Talk:Photobiomodulation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
relation to photobiology?
[edit] History and Use
why are there 2 'History and Use'-s? ~Sushi 08:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] title?
Should the title of the article not be "Low Level Laser Therapy" as opposed to "Photobiomodulation"? If they refer to the same concept, there are far more citations to the former on pubmed.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.185.64.86 (talk • contribs) 13:17, August 24, 2006.
[edit] Scientific status?
How well established is this technique? Is it solidly established scientifically? If so, more references would be useful. Is it fringe science? Is it pseudoscience? It looks rather like one of the latter two to my eye, but I'm not an expert. From the description and claimed benefits, this technique appears to be distinct from light therapy, but the distinction between the two needs to be discussed.--Srleffler 01:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Damn - I just spent 2 hours preparing a neat response to your concern that this might be a psudoscience and accidentally quit the page and there seems to be no way to recover it
- I'm new to Wiki and dont tknow the syntax
- I have other things to get on with so I'll be brief
- Photobiomodulation is phenomenon supported by hundreds of sustentative peer reviewed papers published in reputable scientific medical journals
- you seem to like people at SPIE so start here :http://spie.org/Conferences/Calls/07/pw/bios/index.cfm?fuseaction=BO111
- and USA Natioanl Institute of Health
- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=photobiomodulation[All Fields] OR ("low-level laser therapy"[Text Word] OR "laser therapy, low-level"[MeSH Terms] OR LLLT[Text Word])
- My very old and out of date pages
- http://www.thorlaser.com/LLLT/index.htm
- Upcoming conferences
- http://www.thorlaser.com/conferences/
- Academia salad 11:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. The SPIE conference abstract seems like a good answer to my question: not pseudoscience or fringe science, but still controversial. I'll add these to the article. The Thor links are probably not good references because they have a commercial interest in this technology.--Srleffler 00:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
