 |
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:55 pm  |
See, that's why I love the Baby Q, excellant customer service.
Also something else I have read on the LED's, they help guard against the winter blues by emitting the warmth (? if that is the way to say it) into your skin. Kind of a pick-me-up ray of sunlight on a rainy day. |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:00 pm |
Darn it, I don't know why I have to be odd gal out on this product, BUT, we know for sure that there is no product that works for all of us. I had to return my BQ because I saw no results, and I had eye discomfort, although I wore the goggles and followed instructions implicitly. The raves from the board can not be denied, and I really feel that I did my research thoroughly before ordering. It just wasn't for me, and I'm normally not delicate or sensitive to anything. Just wanted to post so the board is not falsely swayed in any direction. My experience was as real as anyone else's, and it was certainly MY experience. Guess my serums will just have to do the trick.  |
|
|
GardenGirl
New Member
 
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
|
Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:11 pm |
| I have a problem with broken caps on my nose and alot of ruddiness on my neck. Have any of you had any success removing sun damage and redness with the Baby Q. Thanks for any feedback |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:21 am |
| I have posted the question to James asking for him to give a link or include scientific studies that independently verify the results achieved with the Quasar, but am still waiting for a response post. If there are result with the quasar, then Adv Therapeutics should be encouraging to have THEIR device tested. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:34 am |
| Hi Gardengirl, I have broken capillaries on my cheeks and nose from sun damage and they have definitely reduced since I started using the BQ. They haven't disappeared completely, and I don't think that LED treatments are actually intended for that (usually a laser or IPL treatment would be recommended), but I'm very pleased with the results so far. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:22 am |
| cedar wrote: |
Darn it, I don't know why I have to be odd gal out on this product, BUT, we know for sure that there is no product that works for all of us. I had to return my BQ because I saw no results, and I had eye discomfort, although I wore the goggles and followed instructions implicitly. :
( |
Cedar, what kind of reaction did your skin have on BQ? And how long did you test it? Were there any problems with returning it?
Sorry for all these questions, but I will be placing my order this weekend and it would be good to know that the return policy works and is honoured by AT.
Thanks,
R.  |
_________________
44, oily T-zone, acne prone (PCOS) ~ Baby Q & Tanda (blue light) ~ Karin Herzog (Oxy Face, Vita-A-Kombi 2, Vitamin H, Eye cream) ~ PSF (Cramberry Eye Gel) ~ Pearl/Silk powder primer and mist ~ L2K ~ MMU |
|
GardenGirl
New Member
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 2
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:08 am |
Thanks Fifi, I'm having a series of IPL 5 to be exact and I've just finished my 3rd one and the broken caps on my nose have only lightened ever so slightly. I'm totally bummed. Cost me a stinkin fortune and I'm afraid if they still look like this after 3 treatments they won't look much better after 5. Perhaps continued use of the Baby would eventually get rid of them. I have nice skin other than these lousy broken caps on my nose and there are quite alot of them, and I was hoping to not wear any foundation after the IPL. Drat!  Curses on these broken caps! |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:26 am |
Rubby, I actually didn't see any reaction or effect to my skin. I used the BQ 3 times a week, to make the best of the 30 day trial period. I wanted it to work, but had to admit I saw no results. Nothing bad, though. My eyes hurt afterwards, though, and after a coupl of times of noticing that, I determined it would be best for me to return the BQ. I always wore the goggles provided, and never passed the BQ over my eyes. My eyes kind of felt like pins were being stuck in them, at the side of eyeballs. It hurt.
I returned it with Signature Confirmation, and although I never heard from AT, they did credit my card, 10 days after receipt of my BQ.
I think it's important to weigh all reviews, because, there seems to be zillions of happy, satisfied customers. It just didn't work for me. Again, there is no one cream, serum, potion, lotion, or device that works for all of us. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:45 am |
Rubby-They are really good at answ. any questions or addressing concerns once you get your Baby Q. I tried the Sp, returned the Baby Q, returned the SP and got my Baby back. I had no problems at all with any process and would more than recommend them.
As far as broken caps go, the baby Q isn't really for addressing those. An IPL or yag-type laser targets them. Although that is not the norm that after 3 treatments, the IPL would not have addressed the majority of them. A deeper vein or larger cap might need a laser. But it might be your IPL needs to be set higher. I have most of mine burst on the first one and have only had to have a follow up IPL once a year or so, but it is at a high setting and I get bruising and swelling.
I find the baby Q helps calm my rosacea, or ruddiness, so that might be addressed for you.
Cedar-the eye pain is unusual. Some people have migraines that become triggered, but I have never heard of pain like yous. Sorry it didn't work for you. |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:54 am |
Annie, why did you return the SP?
I'm sorry if I missed this already in this thread. It's easy to miss things in this thread... |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 8:01 am |
What you don't want to read back thru a million posts?  Sorry-pre-coffee jesting, just messing with you (can't remember what thread it's on anyway).
The Sp, (although quite wonderful in many ways listed on the SP thread), was a tad bit to strong for my sensitive skin. By the time I got to continuous setting, it was too hot and actually made my rosacea flare up up a bit. The plumping was great,but my baby Q did the same. It was a hard decision, but I knew it wasn't right for me as my trial period was ending.
I also liked the smaller-sized head for easier control in most of the areas on my face. If I had a pumpkin-shaped head, it would have been perfect. But I would have been baked pumpkinpie by the time I was done. Or I could have just used it for my neck and chest, which I thouht it did wonders. |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:44 am |
| TheresaL wrote: |
James,
I am not swissmiss but here is what I would like to know. I have researched light therapy and while I am no expert I have a basic understanding of what it is and what the studies have "proven" (at least the studies that I have seen).
What I have seen is that the Gentle Waves system which to the best of my knowledge does not use the same wavelenghts as the Quasar or the BQ does have some studies which show an actual skin rejuvenation benefit. I know that there is a lot of talk about the NASA stuides and how the Quasar uses the same wavelengths that were proven to work in these studies. But from what I understand the NASA studies were done on wound healing, etc. I am not aware of any NASA studies that show that LED therapy is usefull for rejuvenation of aging skin. Now I do realize that alot of treatments that we consider to be anti-aging are based on wound healing studies and that we are guessing that the treatment should have an effect on wrinkles, etc. But this guess is not the same as a study that shows this actual benefit....
So essentially I want to know if there are any studies on the Quasar or just on the wavelengths that the Quasar uses that show an actual skin rejuvenation benefit as opposed to a wound healing benefit.
Thank You. |
This is a very exhaustive topic.
Let me start by saying that we believe in the power and effectiveness of light on a broad range of people, for a broad range of things, through the use of many different wavelengths of light. Every range of wavelengths is showing to be effective for different treatments. It is not a miracle treatment (although some of the users would beg to differ) nor is it snake oil. Because of the effectiveness and excitement regarding Light Therapy, there are many things that you will see going on that are positive, negative, speculative, or just giving a lot of exposure to "Light Therapy". Some of the negatives are the variety of names for "Light Therapy" making it harder to research, using creative and fancy names, etc. etc. etc. Others trying to make the wavelength(s) they have studied to be most prominent, and the list goes on.
I hope one day Light Therapy will be managed by some sort of consortium, group, whomever, that wants to eliminate the ambiguity and bring clarity for the better of everyone and this treatment.
Listed below are only some of the studies and research. There are so many out there. It depends on what your keyword(s) search is. Some of the below will lead you to other links and medical studies as well.
There is some waves being made in the industry regarding light therapy. It is being taken more seriously and my suspicion is they are learning what many of us have experienced or know already. My fear is that one day this may only be available by going to a medical professional, similar to what is going on with hydroquinone.
There are 74 studies in the works when looking for just "light therapy" for SAD, oral diseases, cancer, various skin conditions, pain and studies as specific as musculoligamentous lesions at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov This is just one of a variety of other trusted and reliable sites to track this as well.
Keep in mind some are using different intensities (power) of the wavelengths of light. Some are falling into LED others into Cold Laser. Again, the ambiguity and broad range of names for the treatments and names for the technology & hardware used, I hope will one day be put under standard terminology or be managed by some sort of a consortium. Names like "Light Therapy", "Photodynamic Therapy", "Photorejuvenation" "PhotoTherapy", "Photomodulation", "Red Light Therapy", "Lower Level Light Therapy", "Low Level Laser Therapy", "Blue Light Therapy", "Infrared Light Therapy".
One thing that is key is the wavelengths of light being used. There are reasons we use what we use. Then there is more technical data on how these devices should be manufactured. The angles of the LEDs, how they are spaced, harmonics, distance to the skin, pulsating settings that are more than just "on and off", and the list goes on. We firmly believe that these are the main reasons people have been finding our devices one of the most effective.
Regarding Acne:
British Journal of Dermatology
http://acne-advice.com/products/beautyskin/british-journal.pdf
Regarding Aging Rejuvenation (red/infrared)
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/(igdlxg45nfx2d555q52wvi45)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,9,11;journal,5,22;linkingpublicationresults,1:300304,1
Like Above
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/mclt/2005/00000007/F0020003/art00009
Using one of our wavelengths
http://www.phototherapeutics.com/downloads/QAMARK2029%20Omnilux%20Medical%20Bulletin%20Issue%204.pdf
Written For Dermatologists by Dermatologists
http://www.skintherapyletter.com/2003/8.4/2.html
American Society for Dermatologic Surgery
http://www.asds-net.org/Media/PositionStatements/technology-LED.html
Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_therapy#_note-0
Reference.com
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Light_therapy
Government Clinical Trials
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/gui/show/NCT00125268
LED enhances other thermal-based rejuvenation treatments (near one of our wavelengths)
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1524-4725.2005.31926
Like the above
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/109865135/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
Tell me what else you want me to share. There is plenty more. You can also check out the "Community" section ofwww.AdvanThera.com where we are trying to add as many relevant, non-bias, and professional articles that explain light therapy, especially ones geared towards the wavelengths, manufacturing, and techniques we use.
I think nothing can answer the burning question of "does it work" than talking to those who have used it. Don't be deceived, some people are not responsive, though I personally find that group to be so minimal that it barely hits the radar.
Make It A Great Day!
James |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:41 pm |
| AnnieR wrote: |
| If I had a pumpkin-shaped head, it would have been perfect. |
Tch! If I had a penny for every time I've thought that...
Nobut really, thanks Annie, for that bit of info, it saves me from lemming for a big expensive thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:39 pm |
You are so very welcome catski.
The baby Q fits my needs. I did ask James if they could come up with an in-between size, halfway between the SP and baby. Now THAT would be perfect!! |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:46 pm |
| catski wrote: |
| AnnieR wrote: |
| If I had a pumpkin-shaped head, it would have been perfect. |
Tch! If I had a penny for every time I've thought that...
|
I'm glad I read that. I now feel better about not having $$ for QSP.
I'm placing my order for BQ tomorrow  .
R. |
_________________
44, oily T-zone, acne prone (PCOS) ~ Baby Q & Tanda (blue light) ~ Karin Herzog (Oxy Face, Vita-A-Kombi 2, Vitamin H, Eye cream) ~ PSF (Cramberry Eye Gel) ~ Pearl/Silk powder primer and mist ~ L2K ~ MMU |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 8:32 pm |
Rubby-I'm still holding out for them to develop the step-sister for the SP and older sis to the Baby. Now that's a match made in heaven for me.
(James, surely you guys don't have to sleep or eat). Let us know when you've got it ready.
|
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:37 pm |
| Patty wrote: |
| Just curious. Do you think it was the LED Lights or do you think any kind of light would have dried the dermatitis up? But aren't you glad you had the lights? Just so convenient to use. |
Hi Patty,
I don't know of any other type of light I would have used. In the past I have had dermatitis and it can be difficult to clear up. The BQ absolutely has made a big difference in reducing the inflammation and itching. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:05 am |
| cedar wrote: |
| Darn it, I don't know why I have to be odd gal out on this product, BUT, we know for sure that there is no product that works for all of us. I had to return my BQ because I saw no results, and I had eye discomfort, although I wore the goggles and followed instructions implicitly. The raves from the board can not be denied, and I really feel that I did my research thoroughly before ordering. It just wasn't for me, and I'm normally not delicate or sensitive to anything. Just wanted to post so the board is not falsely swayed in any direction. My experience was as real as anyone else's, and it was certainly MY experience. Guess my serums will just have to do the trick. |
Cedar,
I am so glad that you posted this. Even though the BQ has done so well by me no product is for everyone. We need to hear more from people like you. It is important to know the negative as well as positives. Glad to hear that your return went well. |
|
|
|
|
 |
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:22 am |
James
I made the assumption that the pointers you provided above would be the "best" examples of research using your device or on LED light therapy.
I went to each of these links, and have been really underwhelmed with the information.
1)A number of these point NOT to studies but articles written in the newletter for a specific device and are not independent. These also are more focused on acne then on skin rejuventation
2)A number of these links document that skin rejuventation is a controversial topic or results for this are not long lasting
3)Some of these links provide just a high level summary from which it is difficult to view the results.
a There does not appear to be scientific studies - double blind on effectiveness.
My Specific interest is in Antiaging and skin rejevenation.
I note the following from one study:
"'Antiaging' Visible red light at 660nm activates ATP in skin cells and increase the rate of production of collagen for a few days, giving a lifting effect. No permanent improvement of skin aging has been demonstrated, but completion of the healing of skin damage does seem to proceed faster.
I do not think that you answered these questions. Could you please answer them with pointer to studies or research or please let us know that you do not have it.
1) Are there any research studies using the Baby Quasar or Quarsar SP for skin rejuventation? If so, please provide the link (NOT to studies you say are using the same wavelength)
2)Are there studies documenting the long term impacts on the skin from using LED light therapy?
If so, please provide the specific links.
I also want to say that I was one click away from a purchase but it is a lot of money. I could not find research on my own, so that is why I turned to you James, knowing the company would be able to point me to the information.
It seems there is benefit for pain, blue light some help for acne, but can not find from the research you provided, support for skin rejuvenation.
many thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:33 am |
| Winnie wrote: |
| cedar wrote: |
| Darn it, I don't know why I have to be odd gal out on this product, BUT, we know for sure that there is no product that works for all of us. I had to return my BQ because I saw no results, and I had eye discomfort, although I wore the goggles and followed instructions implicitly. The raves from the board can not be denied, and I really feel that I did my research thoroughly before ordering. It just wasn't for me, and I'm normally not delicate or sensitive to anything. Just wanted to post so the board is not falsely swayed in any direction. My experience was as real as anyone else's, and it was certainly MY experience. Guess my serums will just have to do the trick. |
Cedar,
I am so glad that you posted this. Even though the BQ has done so well by me no product is for everyone. We need to hear more from people like you. It is important to know the negative as well as positives. Glad to hear that your return went well. |
Just wanted to second what WInnie said. I really appreciate hearing when products ~DONT work for people, as well as when they do.
Thanks Cedar. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:20 pm |
I have used my Quasar 6 times, and I do not notice any difference in my skin.
I was thinking there was something wrong with me, it seems from reading the articles James posted - it does not really work for skin aging issues which is why I bought it. I will use it a few more times and if still no change I am sending it back.
I don't need another product in my drawer that had a lot of promise it did not deliver. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:03 pm |
| kitty143 wrote: |
I have used my Quasar 6 times, and I do not notice any difference in my skin.
I was thinking there was something wrong with me, it seems from reading the articles James posted - it does not really work for skin aging issues which is why I bought it. I will use it a few more times and if still no change I am sending it back.
I don't need another product in my drawer that had a lot of promise it did not deliver. |
Same here. Six times and no improvement. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:07 pm |
| doba wrote: |
| kitty143 wrote: |
I have used my Quasar 6 times, and I do not notice any difference in my skin.
I was thinking there was something wrong with me, it seems from reading the articles James posted - it does not really work for skin aging issues which is why I bought it. I will use it a few more times and if still no change I am sending it back.
I don't need another product in my drawer that had a lot of promise it did not deliver. |
Same here. Six times and no improvement. |
More times than that with me and no improvement either. I emailed James yesterday and am waiting for his reply. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:22 pm |
| Frodo wrote: |
| doba wrote: |
| kitty143 wrote: |
I have used my Quasar 6 times, and I do not notice any difference in my skin.
I was thinking there was something wrong with me, it seems from reading the articles James posted - it does not really work for skin aging issues which is why I bought it. I will use it a few more times and if still no change I am sending it back.
I don't need another product in my drawer that had a lot of promise it did not deliver. |
Same here. Six times and no improvement. |
More times than that with me and no improvement either. I emailed James yesterday and am waiting for his reply. |
Doba, Frodo, Kitty - Everyone here will tell you to just give me a call. I REQUEST THIS. Soemtimes it is hard for me to answer or get right back to you, because I offer this to everyone. I answer phone calls at all hours 7 days a week.
Any customer who purchases from me always hears the following:
"I expect that we will be in touch frequently throughout the next couple weeks/months so I can help you fine-tune your technique to produce the best results, since everyone's response can be different. The guidelines we send you are a general guideline to follow. Please call me after your first treatment so I can make sure you are comfortable with the treatment and performing properly. After that, let's review your results while following the guideline on week 3 and see if we need to make any variations from there."
And the conversation goes on from there. Most of the time I find a better regemin that produces results for you, even if you are already achieving results, sometimes helping you increase them.
Hopefully some will chime in here to vouch for that.
All of you please feel free to contact me in the office tomorrow, so we can discuss.
James Bressi
AdvanThera
P: 800.944.1523
C: 610.999.2668
E: jamesbressi@AdvanThera.com
On The Web:www.AdvanThera.com |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:37 pm |
| swissmiss wrote: |
I made the assumption that the pointers you provided above would be the "best" examples of research using your device or on LED light therapy.... I was "underwhelmed" |
Personal attacks or insinuations will not be tolerated when I am trying to help on my free time. I will assume positive intent and expect that this was not a cocky or condescending comment. Nor will I engage in intellectual prowess contests. As you will see in my post below, I told you I value your tough questions. Again, I will see what else I can find for you. I shot those links under pressure from you to respond sooner.
| swissmiss wrote: |
1)A number of these point NOT to studies but articles written in the newletter for a specific device and are not independent. These also are more focused on acne then on skin rejuventation
|
Actually articles written on studies, and yes, some about specific devices using specific wavelengths. I am not going to pick apart every link, and I do hope to offer you more in the near future.
1. Regarding Aging Rejuvenation (red/infrared)
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/(igdlxg45nfx2d555q52wvi45)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,9,11;journal,5,22;linkingpublicationresults,1:300304,1
The above link is a study by Advanced Laser and Dermatologic Surgery Clinics PC, Beaverton, Oregon & Inveresk CRU, Tranent, Edinburgh, UK & University of Liverpool Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Liverpool, UK
I quote from this reference that "Conclusion. OmniluxTM combination red and near infrared LED therapy represents an effective and acceptable method of photo rejuvenation. Further study to optimize the parameters of treatment is required."
Yes, this is promoting another company's product, but it is Light Treatment that is under question it is seems here. A company that is administering treatment using wavelengths 633nm & 830nm
The point of the study I am speaking of?
To assess the efficacy and local tolerability of combination light therapy in photo rejuvenation of facial skin.
The subjects that helped draw the conclusion?
Subjects with facial rhytids received nine light therapy treatments using the OmniluxTM LED system. The treatments combined wavelengths of 633 nm and 830 nm with fluences of 126 J/cm2 and 66 J/cm2 respectively. Improvements to the skin surface were evaluated at weeks 9 and 12 by profilometry performed on periorbital casts. Additional outcome measures included assessments of clinical photography and patient satisfaction scores.
This is based on their technique and device. Again, the ambiguity circulating Light Therapy has many factors. Skin Types, Wavelengths, "Power", technique, topical ointments (further complicating), and AGAIN, the list goes on once we get to the actual technilogical manufacturing of these devices and how wavelengths (when multiple are involved) add even more variables.
Their results?
Results. Key profilometry results Sq, Sa, Sp and St showed significant differences at week 12 follow-up; 52% of subjects showed a 25%–50% improvement in photoaging scores by week 12; 81% of subjects reported a significant improvement in periorbital wrinkles on completion of follow-up.
Again, results may be better or worse depending on what I mentioned above "technilogical manufacturing..." Some devices will perform better than others.
| swissmiss wrote: |
2)A number of these links document that skin rejuventation is a controversial topic or results for this are not long lasting
|
You are correct, sort of. Light Therapy is the controversial topic in rejuvenating skin that you are referencing, but their are many other device, treatments and such that do rejuvenate skin.
Why is Light Therapy so controversial? Lack of study that abide by FDA guideline. Absolutely. How about because it is natural (and you can't patent natural), and there are unique ways some in the medical field are trying to use Light Therapy to make it medical only? This paragraph can only go down a controversial path that I will choose to not engage. Estheticians and Cosmetologists are all too familiar with what I am referencing.
As far as "not long lasting", neither is the results you get from working out when you stop. Light Therapy will not permanently rejuvenate your skin. Disciplined use should help to prevent further damage and help heal damage that has already been done. Permanent or long lasting would be an odd assumption as "if I work out with XYZ abdominal workout machine, achieve a 'six-pack' and stop using it, I will lose my six-pack?"
| swissmiss wrote: |
3)Some of these links provide just a high level summary from which it is difficult to view the results.
|
I apologize for not meeting your expectations. Like I said, in my post, there are many names and ways to search for the studies, etc. that are very consuming, which is why I hope there will one day be a consortium, etc. that can help us all.
Please help us all and let's get all the best data, research, and information available, and I will be more than happy to maintain this on the internet for everyone who is as interested in Light Therapy as we all are. We have been working on this for many months, and have been thanked by quite a few that feel we simply the research process.
| swissmiss wrote: |
a There does not appear to be scientific studies - double blind on effectiveness. |
I am with you. More needs to be done, to support the results that many report. There has been the "GentleWaves" FDA Approved double blind study to prove efficacy in treating periorbital rhytids (wrinkles), but I don't find this to be enough. I'm sure their device as it stands can do much more than what claims they are making. It can treat periorbital, but no where else? I'll bet it treats much more than just periorbital. Again, me promoting someone else's device! Why? They are a quality manufacturer and we respect and LOVE that. Anything to further Light Therapy.
Money is a big factor. Until big companies swoop in when they see Light Therapy as a viable enough addition to their line, they will wait for the market and interest to build itself and let the smaller companies incur the cost and resources associated. If this was a perfect world, their would be easy access to funding to further this research and do studies, and I am hoping that Light Therapy is heading in that direction with the increase in exposure and reports from doctors and patients alike of the benefits. There has been some funding provided for the use of Light Therapy in studies, but among all the other needs for funding, it becomes a microscopic priority.
| swissmiss wrote: |
I note the following from one study:
"'Antiaging' Visible red light at 660nm activates ATP in skin cells and increase the rate of production of collagen for a few days, giving a lifting effect. No permanent improvement of skin aging has been demonstrated, but completion of the healing of skin damage does seem to proceed faster.
|
I think this is a great thing! Again, back to the working out analogy. Stop working out = lose results.
| swissmiss wrote: |
1) Are there any research studies using the Baby Quasar or Quarsar SP for skin rejuventation? If so, please provide the link (NOT to studies you say are using the same wavelength) |
Only independent studies that are not published. Of course we are working published studies that prove efficacy.
When you say "NOT to studies you say are using the same wavelength", I find that confusing.
To make Libby's 100% Pure Pumpkin Pie: Mix 1&1/2 cups of sugar, 1tsp. salt, 2tsp. ground cinnamon, 1tsp. ground ginger, 1/2 tsp. ground cloves in a small bowl. Beat 4 eggs in a large bowl. Stir in pumpkin and sugar-spice mixture. Gradually stir in evaporated milk. Pour into pie shells. Bake in preheated 425 degree oven for 15 minutes. Reduce temperature to 350 degrees; bake for 40-50 minutes. Cool for 2 hours.
Now if you have all the same ingredients, could you question the result or findings?
Now a tougher question is "James, your company supports pulsing light. You have something called SequePulse. Why do you think that is better than all the other continuous wave devices on the market". This would be like arguing the technique used to make the best tasting pumpkin pie.
Now, everyone, so you know. I love pumpkin pie. So if you could help me out there, PM me
[quote="swissmiss"]
2)Are there studies documenting the long term impacts on the skin from using LED light therapy?
If so, please provide the specific links. [quote="swissmiss"]
Simply, No. But, understanding what Light Therapy does, promotes healing, etc., and with no reported long term impacts, this is a hard question to answer. The logical answers sounds like NO, there are no long term side effects, just like you should use sunscreen every day.
| swissmiss wrote: |
I also want to say that I was one click away from a purchase but it is a lot of money. I could not find research on my own, so that is why I turned to you James, knowing the company would be able to point me to the information. |
Swissmiss, that is why we are a confident company in our product. We are one of the few Professional Light Therapy (in fact I think we are the ONLY in the professional market) that promote the fact that we will give you a trial period that will provide a full refund and no restocking fees as long as you kept the unit in new condition. Everyone else, it is final sale. Why do we do this? We want our customers to be happy, and Light Therapy is not always for everyone. We know this.
| swissmiss wrote: |
It seems there is benefit for pain, blue light some help for acne, but can not find from the research you provided, support for skin rejuvenation.
many thanks |
Swissmiss, I will work harder for you and find more. We have plenty of links and info etc. We do not hide who we are because we believe in the treatment and our products. If I ever doubted our practice, device, or Light Therapy, I would not live a lie. I would leave in that situation and make sure to remove myself as far from that situation as possible.
I value your tough questions. Again, I will see what else I can find for you. I shot those links under pressure from you to respond sooner. Ultimately, this is an emerging and controversial treatment, just like chiropractic services a few decades ago, and many, many, others that now continue to provide so many benefits to their recipients.
Lastly, and I cannot say it enough. I trust others more than I trust anything else. Everyone who has added their praise, problems, or anything else are and were in no way compensated. Look at what they say and help draw conclusions.
I must ask one burning question. I provide my personal email, cell phone, and many other ways to contact me directly. Why haven't you done so?
Take Care Everyone!
James Bressi
AdvanThera
P: 800.944.1523
C: 610.999.2668
E: jamesbressi@AdvanThera.com
On The Web:www.AdvanThera.com |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:01 am |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
|
