• Due to excessive bot signups along with nefarious actors we are limiting forum registration. Keep checking back for the register link to appear. Please do not send emails or have someone post to the forum asking for a signup link. Until the current climate changes we do not see a change of this policy. To join the forum you must have a compelling reason. Letting us know what skills/knowledge you will bring to the community along with the intent of your stay here will help in getting you approved.

Endocrinologist

Member
Thread starter
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
11
"In conclusion, we have demonstrated, in an in vitro system, that exposing cells to MB [methylene blue] and WL [white light - especially red light], at concentrations similar to those used for endoscopic examination of tissue, can lead to elevated levels of DNA damage and apoptosis. We have also shown that by modifying the light emitted to remove wavelengths responsible for MB excitation these effects can be prevented. Reductions in the concentration of MB can achieve a similar effect. We propose that the introduction of a modification to current endoscope light sources in combination with optimization of the concentrations of MB will minimize DNA damage resulting from dye photoexcitation during MB chromoendoscopy. Moreover, by maximizing the amount of harmless light used, tissue visualization should not be compromised. These recommendations, however, require full evaluation in a clinical setting."
 

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,697
they use it as dye right?how much MB is need for that concentrations?i hope its not apply to ray's low dose of 1mg.
 

mangoes

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
447
I mentioned this study in another thread, but it's talking about Barrett's esophagus & a chromoendoscopy. Would it still apply to healthy cells and topical application of MB? I dunno
 

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,697
topical yes, but oral is not that saturating tissues, in chromoendoscopy they saturate the tissues with it by injection i think.
 

Giraffe

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,451
they use it as dye right?how much MB is need for that concentrations?i hope its not apply to ray's low dose of 1mg.
I found the full text of this study.

"However, illumination of cells with WL [white light] in the presence of 15 mM (0.5%) MB caused a significant elevation of DNA strand breaks (5.838 versus 30.91%; P , 0.01) in OE33 cells. [...] Reducing the MB concentration 10-fold (1.5 mM) caused a significant (P , 0.001) reduction in the amount of DNA damage induced when illuminated with WL when compared to that of 15 mM (0.5%) MB illuminated by WL, in terms of both strand breaks and FPG-sensitive sites (Figure 1A, P , 0.001). Furthermore, the amount of DNA damage arising from incubation with solutions of MB at concentrations equal to or ,1.5 mM were not significantly different from the control samples either maintained in the dark or illuminated in WL in the absence of dye (Figure 1A)."

If I understand this right, they used a o.5% solution (5 mg/mL), the same solution that was used in a study they referenced (full text in Portuguese). In this study they first removed excess mucus with n-acetylcysteine, then sprayed the methylene blue solution, and finally removed excess methylene blue with distilled water.

Haidut wrote in another thread that concentrations of 100 nM/L (nano!) are achieved by taking around 1 mg methylene blue daily. (Why Is Everyone Dramatically Under-dosing Methylene Blue?)
 
Last edited:

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,697
right:thumbsup:, i mistaken it with mcM, so it should be that big dose to turn the tissue in blue color, for chromoendoscopy.
 

Ritchie

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
358
I found the full text of this study.

"However, illumination of cells with WL [white light] in the presence of 15 mM (0.5%) MB caused a significant elevation of DNA strand breaks (5.838 versus 30.91%; P , 0.01) in OE33 cells. [...] Reducing the MB concentration 10-fold (1.5 mM) caused a significant (P , 0.001) reduction in the amount of DNA damage induced when illuminated with WL when compared to that of 15 mM (0.5%) MB illuminated by WL, in terms of both strand breaks and FPG-sensitive sites (Figure 1A, P , 0.001). Furthermore, the amount of DNA damage arising from incubation with solutions of MB at concentrations equal to or ,1.5 mM were not significantly different from the control samples either maintained in the dark or illuminated in WL in the absence of dye (Figure 1A)."

If I understand this right, they used a o.5% solution (5 mg/mL), the same solution that was used in a study they referenced (full text in Portuguese). In this study they first removed excess mucus with n-acetylcysteine, then sprayed the methylene blue solution, and finally removed excess methylene blue with distilled water.

Haidut wrote in another thread that concentrations of 100 nM/L (nano!) are achieved by taking around 1 mg methylene blue daily. (Why Is Everyone Dramatically Under-dosing Methylene Blue?)

In light of this study, could that mean that applying methylene blue topically (i.e. 1 or 2 drops), and then shining red light in that area may be dangerous for the localised cells?
 

CoolTweetPete

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
728
Age
35
Location
San Francisco
In light of this study, could that mean that applying methylene blue topically (i.e. 1 or 2 drops), and then shining red light in that area may be dangerous for the localised cells?

This was my experience.

I used topical Oxidal on my scalp and used an LLLT red light device. I noticed aggressive shedding during a shower the next morning.
 

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,291
they use it as dye right?how much MB is need for that concentrations?i hope its not apply to ray's low dose of 1mg.

No longer an issue. I am making a kickstarter patreon for red light pills. They look just like camera pills but emit red light instead.

Come in 3 flavors.

Reusable.
 

jyb

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
2,777
Location
UK
DNA damage and aptotosis is one of the main reasons why MB+light is popular in studies. It doesn't necessarily mean that it is bad. Coffee and I'm sure many other supplements can have the same effect.
 

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
DNA damage and aptotosis is one of the main reasons why MB+light is popular in studies. It doesn't necessarily mean that it is bad. Coffee and I'm sure many other supplements can have the same effect.
what
 

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,697
I prefer nocotinic acid :) Live for the flush! :D
not sure if your serious about that, but niacin form is not safe in long term,at least in comparing to niacinamide.it can cause diabete like problems by increasing free fatty acids.
 

Similar threads

Top