whats your guys opinion about the lasercomb?

[Greg1]

Checking in

Hello everybody. Wew! Now that things are slowing down a bit (Post-Holidays)I can start posting again.

Interesting discussion going on here I have always been a tinkerer and can empathize with d_umberly. However, when it comes to lasers I would, like vperfish said, be cautious. But converseley, it's folks like d_umberly that get new products out there and new ideas to florish or maybe even help to build a better mouse trap if you know what I mean. I'm curious, d_umberly, are you an inventor? I've always wanted to invent or design something in the electronic field.

viperfish, if I'm not mistaken, you have been using the LC now for a bit. How are things going?

Greg

 

[d_umberly]

Re: Checking in

Hello everybody. Wew! Now that things are slowing down a bit (Post-Holidays)I can start posting again.

Interesting discussion going on here I have always been a tinkerer and can empathize with d_umberly. However, when it comes to lasers I would, like vperfish said, be cautious. But converseley, it's folks like d_umberly that get new products out there and new ideas to florish or maybe even help to build a better mouse trap if you know what I mean. I'm curious, d_umberly, are you an inventor? I've always wanted to invent or design something in the electronic field.

viperfish, if I'm not mistaken, you have been using the LC now for a bit. How are things going?

Greg

Greg1,

I wouldn't consider myself an inventor, while have built a few things for myself, I have never applied for a patent.

My education and background are in math/eng. I worked for 8-1/2 yrs at NASA's Johnson Space Center as a minor functionary. I left there and moved to the oil industry for monetary reasons. I am now semi-retired and teach classes dealing with American Petroleum Institiute and American Society of Mechanical Engineers as regards pressure vessels and piping. I hobby in electronics and it appears I will soon be into laser devices.

As I mentioned I'm hopeless tinker, call it a hobby of sorts. The concept of low level laser therapy has piqued my interest in general and specifically as it applies to hair growth.

 

[viperfish]

Re: Checking in

Hello everybody. Wew! Now that things are slowing down a bit (Post-Holidays)I can start posting again.

Interesting discussion going on here I have always been a tinkerer and can empathize with d_umberly. However, when it comes to lasers I would, like vperfish said, be cautious. But converseley, it's folks like d_umberly that get new products out there and new ideas to florish or maybe even help to build a better mouse trap if you know what I mean. I'm curious, d_umberly, are you an inventor? I've always wanted to invent or design something in the electronic field.

viperfish, if I'm not mistaken, you have been using the LC now for a bit. How are things going?

Greg

Greg,
Been using the comb for about 6 weeks now. I only have positives to say about it. Hair has thickened, shedding reduced big time, and my scalp has never felt better. No irritation or itching going on. Very pleased thus far. I hope it continues and this is my only fear. Lots of vellus hairs along the hairline. Gotta give it some more time to see what happens with those. I'm currently not using anything else besides Kevis shampoo. The other day I put gel in my hair and it actually looked good. Been a long time since I have been able to do that. How's the comb treating you??

 

[d_umberly]

Re: Checking in

Greg,
Been using the comb for about 6 weeks now. I only have positives to say about it. Hair has thickened, shedding reduced big time, and my scalp has never felt better. No irritation or itching going on. Very pleased thus far. I hope it continues and this is my only fear. Lots of vellus hairs along the hairline. Gotta give it some more time to see what happens with those. I'm currently not using anything else besides Kevis shampoo. The other day I put gel in my hair and it actually looked good. Been a long time since I have been able to do that. How's the comb treating you??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Viperfish,

That is a most encouraging post. I sure hope to see many more positive reports like yours. Makes me want to investigate this even more. I am one who will certaninly follow your progress.

 

[S Foote.]

For those interested in perhaps making their own versions of the laser comb, i would suggest researching similar devices and their effects.

One claim i understand is being made for the `mechanistic' effect, is that the laser comb increases the local microcirculation.

I would say this is the `active' effect upon hair growth according to my `Hydraulic' theory.

Such devices are known to, and have been specificaly designed to reduce edema. http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/lastoredswel.html

Here is perhaps a more effective version of the `laser comb', although a lot more expensive! http://lymphatichealth.com/products1.htm

Regards.

S Foote.

 

[d_umberly]

S. Foote,

This thing looks like it would cure death.


Benefits of the
LymphStar Pro

Improves edemas, fibrotic conditions, and swollen lymph nodes. Some conditions reported to have benefited from therapy include breast lumps, inflammation, chronic pain, joint aches, allergies, sinus, respiratory problems, headaches, prostate problems, hormone imbalance and chronic female conditions, dental trauma and chronic problems, heavy metal toxicity, neuromuscular trauma, immune and fatigue syndromes.

Most of these medical laser devices I have read about use a much wider wave length and higher power. 890 nM and 30 mW or more. The specs for the laser hair treatments, either the hood type or the handheld much less powerful as I understand it.

 

[Greg1]

Hi viperfish, d_umberly and everyone else. I continue to use the LC and results are very consistent with what I've reported before, that is my hair is ALOT more manageable, the actual texture is corser than before, and thininning areas are filling in. d_umberly, I'm very interested in your research.

Greg

 

[d_umberly]

Hi viperfish, d_umberly and everyone else. I continue to use the LC and results are very consistent with what I've reported before, that is my hair is ALOT more manageable, the actual texture is corser than before, and thininning areas are filling in. d_umberly, I'm very interested in your research.

Greg

Man another positive report on the LaserComb, I think you, Viperfish and, MVP are the only posters who have reported on the LC recently.

There was one other fellow Alonso I think who quit using it after about 7 months of hair growth. I looked at some pictures he had posted in Lexington's forum and seemed to being doing so well. I can't help but think it was shed that discouraged him.

Please keep us uptodate on your progress.

 

[d_umberly]

From my pervious post I must correct the following statement.

If even power distribution can be asserted this means that all nine beams have and energy output of 4.5/9 = 0.5 millwatt .

I have discovered that the LC has only eight beam therefore;


4.5/8 = 0.5265 millwatt

 

[Greg1]

d_umberly, that is interesting about the LC. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you currently also using the LC? I thought for some reason that you were?

Greg

 

[d_umberly]

d_umberly, that is interesting about the LC. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't you currently also using the LC? I thought for some reason that you were?

Greg

Greg I am using a home made version, I call the "Rube Goldberg Laserbrush (not a tm). I haven't said this until now but I am begining to see some changes with hair growth. I have only been using it 6 weeks and I am not ready to say it is the reason yet.

As you can see below I am on the Big 3 and only recently added finasteride four months ago, so it could be the combo of minoxidil and finasteride kicking in. Just not sure.

 

[Gumbo boy]

There is little or no difference between a 655 nm laser and a 650 nm laser. I honestly think viperfish has some connection to Lexington. He argues for using a lasercomb, but argues against making your own or using a different brand other than Lexington. Sounds a bit fishy to me.

 

[d_umberly]

There is little or no difference between a 655 nm laser and a 650 nm laser. I honestly think viperfish has some connection to Lexington. He argues for using a lasercomb, but argues against making your own or using a different brand other than Lexington. Sounds a bit fishy to me.

Hey Gumbo Boy, how's your brush doing? I am using mine every other day. Hoping to have some good news to pass on one day in the not too distant future. Time will tell.

 

[d_umberly]

Gumbo Boy? Where art thou?

 

[Guest]

I honestly think viperfish has some connection to Lexington. He argues for using a lasercomb, but argues against making your own or using a different brand other than Lexington. Sounds a bit fishy to me.

hhhmmm... I think you need to have a quick re-read of this thread.

d_umberly, thanks for all the info on your homemade LLLT device, great stuff, keep it coming.

One quick question what are doing to split the beam source? I presume you are spreading it out some how?

Also does the beam need a direct un-interupted path to the scalp ?


Cheers

Ty

 

[d_umberly]

hhhmmm... I think you need to have a quick re-read of this thread.

d_umberly, thanks for all the info on your homemade LLLT device, great stuff, keep it coming.

One quick question what are doing to split the beam source? I presume you are spreading it out some how?

Also does the beam need a direct un-interupted path to the scalp ?


Cheers

Ty

Ty, the laser module I have uses a lens that projects the beam to left and right as it exits the laser. So if pointed at the wall you would see a horizontal or vertical line depending on how you held it. This line can span my entire living room. Which is about 25 feet (7.6 meters), it goes around corners etc.

The line appear to the eye as being a straight uniform line, but in fact is a very long ellipse. If you look at the lens you will see it has a triangular faceted surface (sort of wedges) which produces this effect. Normally these are used for level measurements over a great distance. The beam is so tight that its accuracy even as an ellipse is within most tolerance requiremtnts for say, building construction.

When you place the laser within a inch or two (2.54-5cm) of a surface (your scalp) it is clearly an enlogated ellipise. For lack of better term the major axis of the ellipse is now much closer to the minor axis in size. This gives of course, a wider suface area being exposed to the laser radiation.

Keep in mind that a laser is coherent light and therefore does not conform to the inverse square law one must apply when caculating the illmunation intensity for other light sources. So the ellipse should not lose that much power at it ends as you might think.

To finally answer your last question, while the beam is tight and fairly intense it will not penetrate the canopy of hair if one has much hair that is. So you must part the hair, hence the mounting in a brush. I am a NW5 so that is not much of a problem for me sadly.

One of the selling points Lexington uses for their product is that it better penetrates through the hair than the hood type salon units.

I have a lot more to investigate to determine if I infact have something roughly equivalent to the LaserComb (tm). The most important question remains, will either work :!:

 

[Guest]

When you place the laser within a inch or two (2.54-5cm) of a surface (your scalp) it is clearly an enlogated ellipise. For lack of better term the major axis of the ellipse is now much closer to the minor axis in size. This gives of course, a wider suface area being exposed to the laser radiation.

just read your previous post, like so ?

Keep in mind that a laser is coherent light and therefore does not conform to the inverse square law one must apply when caculating the illmunation intensity for other light sources. So the ellipse should not lose that much power at it ends as you might think.

So it will have little 'falloff' at it's edges like below.

To finally answer your last question, while the beam is tight and fairly intense it will not penetrate the canopy of hair if one has much hair that is. So you must part the hair, hence the mounting in a brush. I am a NW5 so that is not much of a problem for me sadly.

"Canopy LOL! I like the jungle analogy!

It may be useful (but perhaps not cheap) to employ optical fibres to bring the lazer light right to the scalp by incorporating the fibres into the prongs of the brush ?

One of the selling points Lexington uses for their product is that it better penetrates through the hair than the hood type salon units.

I have a lot more to investigate to determine if I infact have something roughly equivalent to the LaserComb (tm). The most important question remains, will either work :!:

Cheers for the reply, please keep us up to date.

Ty

P.S. The â„¢ symbol is part of the standard ASCII table, it's shift + apple + 2 on a mac, not sure where it is in windows but it will be similarly placed.

 

[d_umberly]

Your second graphic is probably the better approximation. The power distriibution will definitely fall off, but how much I am not sure.

So when I use mine I rock the brush slowly to sweep the beam across a section of scalp there by moving the most intense portion over a wider area. I move it a little and repeat until I have reached the back of the head. Then start from the opposite side and go to the front of my head. Then I start at the back and go across my vertex from left to right and so on unitl I reach the forehead. Then I grab a brewsky because I am wore out and need a break.

As far as fiber optiics, that may well be a good approach. However we are not really after pin points of light, my impression is that a broader more uniform beam of the correct energy density in Joules/cm2 is what we are seeking. I ran across a web site where they addressed the issue of strength for lasers but damn if I can find it again. I need to, since it might save me a lot calculation. Of course if it grows hair, screw the calculations, we won't need them.

 

[d_umberly]

Ty,

Just read an article on Laser Therapy that is upsetting my original assumptions about lasers. It appears they are affected more than I thought by the distance to the target. Seems the inverse square laws does apply to a laser but to a lesser degree than other forms of radiation.

So your fiber optics idea may have a great deal of merit. I am now wondering if multiple beams pressed against the scalp might be the ticket.

I need to read the article again, but the first pass sure raised questions for me.

 

[Guest]

...It appears they are affected more than I thought by the distance to the target. Seems the inverse square laws does apply to a laser but to a lesser degree than other forms of radiation....

Off the top of my head (no pun intended)

You could bring the multiple lazers close to the scalp and lens from there, or you could vibtate or spin the lazers (vibration being the more viable option) to spread the beam ?