ecstatichamster
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 10,552
Why are you so sure ?
i doubt that there is permanent damage likely that's why. I am speculating.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Why are you so sure ?
Well almost any part of the body can heal given an ideal environment.Why are you so sure ?
That is holding the light way to close if its from RedLightMan. These lights are powerful. You probably want 30-40 cm away for about 25 seconds so you get around 1 J/cm^2 dosage.I'm a victim of too much red light on the balls. The problem is that it feels good and there is no feedback mechanism to know when to stop! The itchiness is finally subsiding. Very odd, it looks like sunburn but doesn't feel burnt. Moderate to severe itchiness that only gets worse when rubbing/scratching the testes. I shined the light on my testes for maybe like 2-3 minutes every day for 5 days. I held the light 2-3 inches from my ballsack.
That is holding the light way to close if its from RedLightMan. These lights are powerful. You probably want 30-40 cm away for about 25 seconds so you get around 1 J/cm^2 dosage.
Ok, do you know what your dosage would have been? I don't know quite when the biphastic dose response kicks in but most sources say around 10 J/cm^2 it starts having an inhibitory effect.It's the one from the lifegivingstore which is equivalent to the redlightman mini. I should also clarify that it wasn't 2-3 minutes nonstop. I would shine it fon my balls for a minute, and then shine the light elsewhere, then back to my balls for another minute, etc.
Ok, do you know what your dosage would have been? I don't know quite when the biphastic dose response kicks in but most sources say around 10 J/cm^2 it starts having an inhibitory effect.
Thats pretty high. If you did that for 1 minute it would be 12 J/cm^2. So you are already over the dosage right there.Probably 150-200m-W/cm² but I'm not sure if that answers that.
Thats pretty high. If you did that for 1 minute it would be 12 J/cm^2. So you are already over the dosage right there.
In experiment 1 rams were induced to testicular degeneration by scrotal insulation. Then they were treated using LLLT at 28 J/cm2 or 56 J/cm2 energy densities. Biostimulatory effect was observed at 28 J/cm2 presented smaller proportion of lumen area and less degeneration degree.
In the second study, rams were submitted or not to scrotal insulation and treated or not by the best protocol of LLLT defined by experiment 1 (28 J/cm2). In this study were evaluated sperm kinetics, morphology, membranes integrity, ROS production, and DNA integrity. Testosterone serum concentration and proportion of lumen area in seminiferous tubule were also analyzed.
In experiment 2, there was no difference between the groups . In addition, LLLT did not improve sperm quality, and there was a decreasing for total and progressive motility and integrity of sperm membranes in LLLT-treated groups. Moreover, testosterone concentration was not improved by LLLT . Stimulation of aerobic phosphorylation by LLLT may have led to a deregulated increase in ROS leading to sperm damages.
LLLT at energy of 28 J/cm2 (808 nm of wavelength and 30 mW of power output) can induce sperm damages and increase the quantity of cells in seminiferous tubule in rams.
Low-level laser therapy to recovery testicular degeneration in rams: effects on seminal characteristics, scrotal temperature, plasma testosterone concentration, and testes histopathology
This study has been sited several times already on the forum, they are using ram testes with lasers and infrared wavelengths (808 nm), we are using light emitting diodes (LED) and visible light 600 nm - 700 nm. I have many times in many threads expressed my concern about using the infrared spectrums and have often talked about the difference in safety between lasers and light emitting diodes. The LED lights we are talking about are in the visible light range and is having a completely different effect then this study."
"The visible orange/red spectrum 600 nm - 700 nm has very positive effect on cellular functioning, it enhances mitochondrial respiration."
I think you're massively overestimating the difference between red and near infrared and the differences between light sources. It's simply a matter of needing a little more power to do the same damage with red. Most of the discussions using red on these forums have been using a hell of a lot more power then 30mW.
People should be very cautious about posts on this forum and elsewhere blindly advocating dosing high amounts of red light on sensitive tissues.
I also think that the theory given by the study is much more likely to be correct than your assertion.
"Stimulation of aerobic phosphorylation by LLLT may have led to a deregulated increase in ROS leading to sperm damages."
Heat damage at 30mW seems extremely unlikely.
"Stimulation of aerobic phosphorylation by LLLT may have led to a deregulated increase in ROS leading to sperm damages."
That was the point of my last post, there is a very big difference in effects between visible red and non visible infrared wavelengths, in the last study i posted, red 670nm had beneficial effects with no cell damage, but the 808 nm had negative effects, its not just about power, wavelength is the key factor.
I'll take the Joovv off y'alls' hands and dispose of it safely if you think it's too dangerous (I will pay for shipping too)
You got a Joovv you’re too scared to use/sell?
Oh nevermind; I thought Joovv was a relative to the crown jewels.You got a Joovv you’re too scared to use/sell?
Maybe the masons called it like that to mock us while they sterilize us? Is Peat part of Agenda 2030Oh nevermind; I thought Joovv was a relative to the crown jewels.