This medical journal article should have been posted ages ago. My apologies for being so slow in making it available to you.Continue reading “Light and neuroprotection”
If you have looked at the availability of rolls of red and near infrared LED lights, you will see that there is a bewildering array, between orangey-red (630nm) to out of the visible spectrum so that you can’t see it at all (940nm).
So what, you ask. Surely it doesn’t matter? Surely red light, near infrared light – it’s all the same? One wavelength is as good as another?
Wavelength matters – please be cautious!
I’ve had a number of queries about pulsed light.
There is good evidence now that pulsed light is more effective than continuous light. Maybe the cell batteries, the mitochondria like to have a little pause in between receiving a pulse of light energy and directing it into the cell as metabolic energy. It makes sense.
The other reason is that by pulsing the light, the light dose is then the average of the pulse-ON and pulse-OFF. This means you can push the power in the pulse-ON, knowing that it will be offset by the no-pulse time.
I know of several people who have gone on to pulse their LED-based Elizas and Cossacks, and I have nothing but total admiration and envy for them, but there is no way I could do that.
The reasons that I have not previously mentioned the value of pulsed light is because;
1. I couldn’t give instructions to achieve it
2. I didn’t want anyone to devalue the effectiveness of continuous red/near infrared light.
Daily unpulsed red light better than no red light.
If you are using your Eliza or Cossack with continuous red/infrared light, do not be tempted to chuck it in the corner and refuse to use it because it won’t pulse. It is still doing its very best for you, and that is a lot better than nothing.
The original research grant application would have seemed odd – to shine red lights on mice. But look what that research has given us.
With all the media attention on red and near infrared lights, let’s celebrate the people who meticulously documented the effects of red and near infrared light.
Professor John Mitrofanis, University of Sydney.
Prof John has been the driver – he recognised that the problem in Parkinson’s Disease was cell battery malfunction – the mitochondria.
The first paper describing the effect of red light on Parkinsonism mice was published in 2010, nine years ago. The animal evidence was convincing way back then. Continue reading “Who should get the credit?”
Three years ago, I would have said that if you have had PD for a long time, then using a red light hat may help a bit. That comment was based on two things: Continue reading “If you’ve had Parkinson’s disease for many years, will red lights help?”
Here is a link to the Royal Society’s 2018 Francis Crick lecture, delivered by Dr Miratul Muqit. Thanks to one of the blog readers who told me about this excellent lecture, entitled Parkinson’s disease: decoding the mysteries of neurodegeneration.
There is one statement about PD which is completely wrong, and it is relevant to red/near infrared lights. Read on.