Is Using Near Infrared Light (700 - 1400nm) Safe? Some Research Seems To Indicate Not!

Discussion in 'Red Light, Infrared, LLLT' started by KyleKingsly, Jul 23, 2019.

?

Do you think near infrared light is safe?

  1. Yes, it's probably safe used responsibly

    57.1%
  2. Yes, it's potentially safe used responsibly

    28.6%
  3. No, it's potentially unsafe even used responsibly

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. No, it's definitely not worth the risk, and you should stick to red light

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Other (please explain in a reply)

    14.3%
  1. KyleKingsly

    KyleKingsly Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2018
    Messages:
    96
    Gender:
    Male
    Hey guys, I could really use some advice on what wavelength to get for my first experiments! I want to use red light/NIR therapy for 3 purposes:
    1. Lose weight, specifically fat, by releasing adipocytes (in conjunction with peating)
    2. Boost metabolism by shining the light on my thyroid
    3. Reduce my anxiety and insomnia, and perhaps help my depression-like anhedonia (cannot enjoy anything like I used to)
    As far as I can tell, near infrared light (NIR) at 850nm will be far better than red light at 660nm because it will penetrate better into the areas I'm targeting. On the other hand, I've seen some research stating that NIR is not safe and actually harms the skin and can lead to skin cancer.

    Here is one such link that discusses the risks: https://www.hightechhealth.com/2018/05/08/near-infrared . I do realize that the discussion there is related to NIR saunas so perhaps it's a matter of dose, but it seems like NIR is so strong that I could see it could causing issues over time, just like getting too much sun does.


    Thus, would be best for my first product to use NIR light rather than red light, or is it potentially unsafe to use NIR and so I should stick to red light? Thanks in advance :cool:
     
  2. Kartoffel

    Kartoffel Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2017
    Messages:
    1,095
    Gender:
    Male
    As far as I can see the author doesn't really provide any evidence that it would not be safe. He mostly cites studies showing that irradiation with red or near infrared light reduces short-term collagen formation. I don't really see how suppression of collagen formation and fibroblast activity can bee seen as harmful. But I haven't really gone through all his material, just had brief look.
     
  3. TripleOG

    TripleOG Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    It's safe. Dose matters. Same negatives happen if you bake in the sun too long. Start low and work your way up.

    Was gonna link you to the LLLT facebook group, but seems you already started a discussion there. ;)

    I may revisit targeted treatment with LEDs when I have the desire to build my own devices. But in the meantime I've been using a DIY red light "bed" consisting of 5 red coated 250w incandescents lined up single file and elevated about 2ft above my body. Been using for about a year with nothing but positives to share. Arguably the most reliable anti-stress tool I have in my possession.

    Never felt like I was missing out on the effects from high prices led alternatives (e.g. Joov). You get the full red spectrum from incandescents plus heat. Benefits have been shown using wavelengths outside of 660 and 850.

    Funny enough, Ray Peat was just asked in the recent One Radio Network interview if there's a difference between the expensive red light LED panels and red incandescents. He answered "no."
     
  4. Gone Peating

    Gone Peating Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2018
    Messages:
    356
    Gender:
    Male
    As far as I know, the higher the wavelength the less harmful it should be, that's why UV rays can be harmful in large amounts because they have the smallest wavelength
     
  5. Kartoffel

    Kartoffel Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2017
    Messages:
    1,095
    Gender:
    Male
    Here is what Ray said in response to my question on one particular study from that article in which infrared augmented the damage by UV-light.

    I don’t recommend the use of infrared radiation, because at best, it just raises the temperature of the tissue, and that isn’t necessarily helpful, and increase collagen degradation. Red light alone has been used in a variety of situations, including ultraviolet and gamma ray exposure.

    Exp Dermatol. 2008 Oct;17(10):864-70.
    Heat-induced MMP-1 expression
    is mediated by TRPV1 through PKCalpha signaling in HaCaT cells.
    Lee YM, Li WH, Kim YK, Kim KH, Chung JH.
    BACKGROUND:
    Matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1) is considered a key initiator of collagen degradation in inflammatory responses. A heat-gated channel, transient receptor potential vanilloid type 1 (TRPV1), induces release of proinflammatory mediators. TRPV1 channels have been localized to the epidermis and we have recently suggested that they act as mediators of heat-induced MMP-1. The aim of this study was to investigate the signaling of TRPV1 in MMP-1 regulation by heat shock in human epidermal keratinocytes.
    METHODS:
    Heat shock-induced MMP-1 expression was decreased by treatment with TRPV1 inhibitor. The heat-induced MMP-1 expression was suppressed by Gö6976 [calcium-dependent inhibitor] and staurosporine (ST, broad-spectrum PKC inhibitor), while rottlerin (ROT, calcium-independent PKCdelta inhibitor) had no effect. Also, transfection of PKCalpha siRNA decreased MMP-1 expression, whereas MMP-1 expression was not significantly affected in cells transfected with negative control siRNA, PKCbeta siRNA or PKCdelta siRNA.
    RESULTS:
    We demonstrated that heat shock failed to induce MMP-1 expression in HaCaT cells cultured in calcium-free media. The heat-induced [Ca(2+)](i) increase was inhibited by Gö6976 and ST, but not by ROT. We also found that heat-induced phosphorylation of ERK, JNK and p38 MAPK in HaCaT cells, but capsazepine and ruthenium red had no effect on this activation. In addition to the role of TRPV1 in heat-induced MMP-1 expression, we also found that heat increased TRPV1 proteins in human skin in vivo.
    CONCLUSIONS:
    Our results suggest that TRPV1 mediates heat shock-induced MMP-1 expression via calcium-dependent PKCalpha signaling in HaCaT cells​
     
  6. Inaut

    Inaut Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2017
    Messages:
    895
    Gender:
    Male
    thanks @Kartoffel
    back to using my red light liberally and my infrared sparingly. multiple applications daily with red and maybe once or twice weekly with infrared in very short durations
     
  7. TripleOG

    TripleOG Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    @Kartoffel can you post your question?

    His answer seems aimed at excessively heating tissue with IR, namely Far-IR. The bulbs he's recommended forever have more IR than any other wavelength lol.
     
  8. Inaut

    Inaut Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2017
    Messages:
    895
    Gender:
    Male
    How close does ray get to the lamps though?? If it’s at some distance I don’t think it matters...or?
     
  9. TripleOG

    TripleOG Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    That's why I asked for context. It sounds like he's replying to an inquiry regarding Far-IR therapy, seeing how he emphasized the heat-shock portion of his reply.
     
  10. OP
    KyleKingsly

    KyleKingsly Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2018
    Messages:
    96
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for the insight guys! Yeah @TripleOG I had posted in a bunch of FB red light/NIR therapy groups already but I've found that people on here tend to be better informed than those on Facebook. After I got some really good replies debunking the article, and explaining, that like you said, that the danger seems to be merely a matter of dose, I decided to get a SGROW 660 + 850nm light from Amazon!

    One study a couple people linked me is this one: Infrared and skin: Friend or foe - ScienceDirect, which states that IR-A aka NIR is actually beneficial for the skin in the right doses and can heal collagen! So nothing to worry much about overall.

    I decided to go with the SGROW light over the incandescents because wavelengths specifically around 660nm and 850nm have been shown to be best for cytochrome c oxidase absorption which is beneficial for cellular respiration, as seen on many websites such as here: Everything You Need To Know About Red Light Therapy. Plus I don't really want the heat from the incandescents.
     
  11. Inaut

    Inaut Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2017
    Messages:
    895
    Gender:
    Male
    FYI Peat is asked about infrared light in his newest interview on One Radio Network.

    He discusses it around the 26min mark. Red light works on mitochondria while infrared works mainly to heat water. Sounds like 600-700nm is the sweet spot as per Ray
     
  12. TheGoogler

    TheGoogler Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Messages:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you think this could be part of why 5g is getting lots of negative press in regards to health? Shorter wavelength = more disruptive ?
     
Loading...