Anyone Tried Methylene Blue? It Mimics Lllt, Inhibits Prolactin....

[Georgie]

The only LED/Laser devices that are worth a damn for hair loss would be either a high powered INFRARED LED array, such as this one:

https://redlightman.com/product/infrared-light-device-mini/ (personally used this one and maintained for over a month and a little bit of regrowth, but it won't stand up to aggressive hair loss on its own)
STUDIES: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26048721

OR

A wide-spectrum light like this that includes both short and long wavelength light:
http://zepter-lb.com/product/Bioptron-Compact-III
STUDY:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28418107
(and the one I posted above uses the earlier generation device to lower inflammatory markers in the blood)


Forget about all the HairMax, iGrow, iHelmet, and iBullshit products. Wrong wavelengths, too weak, spaced too far apart, etc.

Doesn’t it hurt your arm holding that sh*t up to your scone for 25 minutes at a time? And it doesn’t look like it covers a very large area. I’d be there for bloody hours to do my whole head :/

 

[whatevr]

Doesn’t it hurt your arm holding that sh*t up to your scone for 25 minutes at a time? And it doesn’t look like it covers a very large area. I’d be there for bloody hours to do my whole head :/

I have a mount that I hang it on. It covers everything when put at 30 cm distance.

 

[Georgie]

I have a mount that I hang it on. It covers everything when put at 30 cm distance.

I see! And you reckon it’s better than the other laser devices? I ask because I was considering buying one. Muchos grasias for the advice.

 

[whatevr]

I see! And you reckon it’s better than the other laser devices? I ask because I was considering buying one. Muchos grasias for the advice.

I never tried the others, but no one ever got any results with them because they are such low power, and use the wrong wavelengths which don't penetrate deeply enough all the way to the dermal papilla. 830 nm has been shown to be the most potent in studies, yet none of the commercial devices use that.

It won't cause miracle regrowth, but someone with mild-moderate hair loss can probably maintain with it. It does wonders against inflammation by lowering a whole bunch of negative factors, I maintained with it (and nothing but it) for nearly 2 months but then I messed with my hormones and had a huge shed. But it works, and when you look at studies of infrared lasers and LEDs on other parts of the body and see how much they lower a whole lost of inflammatory markers, then you can see why it makes sense that it can work. I already posted some of those studies in this thread and others.

I have yet to find an optimal dose and frequency. I used to do 1x 15 minutes, now I am experimenting with 2x 20 minutes with 12 hours in between, at a greater distance. Maybe that will work better.

I'm pretty sure if I could find one or two more general spectrum anti-inflammatories like this, to use as a topical, I'd be f*****g set. No need to even touch DHT...

 

[Georgie]

I never tried the others, but no one ever got any results with them because they are such low power, and use the wrong wavelengths which don't penetrate deeply enough all the way to the dermal papilla. 830 nm has been shown to be the most potent in studies, yet none of the commercial devices use that.

View attachment 80902

View attachment 80903

It won't cause miracle regrowth, but someone with mild-moderate hair loss can probably maintain with it. It does wonders against inflammation by lowering a whole bunch of negative factors, I maintained with it (and nothing but it) for nearly 2 months but then I messed with my hormones and had a huge shed. But it works, and when you look at studies of infrared lasers and LEDs on other parts of the body and see how much they lower a whole lost of inflammatory markers, then you can see why it makes sense that it can work. I already posted some of those studies in this thread and others.

I have yet to find an optimal dose and frequency. I used to do 1x 15 minutes, now I am experimenting with 2x 20 minutes with 12 hours in between, at a greater distance. Maybe that will work better.

I'm pretty sure if I could find one or two more general spectrum anti-inflammatories like this, to use as a topical, I'd be f*****g set. No need to even touch DHT...

It’s relatively Inexpensive for what it is too. Maybe I’ll give it a go. Says 4-12 times a week. Lol. Kind of ambiguous. Maybe somewhere in the middle is a good place to start. Or maybe even just 25 minutes every other day.

 

[Xander94]

It’s relatively Inexpensive for what it is too. Maybe I’ll give it a go. Says 4-12 times a week. Lol. Kind of ambiguous. Maybe somewhere in the middle is a good place to start. Or maybe even just 25 minutes every other day.

Send hair pic

 

[whatevr]

It’s relatively Inexpensive for what it is too. Maybe I’ll give it a go. Says 4-12 times a week. Lol. Kind of ambiguous. Maybe somewhere in the middle is a good place to start. Or maybe even just 25 minutes every other day.

I think you may be able to get away with every other day, but I'm not sure. Either way, what matters is time and distance, and the total energy delivered.

You can deliver the same amount of total eenrgy, but one may be:
Short distance x Short time
Long distance x Long time
(because the amount of light energy falls off with increasing distance via the inverse square law)

And I'm not sure yet which one is better, but intuitively I would say that delivering a low dose anti-inflammatory effect just strong enough to suppress the damage from a longer distance (~20-30 cm) for a longer duration (20-30 minutes), does more for allowing the hair follicle to breathe than frying it way up close for 10 minutes. But I'm not sure yet, as I said. It's open for experimentation.

Also of interest is that I found that apparently red light seems to lower PGE2, I've found quite a lot of studies that support this. I can't find ANY data on what it does to PGD2, but about PGE2 it seems really clear that it gets lowered by red light, which would be bad in the context of hair (yet it has positive results on hair loss regardless). I think the reduction of PGE2 may be what limits the regrowth potential of red light. I wonder if you combined it with light dermastamping + PGE2 like @westonci uses, if you could get really serious regrowth. Maybe something to try for someone with a good budget.

 

[Georgie]

I think you may be able to get away with every other day, but I'm not sure. Either way, what matters is time and distance, and the total energy delivered.

You can deliver the same amount of total eenrgy, but one may be:
Short distance x Short time
Long distance x Long time
(because the amount of light energy falls off with increasing distance via the inverse square law)

And I'm not sure yet which one is better, but intuitively I would say that delivering a low dose anti-inflammatory effect just strong enough to suppress the damage from a longer distance (~20-30 cm) for a longer duration (20-30 minutes), does more for allowing the hair follicle to breathe than frying it way up close for 10 minutes. But I'm not sure yet, as I said. It's open for experimentation.

Also of interest is that I found that apparently red light seems to lower PGE2, I've found quite a lot of studies that support this. I can't find ANY data on what it does to PGD2, but about PGE2 it seems really clear that it gets lowered by red light, which would be bad in the context of hair (yet it has positive results on hair loss regardless). I think the reduction of PGE2 may be what limits the regrowth potential of red light. I wonder if you combined it with light dermastamping + PGE2 like @westonci uses, if you could get really serious regrowth. Maybe something to try for someone with a good budget.

Relating to skin and slightly different treatment but still relative.

“Our results further suggest that IR radiation may result in beneficial effects on skin texture and wrinkles by increasing collagen and elastin in the dermis through stimulation of fibroblasts. Thus, treatment with IR radiation may be an effective and safe non-ablative remodeling method of the skin”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2687728/#!po=79.7297

I feel like, you as said, it could be a good addition to wounding.

 

[Topher]

I have a 300w infared light and waiting for my MB. I'm going to put the MB right on my scalp see how hypoxic it is. My light is 900nm to 1200nm I'd like to add 600nm and up to 900nm

 

[Georgie]

I have a 300w infared light and waiting for my MB. I'm going to put the MB right on my scalp see how hypoxic it is. My light is 900nm to 1200nm I'd like to add 600nm and up to 900nm

MB?

 

[Topher]

Methylene blue

 

[Georgie]

Methylene blue

You’re going to put it in your scalp? Lol. It’s blue dye!

 

[Topher]

If my scalp is hypoxic as I've read they are in male pattern baldness it should be gone in a few hours. If not, what ever it's for science haha.

 

[Georgie]

If my scalp is hypoxic as I've read they are in male pattern baldness it should be gone in a few hours. If not, what ever it's for science haha.

Lol. A braver soul than I.

 

[HairCook]

damn some seriously take it orally?
anyway https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28489273
Btw talking about methylene BLUE makes me think about blue light .... 8 )
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28418107

Blue is the once interesting wave-lenght to me.

Blue was proven in hair unrelated studies that it increases NO, and we know NO is hair positive.
Someone interested in LLLT should build his own blue light laser helm

 

[Georgie]

Blue is the once interesting wave-lenght to me.

Blue was proven in hair unrelated studies that it increases NO, and we know NO is hair positive.
Someone interested in LLLT should build his own blue light laser helm

If it grows hair shut up and take my money.

 

[kiwipilu]

Dilemma... Blue light(450nm) shows better results but red light is what s being sold and fda approved for hairloss and 311nm blue light for skin conditions.. this study blue vs red is recent though. Need to know the sweet spot (depth ^^

 

[whatevr]

Dilemma... Blue light(450nm) shows better results but red light is what s being sold and fda approved for hairloss and 311nm blue light for skin conditions.. this study blue vs red is recent though. Need to know the sweet spot (depth ^^

Blue only shows some effects in vitro. In vivo it will not even penetrate significantly into the hair follicle. The wavelength is too short.

 

[Alex Contee]

Methylene blue

The forum seems to be down at the moment but a bunch of people tried this over at RP.

 

[Topher]

Dilemma... Blue light(450nm) shows better results but red light is what s being sold and fda approved for hairloss and 311nm blue light for skin conditions.. this study blue vs red is recent though. Need to know the sweet spot (depth ^^

Lots of blue light in all our lighting ie. fluorescence, LEDs, and HIDs.