR on LinkedIn
THOR on Google+
THOR on Instagram