Just assumed i did something wrong. lol How do you appear in so many places at the same time? Tina --- On Mon, 2/22/10, M. G. Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com> wrote:
From: M. G. Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: CS>RE: LED info and Laser VS Red LED To: silver-list@eskimo.com Date: Monday, February 22, 2010, 12:01 PM > Oops, Sorry Oops, what? Hi Christina, You write: > Hi all, I hope this isn't rude but My Red LED unit came with a handy > Acupressure book which also explains about the technology of the LED > for healing. The LED topic has been bouncing around here a little lately, so it's not out of order to add a bit more to it. If things get to be roaring along so badly that people inundate me with comlaints, I'll ask for a few OT threads to be ended or migrated to our Off Topic List. > Normal healthy cells omit wavelengths between 600 and 725 Nanometers. > When tissue is damaged the cells energy slows down. The idea is that > this type of light increases the vibration of the cells to 660. The > tissue underneath the skin changes the light energy to electrical > energy; then the nerves carry it to the brain which releases > neurotransmitters and certain hormones that turn on the healing > process. This is according to my book so don't blame me if its wrong. No doubt it is "wrong" but unless one's knowledge is perfect, complete, and perfectly expressed, when isn't anything written by one of us? <grin> If this was strictly true, we'd all be glowing visibly in a dark room... The visible red spectrum is somewhere around 740 to 630 nanometers. A 660 nm red LED is brightly visible to us. Of course our skin is cooler than our core and would radiate at infrared and far infrared wavelengths, perhaps around 1200 nm. What I think I'm saying is that the higher energy light from visible LED's would perhaps be "increasing the vibration" of the cells just as they say, but from a bit farther away in frequency terms than they're suggesting. The rest of the mechanism might be as they describe, at least as a simple overview of the complex real processes of our bodies. > One benefit of LED VS Laser is that Red LED will not harm the eyes when > used around that area. That's what my book says and i use it all around > my eyes for vision treatments and wrinkles with no problems. Does it seem to be working? Are you seeing objective improvement in smoothness and skin tone? How about accupressure points and other health issues? Any strong results? > I bought a strand of tiny Red LED Mini Christmas lights that are > battery operated with three regular C batteries. I clustered eight > lights together and use it works just as good as my Photonic Torch > which has eight mini LEDs housed in a metal flashlight device mounted > behind a glass dome. I built one of those into a plastic flashlight case. I'm still working off the first set of D batteries. I'm glad to hear that the results seem to be similar. > The neat thing about a strand of lights is you can tape it to yourself > and walk around the house doing chores LOL. That and see into closets and under furniture! <grin> > I've been trying to think of ways to combine it with CS for treatments > on myself and would love any ideas. Tina Any modality that supports your health is going to be synergistic. I know of nothing objective that would indicate against using silver and photonic treatments at the same time, so long as you're not swamping your body with so much silver that it cannot excrete it fast enough to avoid long term retention of the metal. Be well, Mike D. [Mike Devour, Citizen, Patriot, Libertarian] [mdev...@eskimo.com ] [Speaking only for myself... ] -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org Unsubscribe: <mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com> List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com>