Blue (470nm) light kills MRSA (Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus areus) in Vitro

In this study, an average of 90.4% of both US-300 (community acquired) and IS-853 (hospital acquired) strains of MRSA were killed within minutes of exposure to simple blue light. This should be all over the national and world news. Why isn’t it? Maybe people don’t know what it means. Here is what the study said,

“These significant levels of photo-destruction at low dosages indicate that irradiation with 470nm LED light energy may be a practical, inexpensive alternative to treatment with pharmacological agents, particularly in cases involving cutaneous and subcutanious MRSA infections that are susceptible to non-invasive types of radiation.”

Here’s what it means:

“significant levels of photo-destruction” – an average of 90.4% of MRSA bacteria experienced ‘death by light.’

“low dosages” – simple light was used, not low level laser light, not laser light, and it only took a few minutes of exposure to kill significant amounts of bacteria – 30% dying after just 100 seconds of exposure.

“irradiation” – Light shining on something. Light of any color from any source is actually powerful electromagnetic energy, or radiation, and so light of any color can also be called “radiation.” When you shine any light on something, its being irradiated. It’s not  as dangerous or expensive as it sounds. These two girls survive by daily high doses of 405-485nm (blue) ”irradiation.”

“470nm” – blue. That’s it. Click here for a more detailed explanation. A previous study was done with similar results with 405nm light, which is visible violet light, very close to UVA on the electromagnetic spectrum. The actual span of the light used in this case was 455-485nm. Since 405nm also worked, it stands to reason that all wavelengths from 405 through 485 would have the same effect. That is blue light, period.

“LED light energy” – as touched on above, all light is energy, the source does not matter. In this case, SLDs (superluminous diodes) were used, which are just the latest advancement in LED lighting – nothing special. LEDs are commonly used in medical research because they largely eliminate the factor of heat. Any blue light source that peaked around 470nm should have produced the same results.

“practical, inexpensive alternative to treatment with pharmacological agents” – easier and cheaper than drugs. They did not mention it’s also 100% natural, having no adverse side effects reported, non-invaisive, painless, simply administered at home… and it’s worth double mention – easy to obtain, easy to use, and very cheap.

“cases involving cutaneous and subcutanious MRSA infections that are susceptible to non-invasive types of radiation.” – cases of MRSA infections on and just beneath the surface of the skin, where the light is able to penetrate naturally.

So, to sum up:

Since simple blue light killed an average of 90% of MRSA bacteria in the lab, it may turn out to be a practical, inexpensive alternative to treatment with drugs for cases of MRSA infections of or just under the skin in humans.

I would not wait for further studies, FDA approval, or fancy marketing before I tried this out on myself or a loved one battling a MRSA infection on or just under the skin.

The antibacterial properties of blue light have been known for quite some time – in fact the FDA approved blue light to kill acne bacteria in 2002. There are many Acne Treatment Lights already available and in use today containing the same wavelengths used to kill MRSA, it would be very simple for them to be re-purposed immediately in the case of a MRSA infection of the skin not responding to antibiotics. It would also be good to have one of these lights around to disinfect everyday cuts, burns and bites as a matter of MRSA prevention.

Here are the two least expensive lights I know of proven to contain the wavelengths used in the blue light MRSA study, without UV.

GE Dichro-Color Blue – $25.00 – spans 400nm-485nm, peaks near 470nm

enLux Blue R30 LED Floodlight $89.95 – spans 460nm-485nm, peaks near 470nm.

A Google search of “acne lights” will reveal more. Any blue light emitting wavelengths between 405nm and 485nm should have the same effect. Those near the 405nm range, such as 415nm, may have some UVA, however, when faced with an antibiotic resistant MRSA infection, this is fairly insignificant.

Our own LightWave AB™ (Antibacterial) $199.95, is now available online.  It peaks both at 405nm and 470nm and does contain some UVA as part of the natural spectrum of the 405nm light.

More Blue Light MRSA studies:

Visible 405 nm SLD light photo-destroys methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vitro

Effects of combined 405-nm and 880-nm light on Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro.

Blue 470-nm light kills methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vitro.

In vitro bactericidal effects of 405-nm and 470-nm blue light.

——-

]]> http://lighttherapyoptions.com/2009/02/blue-light-kills-mrsa-superbug/feed/ 3 http://lighttherapyoptions.com/2012/02/how-to-get-to-sleep-using-blue-light/ http://lighttherapyoptions.com/2012/02/how-to-get-to-sleep-using-blue-light/#comments Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:54:09 +0000 jbconline http://lighttherapyoptions.com/?p=818 If you suffer from occasional or chronic insomnia – the struggle to get to sleep or to remain asleep for an adequate length of time – then you may feel that you have tried everything and wonder how to get to sleep in an effective, long-lasting, and restful way.

Though there are many “how to get to sleep” instructions that you may be following, ranging from keeping a regular schedule, not eating too close to bedtime, and even drinking chamomile tea, these may not be giving you the quality of sleep that you need.  Sometimes doctors prescribe drugs to help, but these often come with side effects, the risk of addiction (and withdrawal symptoms) and a drowsy morning to follow.

For over thirty years, studies have been showing that blue light can lead to a more alert daytime and a more restful nighttime.  In the pursuit of how to get sleep using blue light therapy, a great deal of research has been performed, such as the following.

The results of research performed in 1975 were published in the Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment, and Health.  Scientists exposed workers to white light enriched with blue light during the daytime.  The participants reported that they were more alert and effective during the daytime and achieved a more restful sleep at night.

More recently, the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism published a study in September 2003 that showed that the natural sleep and awake cycle of the body is influenced by exposure to blue light.

In March 2005, that same journal published another study that showed that exposure to blue light brought about a more steady melatonin cycle, and encouraged steadier thermoregulation, daytime alertness, and heart rate.

If you want to know how to get sleep naturally and effectively, without the use of powerful drugs, you may consider a product as inexpensive as a $3 blue party bulb, installed in a standard bedside lamp.  By exposing yourself to blue light for a half hour to an hour before bedtime, your body will begin to produce a hormone called melatonin that will make you feel tired and begin your natural sleep cycle.

1. Chemicals
2. Side effects
3. UV Content
4. Your Eyes
5. FDA approval

Chemicals
No chemicals are used in blue light or blue/red light therapy for acne. Blue light is a 100% natural acne treatment. If blue light is used with a chemical such as ALA or Levulan, it is then called Photodynamic therapy, or PDT, which is NOT the same form of treatment.

Side Effects
There are no adverse side effects connected to the use of blue light therapy, when it is used either short or long term. In study after study, and year after year, no adverse side effects have been reported.

Consider the following two examples from the wider field of blue light therapy to set your mind at ease:

1. Blue light therapy for Neonatal Jaundice: Around the globe, newborn babies are treated for jaundice every day using blue light. This is shone on the most delicate and tender example of human skin, and yet no short or long term side effects occur.

2. Blue light therapy for Crigler Najjar Syndrome: Patients with this condition need to spend extended amounts of time under blue light every day – for life.   However, despite the quantity of hours spent under blue light on a daily basis (typically 10 hours or more), no short or long term side effects are reported.

UV (Ultraviolet) Content
It is my position that UVA in acne lights is a benefit, but I understand it may be a legitimate concern for you.

The fact is, (whether a website will disclose it or not), if a light peaks around 415nm or below, it is going to also have a little UV in it. Because of their broader spectrum, incandescent and fluorescent lights will have more UVA than LEDs with the same peak.

For example, the lights used in the original research reported in the British Journal of Dermatology (fluorescent tubes) contained 9% UV A (blacklight). “No attempt was made to filter out this UV contamination as the output fell well within the Health and Safety Executive guidelines for occupational exposure of unprotected eyes and skin.” In fact, “it is possible that the UV content of the tubes contributed to the clinical effect of the treatment”.

If you are seriously concerned about UV, there are a couple of things you can do. First, you can purchase an LED acne light instead of one that uses fluorescent tubes. If you would like to further eliminate the presence of UV, get an LED light that peaks between 430nm-470nm. It will still be effective, just a little less so, and may require a longer treatment time, but it will most likely have zero UV in it.

Your Eyes.
There was at least one study done where blue light was blamed for Macular Degeneration. Also, the LEDs of today are glaringly bright. Do not ever look directly into them. Even with your eyes closed some can cause you to see spots for awhile afterwards. As a result of these issues, all acne lights should come with free eye protection, which you should wear during your therapy.

FDA Approval
Now for “FDA Approval.” The first blue light therapy device, ClearLight, gained FDA approval in 2002. Since then many ‘acne lights’ have hit the market. Although they use generally the same color (wavelengths of) light, few of them actually have “FDA approval.” There are many websites throwing around the terms “FDA Approved”, or “FDA Cleared”, or “FDA Accepted” and what they are really referring to is the concept of using blue light for acne treatment, NOT their specific product.

We know by now that “FDA approval” does not necessarily mean the approved thing is safe. But if FDA approval means a lot to you, seek proof that the product has obtained it. If their website is misleading, scratch their product off your list.

To sum it up, blue and blue/red light is a 100% natural acne treatment with no adverse side effects in the short or long term. Potential risks can be negated by using your chosen product only as directed.

2008. Katelyn & Zoe undergoing daily blue light treatment. Visit www.KatelynsLight.com for more information and updates.

Katelyn Bachman and her sister Zoe suffer from a condition which is known as Crigler-Najjar Syndrome, an extremely rare disorder.  It requires the children to need to spend as much time as possible in the sun during the daytime, and to remain under a special blue light every night, including when they sleep.

This light exposure is necessary for the girls to survive, leading their mother to nickname them “little sunflowers”.  If the girls did not have the blue light therapy on a daily basis, they would suffer debilitating muscle and nerve damage, as well as brain damage, and eventually death. The light, combined with medication for the condition, has been so effective that it has allowed them to be taken off the National Transplant list.

Crigler Najjar Syndrome affects fewer than 50 people in the United States and fewer than 200 people in the whole world.  The condition is a metabolic disorder and is hereditary.  It is caused by an enzyme deficiency in the liver which prevents bilirubin – a normal byproduct which results from the body’s natural disposal of red blood cells when the cells die – from being broken down in the blood as it should.

The blue light therapy allows Katelyn and her sister to naturally eliminate the excessive bilirubin levels in their bodies.  These lights are highly effective and yet very gentle.  Spending 8 to 10 hours under the lights every night (and more when the girls are ill, such as in the case of a cold or flu) is a treatment that is perfectly safe for the girls and they have experienced no side effects.

The use of phototherapy on Crigler Nijjar Syndrome patients is becoming increasingly widespread among in the United States, as well in other parts of the world, such as Europe and Australia.  Blue light therapy for this condition most frequently involves 4 foot bulbs or 2 foot bulbs.  In the Netherlands, there are special 5 foot  bulbs that have been used extensively in Europe.  The ideal spectrum for these bulbs should have a peak wavelength of 450 nanometers, with nothing below 400 nanometers or above 520 nanometers).  At this intensity, blue light should not cause any unwanted side effects.

Sources: http://carmonet.50webs.com/CNS/phototherapy.html and http://www.katelynslight.com/

Shining Blue Light on Neonatal Jaundice. This photo won third place in the November 2010 FrontLines photo contest.

In the news 2011: new blue light LED blanket for Africa.

Neonatal jaundice is a condition seen in some infants where their skin discolors to a yellow shade.  It is an exceptionally common condition that affects approximately 70 percent of newborn babies as a result of heightened bilrubin levels in the blood.  Though some cases of neonatal jaundice will disappear on its their within a week or two, others require additional treatment.

Blue light is a favored treatment for neonatal jaundice because it is simple to administer – as it consists of a light simply shining onto the skin – and yet it does not have any short-term side effects such as stinging, burning, or peeling, even though it is shone onto the most delicate and tender skin areas.

The process of blue light phototherapy allows the blue light to be absorbed by the skin and the capillaries of the baby enabling the body to change the bilrubin in the blood so that it can move through the system and be passed.  It involves using a 430 to 490nm light emitting diode (LED) bulb in an overhead lamp (at a distance no greater than 20 inches) or a fiber optic blanket for sessions of varying lengths, depending on the product used and the degree of the condition (the amount of bilrubin which must be irradiated).

The sessions of blue light therapy are most effective when the baby is not distressed – as there will be less movement, so that the light will better remain in place – wearing a diaper, and has his or her eyes protected from the light with special soft eye patches.

The only purpose of this post is to let you know that blue light kills Staphylococcus aureus, 100% naturally, and inexpensively.  Even the antibiotic resistant strain, the MRSA ‘superbug.’   If this follows in the path of most light therapy of it’s kind, there will also be zero negative side effects.

As the researcher points out, this finding could be applied to treatment of Staphylococcus aureus infections of the skin, or just under the skin, prevention of such infections, and for decontamination of environmental surfaces.

You can read more about the bacterial effect of blue light on staph from an earlier post I wrote when this first became news.

Detailed investigation of the bactericidal effect of the blue-light treatment on Staphylococcus aureus suspensions, for a range of different population densities, demonstrated that 405-nm LED array illumination can cause complete inactivation at high population densities: inactivation levels corresponding to a 9-log₁₀ reduction were achieved. The results, which show the inactivation of a wide range of medically important bacteria including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, demonstrate that, with further development, narrow-spectrum 405-nm visible-light illumination from an LED source has the potential to provide a novel decontamination method with a wide range of potential applications.

Quoted from:

Inactivation of Bacterial Pathogens following Exposure to Light from a 405-Nanometer Light-Emitting Diode Array

Click the links for full details.

Visible 405 nm SLD light photo-destroys methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vitro

Conclusion

At low doses, blue light photo-destroys HA-MRSA and CA-MRSA in vitro; raising the prospect that phototherapy may be an effective clinical tool in the on-going effort to stem MRSA infections.

Effects of combined 405-nm and 880-nm light on Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro.

CONCLUSION:

Appropriate doses of combined 405-nm and 880-nm phototherapy can kill Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro, suggesting that a similar effect may be produced in clinical cases of bacterial infection.

Blue 470-nm light kills methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vitro.

CONCLUSION:

At practical dose ranges, 470-nm blue light kills HA-MRSA and CA-MRSA in vitro, suggesting that a similar bactericidal effect may be attained in human cases of cutaneous and subcutaneous MRSA infections.

In vitro bactericidal effects of 405-nm and 470-nm blue light.

CONCLUSION:

The results indicate that, in vitro, 405- and 470-nm blue light produce dose dependent bactericidal effects on Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus but not Propionibacterium acnes.

We got the news that blue light (405nm and 470nm) kills MRSA in February 2009.   Mom and I both published separate articles to help get the word out, and we both put ads up on Google to try to reach people looking for help.  I had a prototype be made using the exact wavelengths used in the research.I wondered how we would ever test the new light before selling it.

Then all hell broke loose in my family.  Suddenly my mom was gone, and my sister was in the hospital with 5 open wounds.   Because we were actively working on blue light for MRSA at the time, the risk of MRSA infection was at the top of my mind.  I had my prototypes overnight-ed to me in Florida.  The doctors and nurses at Tampa General Hospital were very open to alternative treatments including light therapy, and they did not give me any problem using the lights on my sister.  (I used both red and blue prototypes.  Blue to kill MRSA, and red to speed wound closure wound healing.)  Her wounds were cleaned and packed twice daily.  We made sure blue light shone on them whenever they were open.  For the three weeks she was on the trauma floor, she did not contract MRSA in any of her wounds.

After three or four weeks, my sister gained strength and determination enough to graduate to the rehab center at TGH.  Visiting hours were slashed, and so no one was there to shine the lights on her while her wounds were cleaned dressed.  Within three days of being in rehab, she had acquired MRSA in her deepest wound.  I called the nurse practitioner who cared for her the weeks before in the trauma unit, she came and cleaned the wound herself, and instructed the nurses in rehab that the blue light be shone on her wounds whenever they were open.

There was no evidence of recurrence of the MRSA infection.

Of course I can not say for sure the blue light kept the MRSA away while she was in the trauma unit.  I can only say for sure she got MRSA after three days without it.  I can not say for sure the antibiotics she was on did not kill the MRSA, or keep it from recurring.  All I know is, while the light shone on her, for three weeks, she did not get it.  Then three days without it, and she was infected.  Upon proper cleaning of the wound and the reintroduction of blue light treatments, the hospital aquired MRSA did not reoccur in any wound.  It has been 18 months since the original incident.  My sister is almost 100%.

Since then, by way of the articles mom and I published at the start,  I have sold a few lights, now called Genesis AB, specifically for MRSA treatment by request.  Although I have not yet followed up with those clients to see how their treatment went, none of them returned the light.

So after a year and 1/2 interruption of plans, I’m continuing where we left off, and making this light available online today.

Actually I hope you never need it.

And look at the results they are getting!  63% success (3mm of clear nail growth) 6 months after only 4 treatments!  Not sure how long the treatments were, but this is what I’m going to do:

I’m going to tape off the red HPLEDs on my LightWave DH and start shining just the 850nm infrared band of light on my few infected toenails for 5 minutes once per week.  This will be a long test, I guess, but I’ll post updates as I go.  Imagine if that works.  Imagine the cost of the treatments once the laser companies get FDA approval.

Hopefully we can show some ‘in vivo’ success and offer a cheaper toenail fungus solution for the rest of us.

Here’s some excerpts from the article:

“Photoinactivation of Trichophyton rubrum (T. rubrum) has been demonstrated in vitro and in animal studies using wavelengths at 870 nm and 930 nm while maintaining physiologic temperatures (Bornstein E, et al. Photochem Photobiol. 2009;85(6):1364-1374).”

“Penetration through the entire nail plate without damage to the nail bed or matrix is the key to success with either device. In one published study with the 870/930 nm device, clinical cure rates (3 mm of clear nail growth) of 63 percent were noted six months after four treatments (Landsman AS, et al. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2010 May;100:166-177). Both devices should be effective on all skin types with little to no discomfort. Number of treatments or need for periodic treatment to prevent relapse remains to be determined.”

Laser, light therapy may help treat stubborn nail disorders

Publish date: Aug 1, 2010
By: Joely Kaufman, M.D., Martin Zaiac, M.D.
Source: Dermatology Times

Though there were studies that showed that there were significant health risks to taking the medication, the FDA was unable to procure enough data to justify approving the drug.  Among the health concerns that were connected to Qnexa were an increased heart rate, potential birth defects, and thoughts of suicide.

With this kind of news, what are people supposed to do when they are seeking assistance in their effort to lose weight?  Weight loss is, after all, a very challenging process and millions of people find that the struggle is so great that their dieting efforts are continually failing.  If drugs prescribed by their doctors are also not healthy, many are looking into studies that are revealing promising results with alternatives to prescription drugs.

For example light therapies and vitamin D supplementation are proving to be significant in assisting obese people to achieve a healthy body mass index (BMI).

In the study published in the Obesity journal in February, 2010, “25-Hydroxyvitamin D Concentration Correlates With Insulin-Sensitivity and BMI in Obesity”, a team of researchers from Italy showed there is a notable relationship between the amount of vitamin D a person has in his or her body, and that individual’s BMI.  It showed that among obese participants, both low concentrations of vitamin D and insulin-sensitivity seem to rely on the higher body mass.

Therefore, receiving adequate amounts of vitamin D through natural sunlight, certain tanning beds, and supplements can help the body’s metabolism to naturally function at a better rate.  This, combined with a well balanced, portion controlled diet and regular daily exercise can have a significant impact on weight loss.

Sources:

• http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/07/16/fda.diet.drug.rejected/?hpt=Sbin
• http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20150902
• http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/newsroom/pressannouncements/2008/ucm116998.htm
• http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm149575.htm