Red Light Therapy, Lights, Supplemental Lighting

[narouz]

Just another data point in this discussion:

As you may've noticed,
some salons are now offering "Red Light Therapy"
in what you'd normally look at and think is a tanning bed.
They just change the (fluorescent) bulbs
from tanning bulbs to "red light bulbs."

I checked up on those red light bulbs.
The biggest maker is "Interlectric,"
and their red light bulb (fluorescent)
just emits red light at the wavelengths 615 – 635 nm.

http://www.interlectric.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Interlectric_general_lighting_catalog.pdf

So that is the visible red spectrum
and probably would be considered "discontinuous" by Peat.
No near infrared at all.

 

[nwo2012]

Just another data point in this discussion:

As you may've noticed,
some salons are now offering "Red Light Therapy"
in what you'd normally look at and think is a tanning bed.
They just change the (fluorescent) bulbs
from tanning bulbs to "red light bulbs."

I checked up on those red light bulbs.
The biggest maker is "Interlectric,"
and their red light bulb (fluorescent)
just emits red light at the wavelengths 615 – 635 nm.

http://www.interlectric.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Interlectric_general_lighting_catalog.pdf

So that is the visible red spectrum
and probably would be considered "discontinuous" by Peat.
No near infrared at all.

Not forgetting the concentrated EMFs emitted by most commercial tanning beds.

 

[narouz]

Not forgetting the concentrated EMFs emitted by most commercial tanning beds.

Electro Magnetic Frequencies?
Please explain, nwo.
I'm so dense when it comes to light, sprectrums, wavelengths....

 

[Kemby]

Looking at this chart:

http://heelspurs.com/a/led/BLACK_BO2.gif

It now seems to me that Halogen bulbs are the most appropriate tool to gain the most benefits (?)

We have to remember that when going from one type of light bulb/lamp to the next (Say Halogen to Incandescent) most of them still offer a percentage in the desirable light ranges but we want the best tool for the job.

Halogen lamps seem to offer about 9% from 600nm peaking at about 9.5% between 700-800nm and slowly lowering BUT still offering about 5.5% at 1200nm - In other words it seems to be the type of buld that offers the highest percentages within all of the potentially desirable ranges.

Anecdotally I have something like this http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B002W4KXSG/?tag=hydra0b-21&hvadid=9550945869&ref=asc_df_B002W4KXSG for my garage while I train but haven't used it in a while. I always found the light/heat from it very pleasant and I now know why.

Your thoughts?

 

[nwo2012]

Not forgetting the concentrated EMFs emitted by most commercial tanning beds.

Electro Magnetic Frequencies?
Please explain, nwo.
I'm so dense when it comes to light, sprectrums, wavelengths....

Fields.
Most sunbed ballasts emit these. Basically they mess with out cells, in a nutshell.

 

[Birdie]

I have just read every single comment. Whew. I do remember that Dr Peat said that when he says red light, he means light from the red part of the spectrum. Regarding healing uses for light, such injuries, that could be thought of as a different aspect of light therapy, and probably not what RP is advising as far as using red light. He may be including such but he is not giving advice for musculo-skeletal injuries... Not sure if I'm being clear. Just thinking...

Back in January, there was a similar discussion on the fans page. Cliff recommended a certain light. People were fixing up chicken lights to hang over their desks. I've tried to find Cliff's post over there before and couldn't. But I did get the bulb back then. It's a 250 colorless bulb. It's a heat lamp. BTW a contractor friend said they are using colorless rather than red heat lamps. I didn't tell him, but, of course, they are still in the red spectrum and therefore red lights.

 

[narouz]

I have just read every single comment. Whew. I do remember that Dr Peat said that when he says red light, he means light from the red part of the spectrum. Regarding healing uses for light, such injuries, that could be thought of as a different aspect of light therapy, and probably not what RP is advising as far as using red light. He may be including such but he is not giving advice for musculo-skeletal injuries... Not sure if I'm being clear. Just thinking...

Back in January, there was a similar discussion on the fans page. Cliff recommended a certain light. People were fixing up chicken lights to hang over their desks. I've tried to find Cliff's post over there before and couldn't. But I did get the bulb back then. It's a 250 colorless bulb. It's a heat lamp. BTW a contractor friend said they are using colorless rather than red heat lamps. I didn't tell him, but, of course, they are still in the red spectrum and therefore red lights.

Birdie--
Yes, and a poster here, peatarian, says Peat personally guided her to exactly the same kind of bulb.
The confusion is:
that heat bulbs produce relatively small amounts of Red Light.
The regular incandescents (non-heat lamp type) have much more Red Light.
And halogens more still (but Peat did say those were not thoroughly enough studied for him to okay them from a safety point of view)....

 

[narouz]

Looking at this chart:

http://heelspurs.com/a/led/BLACK_BO2.gif

It now seems to me that Halogen bulbs are the most appropriate tool to gain the most benefits (?)

We have to remember that when going from one type of light bulb/lamp to the next (Say Halogen to Incandescent) most of them still offer a percentage in the desirable light ranges but we want the best tool for the job.

Halogen lamps seem to offer about 9% from 600nm peaking at about 9.5% between 700-800nm and slowly lowering BUT still offering about 5.5% at 1200nm - In other words it seems to be the type of buld that offers the highest percentages within all of the potentially desirable ranges.

Anecdotally I have something like this http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B002W4KXSG/?tag=hydra0b-21&hvadid=9550945869&ref=asc_df_B002W4KXSG for my garage while I train but haven't used it in a while. I always found the light/heat from it very pleasant and I now know why.

Your thoughts?

Martin-
I agree, but with some caveats.
If you look at what Dr. Peat said to "katia" (at Peatarian.com) in an exchange:

I researched this a bit more and it seems these IR bulbs (Osram, Philips) are not the best choice. Their max. wavelenght is at 1,100 nm (see for example here: http://www.infraphil.info/Philips_Infraphil-PAR38E.pdf ). When I asked Peat about them, he wrote back:

Ray Peat wrote:
I think the slightly shorter wavelengths are the most beneficial, from about 600 nm to about 850 nm.

And if you consider the charts posted by Charlie earlier in the thread...




...it looks like halogens are pretty clearly the best in terms of continuous energy
within the Peat-preferred wavelengths "from about 600 nm to about 850 nm".

My caveats/concerns would be:

1. Peat has never, as far as I've seen, discussed halogens
2. I think I read that halogens have some wavelengths that can be harmful to the eyes.
I'll have to root around to find that info.
3. Halogens often seem to have a clear glass filter over them. Maybe this is just to prevent burns,
but I have some stray note stuck in my mind about the glass filter being there to filter out harmful wavelengths...? I could be wrong here.
4. Over on the HeelSpurs website, they show a halogen light therapy "bed" arrangement.
It has, I believe, some trays of colored water. And those trays of water are there for what reason...?
(Again, I'm posing these admittedly half-baked questions as areas to be explored more thoroughly, especially in terms of safety.)

 

[narouz]

I have just read every single comment. Whew. I do remember that Dr Peat said that when he says red light, he means light from the red part of the spectrum. Regarding healing uses for light, such injuries, that could be thought of as a different aspect of light therapy, and probably not what RP is advising as far as using red light. He may be including such but he is not giving advice for musculo-skeletal injuries... Not sure if I'm being clear. Just thinking...

Back in January, there was a similar discussion on the fans page. Cliff recommended a certain light. People were fixing up chicken lights to hang over their desks. I've tried to find Cliff's post over there before and couldn't. But I did get the bulb back then. It's a 250 colorless bulb. It's a heat lamp. BTW a contractor friend said they are using colorless rather than red heat lamps. I didn't tell him, but, of course, they are still in the red spectrum and therefore red lights.

And Birdie--
Just to focus the confusion a bit more:

Peat has usually, I think, spoken of "red light" as the good/healing kind of light. Hasn't he?
Well, the "red light" spectrum is roughly 600-700nm.

But in an email reply to a "katia" at Peatarian.com,
Peat said this:

When I asked Peat about them, he wrote back:

Ray Peat wrote:
I think the slightly shorter wavelengths are the most beneficial, from about 600 nm to about 850 nm.

So 600-850nm goes well beyond the "red light" spectrum--into a good part of the near-infrared spectrum.

Maybe I'm wrong about Peat using the "red light" handle.
But if he has then the confusion is explained.

 

[Birdie]

Some references show red light at 620-750nm... Peat mainly says red light is beneficial. But, here, he includes "to 850nm".

Well, I do see your point in that the near infrared might be closer to 750nm. So he is moving over a little by including 850nm. But I don't think there are any critical boundaries in that "about 600 to 850nm."

 

[Kemby]

1. Peat has never, as far as I've seen, discussed halogens
2. I think I read that halogens have some wavelengths that can be harmful to the eyes.
I'll have to root around to find that info.
3. Halogens often seem to have a clear glass filter over them. Maybe this is just to prevent burns,
but I have some stray note stuck in my mind about the glass filter being there to filter out harmful wavelengths...? I could be wrong here.
4. Over on the HeelSpurs website, they show a halogen light therapy "bed" arrangement.
It has, I believe, some trays of colored water. And those trays of water are there for what reason...?
(Again, I'm posing these admittedly half-baked questions as areas to be explored more thoroughly, especially in terms of safety.)

Fair caveats Narouz!

I read the Heelspurs website in detail the other day and noticed that he contradicts himself on several occasions in regards to the light. He talks about the "Blue light spectrum" from Halogens being damaging to the eyes. When discussing the light therapy bed and the red coloured water in the trays (To block the blue light) he said "I don't think that is necessary". I got the impression that he feels it is damaging if it is at close range and you are staring straight into it but otherwise it is an insignificant risk (But I might be wrong).

Wearing red tinted sunglasses would block out most of, if not all of the blue light from Halogens.

I am unsure about the glass filter over halogens and certain wavelengths being blocked. Something we should look into.


Elsewhere I have seen people talk about blue light wavelength being beneficial but I personally do not believe that.

Have a read of this:

http://www.mdsupport.org/library/blulight.html

The research is mixed.

I might add that I have seen no studies on light in relation to potential eye damage where the participants have stopped their PUFA and wheat consumption for a significant amount of time before doing the study.

I genuinely believe that light would likely cause little risk regardless of wavelength where a person has a healthy high turnover oxidative, healing metabolism.

Any research that comes out about human health I bin immediately unless PUFA and grains have been stopped as otherwise the results are always going to be flawed - They are doing research on already unhealthy poisoned participants without even realising it.

Just a thought!

 

[kiran]

Any research that comes out about human health I bin immediately unless PUFA and grains have been stopped as otherwise the results are always going to be flawed - They are doing research on already unhealthy poisoned participants without even realising it.

This would mean you bin most research. I don't think that's wise.

 

[Kemby]

This would mean you bin most research. I don't think that's wise.

I wouldn't go that far. I was making a point but realise that I made it badly.

I can differ between research that may have significance and research that does not.

 

[gabriel79]

Hi Martin,
I think what you´re referring to about the halogen being harmful to eyes is that halogen incandescent bulbs have more energy on the blue/violet/ultra-violet wavelengths than normal incandescent bulbs, which have very little. That´s why halogens usually have a UV filter in the glass, so that way UV energy is actually reduced.
Bear in mind that normal daylight has even more energy on the UV part than halogens.

For me the answer to this "light" issue is simple: I use halogens for light in my house, since normal incandescents were discontinued for selling. I try to minimize exposure to all kinds of fluorescents lights (this light is really different from all types of incandescent). Heat/IR lamps are more of a "therapy" thing, you can´t use them for lighting; so I don´t even consider them. I guess if you want to spend half an hour below a heat lamp it may be beneficial to get more of the IR wavelengths that you don´t get so much under normal bulbs (but you still get some even there)

 

[peatarian]

I asked Ray Peat again about the right bulbs, here is his answer:

"Plain incandescent bulbs are o.k., but the best kind are used by farmers for incubators, etc., and are designed as 130 volt bulbs, so when they operate on 120 volts they have a bias toward the longer wave red color, and they have an internal reflector. They are often called "infrared" or "heat lamps," but they have a clear glass front."

You still get the normal bulbs on Ebay and some companies are working on re-introducing them as 'heat bulbs'.

 

[peatarian]

Not forgetting the concentrated EMFs emitted by most commercial tanning beds.

Electro Magnetic Frequencies?
Please explain, nwo.
I'm so dense when it comes to light, sprectrums, wavelengths....

Fields.
Most sunbed ballasts emit these. Basically they mess with out cells, in a nutshell.

"Robert Becker's discussion of the dangers in Body Electric is worth reading." Ray Peat
Have you read this, nwo2012?

 

[narouz]

I asked Ray Peat again about the right bulbs, here is his answer:

"Plain incandescent bulbs are o.k., but the best kind are used by farmers for incubators, etc., and are designed as 130 volt bulbs, so when they operate on 120 volts they have a bias toward the longer wave red color, and they have an internal reflector. They are often called "infrared" or "heat lamps," but they have a clear glass front."

You still get the normal bulbs on Ebay and some companies are working on re-introducing them as 'heat bulbs'.

Wow!
This is a big breakthrough, at least for me.
Thank you peatarian!

I can see why, back in this thread somewhere I believe,
you said that you went back and forth with Peat in about 12 emails
over the intricacies of this Light Thing!

The point I've been stuck at for a while
is that Peat has used the handle "Red Light"
for the desirable spectrum,
and he has also said (I believe) that the wavelengths 600-820nm are the best.

Well...that data just would not seem to agree with Peat's other light recommendation,
oft-cited,
and reported from very reliable sources,
about Heat Lamps (or Infrared Lamps)--
because the wavelengths produced in strength by those kinds of bulbs
is generally considered to be 760-1260nm.
Which doesn't answer to Peat's 600-820nm wavelengths
or to his handle of "Red Light": 600-700ish nm.
(Well, it doesn't answer very well.)

Now, peatarian, you relay to us (thank you, again) that
Peat does indeed recommend as best what is often called a heat lamp or infrared lamp,
but a special kind and application:
one which is designed to run on 120 volts,
but which should be (for our Peatian purposes) run at 130 volts.

Okay. Well that sounds just crazy enough to be true!

I wonder how Peat figured that out?
I mean, does he have his own spectrascope (or whatever)?
Did he run the bulb with a variac (voltage adjuster)?
Maybe he lives in a place where the voltage is normally 130V
(local voltages do vary)?

At any rate, I think this is the closest we've come
(when I say "we" I mean "peatarian," :)
to solving one of
The Great Unsolved Peat Mysteries!!

To absolutely nail this down,
my suggestion would be to copy a picture of the target Peat Bulb described by Peat to peatarian
accompanied with its tech data,
send that to Peat,
and ask him to confirm that it is The Magic Bulb,
and further: ask him if the way to go would be to get a Variac
and run the bulb/s at 130 volts.

Anybody got a Peat Phone handy...?

 

[charlie]

Narouz, here you go. See how its 130 volts?

http://www.lightbulbemporium.com/bulbri ... 0br40h.asp

 

[narouz]

Sorry, correction:
The bulb Peat indicated are:
-designed to run a 130V
-but should be run at 120V for the ideal Peat spectrum

I asked Ray Peat again about the right bulbs, here is his answer:

"Plain incandescent bulbs are o.k., but the best kind are used by farmers for incubators, etc., and are designed as 130 volt bulbs, so when they operate on 120 volts they have a bias toward the longer wave red color, and they have an internal reflector. They are often called "infrared" or "heat lamps," but they have a clear glass front."

You still get the normal bulbs on Ebay and some companies are working on re-introducing them as 'heat bulbs'.

Wow!
This is a big breakthrough, at least for me.
Thank you peatarian!

I can see why, back in this thread somewhere I believe,
you said that you went back and forth with Peat in about 12 emails
over the intricacies of this Light Thing!

The point I've been stuck at for a while
is that Peat has used the handle "Red Light"
for the desirable spectrum,
and he has also said (I believe) that the wavelengths 600-820nm are the best.

Well...that data just would not seem to agree with Peat's other light recommendation,
oft-cited,
and reported from very reliable sources,
about Heat Lamps (or Infrared Lamps)--
because the wavelengths produced in strength by those kinds of bulbs
is generally considered to be 760-1260nm.
Which doesn't answer to Peat's 600-820nm wavelengths
or to his handle of "Red Light": 600-700ish nm.
(Well, it doesn't answer very well.)

Now, peatarian, you relay to us (thank you, again) that
Peat does indeed recommend as best what is often called a heat lamp or infrared lamp,
but a special kind and application:
one which is designed to run on 120 volts,
but which should be (for our Peatian purposes) run at 130 volts.

Okay. Well that sounds just crazy enough to be true!

I wonder how Peat figured that out?
I mean, does he have his own spectrascope (or whatever)?
Did he run the bulb with a variac (voltage adjuster)?
Maybe he lives in a place where the voltage is normally 130V
(local voltages do vary)?

At any rate, I think this is the closest we've come
(when I say "we" I mean "peatarian," :)
to solving one of
The Great Unsolved Peat Mysteries!!

To absolutely nail this down,
my suggestion would be to copy a picture of the target Peat Bulb described by Peat to peatarian
accompanied with its tech data,
send that to Peat,
and ask him to confirm that it is The Magic Bulb,
and further: ask him if the way to go would be to get a Variac
and run the bulb/s at 130 volts.

Anybody got a Peat Phone handy...?

 

[charlie]

Narouz, look up two posts, I posted a link to the correct bulb.