DIY Low-Level Laser Therapy for Tinnitus on a Budget — LLLT Under 100,-

[Bobby B]

This will burn the surface of your skin before it goes deeper than one millimeter into the flesh

Or anywhere close to the cochlea

For light therapy we use single wavelengths - of near infrared in the 850nm or 900nm range.

Have a read on what pumkinate did .

It does not have to be a single wavelength but the wavelength needs to be between 600nm to 1500nm - This is called the therapeutic window
There is a good video of professor Hamblin explaining this on YouTube - I posted the link in those LLLT threads.

And you want a somewhat focused beam not a wide angle beam and of course you need to cover your eyes

 

[Foncky]

Sorry, I don't see the difference between this led and the DIY videos you posted

I also don't find any "pumkinate" post

 

[Bobby B]

@Pumpkinate

 

[Foncky]

Ok thank you.

Here is the Pumpkinate LLLT earmufs : https://www.tinnitustalk.com/thread...riences-dr-wilden-etc.295/page-50#post-186212

He used 20W led and found it quite hot, maybe the same system with 10W would be ideal. But we still need to be careful not to burn the cochlea, even with led.

 

[undecided]

Ok thank you.

Here is the Pumpkinate LLLT earmufs : https://www.tinnitustalk.com/threads/low-level-laser-therapy-lllt-for-tinnitus-—-experiences-dr-wilden-etc.295/page-50#post-186212

He used 20W led and found it quite hot, maybe the same system with 10W would be ideal. But we still need to be careful not to burn the cochlea, even with led.

Don't usual leds/lasers use like 80mW output?
10W seems like a gigantic dose of the stuff... I'm hardly an expert, just asking.

 

[RUM]

Hi,
I'm a new member, I have hyperacusis and tinnitus and I'm French.
This thread is very interesting.
But I ask me about this study that CityJohn have published.
https://www.tinnitustalk.com/attachments/nir-penetration-pdf.10929/
The authors speak about 50mW LED, 200mW LED, 10W laser and 15W laser.
They said that 50mW and 200mW LED are useless beacause they don't traverse 2 mm of skin.
But 10W and 15W lasers are very powerful, I know that can normally burn skin but the authors said that just increase the temperature of just few degrees. How it is possible, I don't understand?
Can you explain me CityJohn or others?

Thank you.

 

[Bobby B]

The laser are coupled to special lenses that spread the beam so its not focused and does not burn - it's also pulsed so it's not 25w continuous

 

[RUM]

Ok, so the difference between a laser without the lens and a LED at the same power is that the wavelength is one value for the LASER and a large spectre for the LED?

 

[Bobby B]

The near infrared LED have a single wavelength - maybe not as precise as laser but it does not matter​

The big difference is that you don't need a lense for led and the price difference between a 10w led and a 10w laser is huge
You can buy a 10w 850nm LED bulb for 2 dollars
It's going to be hard to even find a 10w 800nm range laser and it will cost a lot not to mention having to work on the lense and the dangers of focused laser light escaping and burning your retina in a fraction of a second

850 nm light is very hard to see wiht the naked eye

Some of it is explained in the Hamblin video

 

[RUM]

Ok thanks you very much for your explanations.
For the video I'm not enough good in english for listen and understand completely the video.
What do you use? 10 W LED? Now do you have an improvement? How many time do you use it?
And another thing, on the scientific publication shared by cityjohn, the authors used 650 nm wavelength for have anti-inflamatory effect. 650 nm it is better than 810 nm?
810 nm is hotter than 650 nm because it is in infrared wavelength, it is not dangerous?

 

[Cityjohn]

Ok thanks you very much for your explanations.
For the video I'm not enough good in english for listen and understand completely the video.
What do you use? 10 W LED? Now do you have an improvement? How many time do you use it?
And another thing, on the scientific publication shared by cityjohn, the authors used 650 nm wavelength for have anti-inflamatory effect. 650 nm it is better than 810 nm?
810 nm is hotter than 650 nm because it is in infrared wavelength, it is not dangerous?

There has been no improvement for me with light.

650nm is not "better" or "worse" than 810nm, it's just the choice they made at the time of research.

810nm is not hotter than 650nm, they both have the same energy transfer conveyed in its Wattage. The problem is that when you get in to infrared you start heating water molecules deep in the skin and you can burn your flesh. 650nm does not excite water. It will however burn your skin on the surface if enough energy is transferred. Be careful with 810nm.

 

[Bobby B]

As far as nerve regeneration goes they used a lot of different wavelengths even infrared one - which was 3000nm and all these experiments showed some positive effect so the actual wavelength is pretty much a non issue as long as we factor in how light can pass through various type of tissues and the heat and absorption that is caused .

Hamblin says between 800nm to 1200nm is optimal for best penetration with low heat and therefore optimal effect

 

[Foncky]

I don't think we can compare power between led and lasers ? B

There has been no improvement for me with light.

650nm is not "better" or "worse" than 810nm, it's just the choice they made at the time of research.

810nm is not hotter than 650nm, they both have the same energy transfer conveyed in its Wattage. The problem is that when you get in to infrared you start heating water molecules deep in the skin and you can burn your flesh. 650nm does not excite water. It will however burn your skin on the surface if enough energy is transferred. Be careful with 810nm.

Do you think a laser would have been more useful for you ?

Can you recommand me a led setup that would be absolutely safe to begin with ?

 

[Cityjohn]

I don't think we can compare power between led and lasers ? B

Do you think a laser would have been more useful for you ?

Can you recommand me a led setup that would be absolutely safe to begin with ?

A Laser might have been more useful, and we'll find out as I use them.
Yes, the 10W LED floodlights in this thread. You can buy ten of those and heat your head, those can't hurt you.

 

[MikeP505]

Ok so guys, here's an idea following Mike's post.

 

[MikeP505]

I was only joking about the LLLT and using 2 desk lamps with led bulbs!! Just the same I see I have a few people thinking....................

Keep us posted on any results John! Good luck to everyone trying light therapies. Never know, this may be a big treatment in the years to come.

Regards.

 

[RUM]

There has been no improvement for me with light.

650nm is not "better" or "worse" than 810nm, it's just the choice they made at the time of research.

810nm is not hotter than 650nm, they both have the same energy transfer conveyed in its Wattage. The problem is that when you get in to infrared you start heating water molecules deep in the skin and you can burn your flesh. 650nm does not excite water. It will however burn your skin on the surface if enough energy is transferred. Be careful with 810nm.

Ok, I would like to say, 810 nm heating the skin than 650 nm, my english is poor.
LLLT don't work for you, so you will stop your reasearch or continue?
I think that the anti-inflammatory effect of LLLT show in one of your shared paper is very interesting and useffull for the middle-ear.

 

[Foncky]

Ok, you got me
The DIY way is very confusing (for me at least).

 

[Foncky]

Ok, so, could someone help me to do a shopping list for a DIY powerful led device :

- 2x 10w led 850nm
- 2x heatsinks
- 1x cheap earmuffs
- 1x hardware to build the rig
- 1x thick mask for eyes protection

What do I need for the power supply part ? Do I forget something else ?

There's a great shopping list on the first page of this thread but it's about laser diodes.

 

[Davroid]

I recently bought two of these devices. One for each ear:

https://www.amazon.com/Univivi-U06R...rd_wg=rouLf&psc=1&refRID=P33AP9VFT3Y6W582MVR8

I intend to do 10 days on and 7 days off. 20 Minute sessions. I plan to do this for at least 6 months. Michael R Hamblin believes that many of the LLLT trials have failed because of 'under-dosing'.

I may also try two 250 watt incandescent bulbs pointing at both sides of the head. Incandescent bulbs emit a lot of energy in the healing ranges:

 

[Bobby B]

Good find for the IR device
Maybe this is better as you don't want too wide of an angle
Also normal bulbs emit too much light in the hot wavenelgths so you will burn the skin before any light can enter deep
Keep at 850nm

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B...0e-1aa1-5ead-ba61-77545d54848f&pf_rd_i=524136

 

[MikeP505]

I may also try two 250 watt incandescent bulbs pointing at both sides of the head

They make 250 watt incandescent bulbs? You sure they are not sodium bulbs?

 

[Bobby B]

The Clinics charging thousand of dollars for LLLT will be out of business soon once People find out you can have high power IR 850nm LT with a 7 dollars device...

I ordered one just for the fun of it will try and see how much heat/power this thing gives out

 

[MrBonk]

For that price, I think I will give that a shot too.

 

[Marlino]

-----------------------periodical lllt user report:--------------------------------

- weeks since lllt begin: 9

- perceived tt level since last report:
No change. Better and worse days in a row. But no permanent change to the better. Probably same level or worse.
- change in tt description since last report:
None
- other relevant remarks:
At this point I see LLLT as a failure. There is definetly no improvement in my symptoms. That other protocols (e.g. other wavelength, pulsating patterns..) might perform better I personally dismiss. That it needs more than two month of treatment to show first improvements I personally do not believe.

Sorry for the bad news. Good luck for everyone.

 

[Bobby B]

@Marlino
Any improvements In hearing ? Sound quality

 

[Cityjohn]

-----------------------periodical lllt user report:--------------------------------

- weeks since lllt begin: 9

- perceived tt level since last report:
No change. Better and worse days in a row. But no permanent change to the better. Probably same level or worse.
- change in tt description since last report:
None
- other relevant remarks:
At this point I see LLLT as a failure. There is definetly no improvement in my symptoms. That other protocols (e.g. other wavelength, pulsating patterns..) might perform better I personally dismiss. That it needs more than two month of treatment to show first improvements I personally do not believe.

Sorry for the bad news. Good luck for everyone.

I agree with you Marlino. I myself have also experienced no improvement what so ever. I much rather try direct current stimulation next.

 

[Cityjohn]

@Marlino
Any improvements In hearing ? Sound quality

One thing I must note is that my hearing has improved but I have not had time to go to the audiologist for a complete test.

 

[Foncky]

So, people who bought the Lucky Laser or other expensive devices often say they feel better. People with DIY devices often say no improvement.

Placebo effect for those who spent thousands of dollars and don't want to admit they lost their money ?

 

[Bobby B]

My take on this - LLLT definetely works but you need a powerful light source that goes deep and covers a wide area - the 7 dollar 850nm led would be perfect - and even then it takes months and perhaps years

My t is really much better and sound quality a lot better too but I use the 10w device not a mw one

These low power red lasers won't work well I think