Class IV laser misleading claims

In October a paper was published claiming that class IV laser is more effective than class 3B for oral mucositis.  The authors attempt to con the reader by asserting they used a “standard” 3B laser protocol, but instead they set up a weak protocol delivering just 15% of the recomended energy in order to make a “class IV laser” product appear more effective.

As you know the marketing  claim for class IV devices is that they have more power so should go deeper, should reduce treatment time and should be more effective, well guess what, most of their power is using wavelengths that do not penetrate (970-980nm) [1]. All the evidence on dose consistently shows  that over treatment reduces effectiveness [2][3], treatment times are longer due to the scanning technique [4] and when you look at the small handful of clinical trails done with class IV lasers they use the same irradiation parameters used by 3B lasers anyway![4]

Such  misinformation is intended to direct a doctor / therapist away from what is proven to work in favour of something more expensive. If you you see a manuscript with “HILT” or “class IV laser” in the title watch out for the marketing spin.

I wrote a letter to the journal editor. I will post a link when it is published.

About James Carroll

Founder and CEO at THOR Photomedicine Ltd. About THOR
This entry was posted in Rants. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Class IV laser misleading claims

  1. Deborah Rennie says:

    Lets hope the journal editor publishes your referenced and evidence based response.

  2. Suzanne Norton says:

    Regarding the claim that Class 4 lasers are better, a clinic in Ipswich are claiming their lasers are very powerful at 3 and 5W and can penetrate a plaster cast. Have a look at the following link, pass back your comment.

  3. Michael Patterson says:

    Great job continuing the fight against mis-information. Unfortunate to see that researchers and reviewers continue to have a lack of understanding of the physics of light in biological tissue.

Comments are closed.