Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Attn Dr Crouch - Re: Home Made Red LED Arrays

  1. #1
    Senior Member redhotoz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,500

    Default Attn Dr Crouch - Re: Home Made Red LED Arrays

    Hi Dr Crouch

    Good to see you posting again. I hope you don't mind me bringing this up again but I really want to understand.

    I have a home made red LED array that I have been using on and off since May this year. My boyfriend is an Electrician and he put the light panels together in a frame for me. IowaDavid made the light panels up for me and posted them from America to Australia and I am very grateful that he did this for me. It's quite fiddly and time consuming from what I understand by just looking at each light panel. Recently, my boyfriend set the frame up above my bed and I have to admit that I have fallen asleep under it a few times, for several hours at a time. This has only been beneficial to my skin and I really love the calming effect of the low level red LEDs on my face.

    I know there has been a big 'hoo haa' about the two people who were burnt by using home made light units back in January and I was wondering if you had been able to get any firm information from these patients, about what they put together. That is, do you know what they used to receive these burns? I truly can't understand how anyone can get burns from low level red LEDs and IowaDavid has offered to share the information he has gathered with anyone who asks. I assume that the patients that saw you had not contacted IowaDavid before gathering their bits and bobs. I mean, if they had of, they would not have received burns.

    Anyway, I hope you don't mind me asking this. It has been a rather contentious issue in this Forum for some months now and it would be great if we could finally get the answers.

    Many thanks for your time.

    Jenny
    Currently trying: Apr 06 Bee Wilder's Candida (natural healing) Diet; May 06 Home made red LED array; Aug 06 ZZ ointment.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Steve95301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,140

    Default

    Yes, I almost asked this myself when I saw the post. However my question would be:

    "Other than burns, are there any risks associated with RLT for rosacea?"
    KNOWLEDGE = POWER

  3. #3
    Senior Member redhotoz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve95301
    Yes, I almost asked this myself when I saw the post. However my question would be:

    "Other than burns, are there any risks associated with RLT for rosacea?"
    Hi Steve

    What I am asking Dr Crouch, is...did he ever find out what his patients made. I think it is important to understand what these patients sat themselves under, in order to get burns.

    I don't think they made the same thing as what I have here, as using low level red LEDs will not burn the skin.

    So, I'm a bit confused about your question really. Perhaps we, the members of this Forum, are lumping the term "Red Light Therapy (RLT)" into one basket? I think it is important to differentiate between the different light sources and I do hope Dr Crouch can explain this to us.

    Jen

  4. #4
    Senior Member Steve95301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,140

    Default

    I think the focus on the burn incident leads people into false logic.

    Premise: The people who got burned, built their RLT devices incorrectly.
    Conclusion: Therefore, if I build my RLT device correctly, or purchase a quality device, I will not be harmed.

    The conclusion includes the unstated assumption that RLT is an effective tx modality for rosacea, and that burns are the only objection to using it, which is false.
    KNOWLEDGE = POWER

  5. #5
    Senior Member Twickle Purple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    2,270

    Default

    //

  6. #6
    Senior Member redhotoz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,500

    Default

    Well Steve, I'm not sure what the other real objections are to low level red light therapy for Rosacea but at least we may be able to clear up this part of it, once and for all.

    Whilst there have not yet been studies done specifically on low level red light therapy for Rosacea, I do believe it is a treatment modality that is worth considering. Of course, that is up to each individual to decide.

    Jen

  7. #7
    Senior Member peter.crouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    162

    Default Re: Attn Dr Crouch - Re: Home Made Red LED Arrays

    Quote Originally Posted by redhotoz
    Hi Dr Crouch

    Good to see you posting again. I hope you don't mind me bringing this up again but I really want to understand.

    I have a home made red LED array that I have been using on and off since May this year. My boyfriend is an Electrician and he put the light panels together in a frame for me. IowaDavid made the light panels up for me and posted them from America to Australia and I am very grateful that he did this for me. It's quite fiddly and time consuming from what I understand by just looking at each light panel. Recently, my boyfriend set the frame up above my bed and I have to admit that I have fallen asleep under it a few times, for several hours at a time. This has only been beneficial to my skin and I really love the calming effect of the low level red LEDs on my face.

    I know there has been a big 'hoo haa' about the two people who were burnt by using home made light units back in January and I was wondering if you had been able to get any firm information from these patients, about what they put together. That is, do you know what they used to receive these burns? I truly can't understand how anyone can get burns from low level red LEDs and IowaDavid has offered to share the information he has gathered with anyone who asks. I assume that the patients that saw you had not contacted IowaDavid before gathering their bits and bobs. I mean, if they had of, they would not have received burns.

    Anyway, I hope you don't mind me asking this. It has been a rather contentious issue in this Forum for some months now and it would be great if we could finally get the answers.

    Many thanks for your time.

    Jenny
    Dear Jenny,
    Thank you for your question – I think it is useful because I’m aware of the consternation the post in January caused. For my own part, all I thought I was (responsibly) doing was sharing my firsthand experience of seeing first one then another patient present with burns from an improvised light device. I am certain that I have never suggested that burns could result from Low Level Red Light Therapy or that I have ever seen more than the two patients I made people aware of. Some of the posts that resulted assumed that my post was part of some grand conspiracy to discredit Red Light therapy and the resulting discussions narrowly risked questioning both my honesty and integrity. I felt that what was implied about my part in the discussions that followed was both unjustified and quite unfair. I seriously considered withdrawing from contributing to the boards completely at that point (however I remain grateful to those who sought to clarify exactly what was being implied). My issue has clearly been focussed on the potential for damage that could result from DIY constructed devices that inadvertently and unintentionally use powerful components never intended for medical application and not red light therapy per se.

    I feel certain that, if properly constructed, using low powered LEDS, benefit may be obtained. To imply otherwise was not the theme of my original post. I have seen only 2 patients with burns. They presented independently of one another. I realise retrospectively (but did not know at the time) both cases were linked to the use of the same improvised high power device. I have not seen any further cases since the two in January. I hope that if people use tried and tested low power devices, that I will never see another case.

    I have no way of knowing if the patients that saw me had previously contacted anyone currently constructing safe devices (but I can’t imagine that they did because if they had done so, I feel sure they would not have used the components that they chose to use). I have had an e-mail exchange with one of them over the past 2 weeks that refers to “we constructed” and I assume that the reason they initially presented separately was that one checked me out first and the other followed later. I imagine that they probably felt that they might be in trouble as they had injuries. As to why they contacted me, I don’t know ~ I assume they did so because of my profile on the rosacea forum but if they were referred by someone else they didn’t say. I have deliberately tried to not question them too closely (as they were obviously feeling stupid about what they had done and I didnt want to scare them off from coming forward again). So, what did they do that was so ill advised in retrospect? They have kindly sent me the specifications of their device and it would appear that they were not using low power components at all. One of the websites I found, (using Google), describes the LED that they used as “the evil twin” of “a similar red LED” and describes it as “meaning business”. The website describes the LED as having an optical output of 250mW at 810nm as it has an array of six GaAlAsP chips inside.

    This is a quote from the website I found
    “Model SHPL-810-260 This is the evil twin to the SHPL-660 on the Red LED page… Mounted in a very beefy metal stud package, this LED means business… With an optical output of 250 milliwatts at 810nm, this infrared powerhouse will fry your eyeballs if you stare into it. Even so, DO NOT, and I mean DO NOT look directly into this LED from any closer than about three feet away”.

    The email I received describes the construction thus:-

    “I’ve done a diagram of one of the two panels which I hope explains why the panels ended up as they did – we glued the edges of the lenses to one another and to the plastic edges of the clusters to support them over the single 810nm LEDs (the lenses overlapped the 810nm LEDs so this is why the 810s are shown as a blue circle behind a circular lens):-“

    The diagram they supplied shows 12 of the 810nm LEDs each with a lens over the top and 8 of the clusters of 52 LEDs each arranged in a panel.

    So they used lenses and high powered components in their quest to construct a Light Therapy device. I think I can establish that it was the lenses and the power of the single LED components that concentrated the Infra-Red beam (not the clusters of 52 low powered LEDs). Certainly the website research above suggests that this LED could be dangerous.

    Some suggested that it was preposterous to suggest that Low Level Red Light could cause a burn and questioned why I hadn’t reported the device to the authorities. I agree and, well, I tried…. The Medical Devices Agency said that I couldn’t really report something that isn’t a medical device ~ they can’t put an alert out about “something that has been thrown together from electrical components never intended to be used for medical treatments”. These “one of a kind” DIY constructions cannot be regulated. The component manufacturers send these components out on receipt of an order and don’t ask what their intended use is. The recent clarification of the make and type of the LEDs ~ particularly the use of the lenses makes it clearer why burns resulted.

    Arrays of Low power LEDS should be safe and may be beneficial but what stops someone simply mistaking a low power LED with a higher powered one or thinking that by using a lens the result will be more beneficial? My only reason for posting in January was to express concern over the two burns I’d seen and to urge caution by anyone who was thinking of setting out to construct their own device with no guidance from those who had (or from high powered components that they naively bought from LED electrical wholesalers).

    I hope that this reply helps to inform the debate in a constructive way.

    Kind regards,


    Peter

  8. #8
    Senior Member Twickle Purple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    2,270

    Default

    Dear Dr. Crouch,

    Thank you so much for your post.

    This subject has caused considerable debate and assumption. I am grateful for your follow-up and clarification.

    Respectfully,
    Twickle Purple

  9. #9
    Senior Member Peter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,085

    Default

    Hello Peter

    How are you? Good to see you back on here again.

    Appreciate you coming on here, especially on a Sunday and giving us more details on what actually happened with these particular people and your views on RLT. It's a shame it didn't all come out in this detail on the original thread in January, as it could have saved many of us a lot of brow beating on what became a very emotive subject but these things happen and I am sure you had very good reasons for this at the time. Personally I had tried to put this issue to one side but this was very difficult when two individuals who used to be members on this Forum repeatedly kept on bringing the controversy back and using your name and posts as a lever to imply that all forms of RLT would damage the rosacea skin.

    This happened again a few weeks ago where I was accused via a well known individuals web site of all sorts of things, including making money out of selling lamps and not actually having rosacea. Jen and other members also had lies told about them regarding RLT with Jen being singled out in particular with additional nasty remarks being made about her over other issues. Taking this into account I would like to apologise regarding one post I made concerning you last week, which shouldn't be taken as being a personal attack but at the time I was very angry over the accusations being made about me from the other source.

    Your post is very concise and I would like to time to read through it properly, digest what you have written and refer back to the original thread before deciding if I need clarification on certain points. The opening post on that thread in January that triggered off the controversy, made all sorts of wild claims which as we suspected at the time and now know that most of it was utter nonsense. I assume you are happy to take constructive questions?

    Best wishes

    Peter

  10. #10
    Senior Member peter.crouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter
    Hello Peter

    How are you? Good to see you back on here again.

    Appreciate you coming on here, especially on a Sunday and giving us more details on what actually happened with these particular people and your views on RLT. It's a shame it didn't all come out in this detail on the original thread in January, as it could have saved many of us a lot of brow beating on what became a very emotive subject but these things happen and I am sure you had very good reasons for this at the time. Personally I had tried to put this issue to one side but this was very difficult when two individuals who used to be members on this Forum repeatedly kept on bringing the controversy back and using your name and posts as a lever to imply that all forms of RLT would damage the rosacea skin.

    This happened again a few weeks ago where I was accused via a well known individuals web site of all sorts of things, including making money out of selling lamps and not actually having rosacea. Jen and other members also had lies told about them regarding RLT with Jen being singled out in particular with additional nasty remarks being made about her over other issues. Taking this into account I would like to apologise regarding one post I made concerning you last week, which shouldn't be taken as being a personal attack but at the time I was very angry over the accusations being made about me from the other source.

    Your post is very concise and I would like to time to read through it properly, digest what you have written and refer back to the original thread before deciding if I need clarification on certain points. The opening post on that thread in January that triggered off the controversy, made all sorts of wild claims which as we suspected at the time and now know that most of it was utter nonsense. I assume you are happy to take constructive questions?

    Best wishes

    Peter
    Apology accepted. Actually I've disclosed all I know in as concise a manner as possible but if you decide you need further clarification, you could always ask the patients themselves (if they post on here).

    Kind regards,

    Peter

Similar Threads

  1. Home Made Eye Lid Scrub -- thoughts??
    By Ghost in forum Ocular Rosacea
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 28th May 2011, 01:38 AM
  2. My Home Made Oatmeal Cleanser
    By DJC in forum Topical and oral products (non-prescription)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 28th July 2010, 08:04 PM
  3. What home made facial recipes have you tried?
    By -ToadStooL- in forum Topical and oral products (non-prescription)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10th April 2006, 02:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •