Avoiding Device Pitfalls: Making Informed LED Choices

Guaranteed risk/complications reduction, guaranteed improved results, and no consumable cost with highly profitable economics is what LED offers its users. It has a completely unique biomechanism with no comparable globally and uses radiation to create biological changes from physical stimuli. With its unique method of action, it lends itself to be used in any treatment modality in combination. Unfortunately, a lot of misinformation exists which has led to clinicians and members of the public purchasing exceptionally poor devices that may even cause harm instead of improvement.

By generating radiation (photons) we create 1-2-1 interactions from one photon to one photoreceptor. In the case of red light, which should be 633nm according to decades of research, we cause an increase in activity of the Cytochrome C Oxidase enzyme within the mitochondria. The mitochondria (energy centre of our cells) then generate increased amounts of ATP. ATP is the currency of energy in all our cells - with this, all chemical reactions can then take place and keep us alive. In the case of the skin, increased ATP leads to cells like keratinocytes and fibroblasts making more matrix components such as HA, collagen, elastin, laminin, fibronectin, etc, as well as melanocytes and immune cells making a more even deposition of pigment and stronger immune capability in the area. Extrapolated, studies have shown that this then leads to metrics such as increased skin thickness, increased cell numbers/density, increased elastic fibres, increased evenness in skin tone, and much more. Applied, this can be translated to an increased response to any treatment provided when used in combination. For example, used leading up to a laser treatment, it can lead to the skin quality increasing such that its response to the controlled laser damage is less difficult to recover from whilst yielding a greater growth after recovery.

Using the same 1-2-1 interactions, we can use near-infrared (NIR) 830nm light (invisible to the human eye) to instantly switch off all inflammation. This occurs due to one photon causing one molecule of nitric oxide, which is blocking the mitochondrial ATP pathway, to be physically pushed out of the way and therefore allowing ATP production to resume as normal. Many patients have a visibly less inflamed appearance in the skin immediately after the session has finished. Application of this wavelength has even been shown to prevent/reduce sun damage if used before exposure and even without sun cream. It is extremely useful in lowering inflammation levels before/after invasive treatments to reduce risk. Split-face evidence has shown that the non-irradiated (NIR) side produced keloid scars after a facelift. Readers are urged to draw the links together and realise that LED is powerful enough to prevent the most devastating type of scar - it can save your reputation and practice if understood with good education (crucial) and used accordingly.

Blue light at 415nm causes instantaneous death of bacterial cells. This occurs due to the photon hitting protoporphyrin IX which then excites and causes catastrophic cell structure failure leading to cell death. Such is the capability of this that even MRSA has been shown to fall prey. In a world increasingly reliant on antibiotic usage, hospitals worldwide are looking into its widespread use. In humans, this can (at times and if used by an experienced clinician) actually be used to simultaneously destroy bacteria and cause cell stimulation for us similar to stimulating our muscles by going to the gym. However, the full explanation of this mechanism is beyond the scope of this article.

This ability to manipulate sub-cellular structures to cause biological cascades but with no damage in the process is unmatched. The only other theoretical way to do so is to create atomic scale tweezers that we can reach into cells with to push things around and make molecules bump into each other… which is clearly farcical.

Inevitably, misinformation lies significantly in the knowledge required to choose which device to buy. It can be easily understood with no manufacturer bias whatsoever by using facts of physics and biology to build scientific and reliable conclusions. For example, we know, factually speaking, that the radiation and photoreceptor have an interaction that proves a 1:1 ratio of radiation to biological change. This then stands to reason that the amount of radiation (energy/power) is of the utmost importance due to being directly proportional to the amount of biological change - 240J/cm2 is currently the market limit. There is only one device in the world capable of this (and therefore worth buying), all others are nowhere near. Manufacturers may also talk about the distance being close to the skin as a reason to reduce power delivery. This is a copout and has no scientific basis. 1-2-1 interaction doesn’t change based on distance because the skin doesn’t know how far the photon has come from - it just experiences interaction (so all it cares about is how many photons hit it). Therefore, manufacturers that do this just yield less biological change - the skin doesn’t make more change from fewer interactions just because it thinks the photons have come from closer. This is a good example of a key metric being crucial for your practice, but, a manufacturer spreading misinformation to justify them not being able to make a device of higher power so that you buy from them.

In summary, LED is a completely unique treatment modality capable of producing biological changes that cannot be matched in quality, but, also improves all outcomes of all other treatments with no consumable cost. However, metrics such as power, LED accuracy, thermal dissipation mechanisms etc must be understood to prevent wasting money purchasing dud devices.