Joint publication in Laser Partner and Laser World 
(www.laser.nu/lllt/lllt_editorial.htm)

Dr T. Volkov and Dr. V. Volkov, 

LLLT Therapists and Naturopaths, THE VOLKOV CLINIC, Wellington & Lower Hutt, New Zealand

E-mail: v-volkov@paradise.net.nz

 

ABSTRACT

Concerned at the tone and content of a recent position-paper, and being acutely aware of the potential of laser therapy, we caution against 'popularising' LLLT with extravagant and/or unsubstantiated statements. Medical and health practitioners need to understand the LLLT potential for augmenting most other modalities in mainstream medical and therapeutic practice. There are still people with a scientific background, who remain sceptical about the therapeutic use of LLLT. We should be careful not to alienate them by using a populist vocabulary. Strict attention to referencing, and the accurate use of English, especially in peer-refereed articles, should be our prime concern. Extravagant and unsubstantiated claims will do us all more harm than good over time. At this point our aim is to educate about LLLT, not advertise it. Success, spread by word of mouth as we go along, will eventually be the best advertisement of all.

 

***

We were deeply concerned at the tone and content of the recent paper circulated by Prakash B. Katariya (India): Laser Medicine - A Brand New Option for Seemingly Incurable Diseases (1.6.2001).

In answer to your request for clarification, we are happy to do this. We also wish to reassure you that we commend and share the writer's enthusiasm for laser therapy, and his understanding of its potential for augmenting most other modalities in mainstream medical and therapeutic practice.

But what we are cautioning against are extravagant claims that will discredit laser therapy and therapists. It is most important that we do not 'popularise' lasers (LLLT) by using terms and syntax that are not worthy or accurate of the true potential of LLLT. In this case, all advertising is not necessarily good advertising. We mention a few specific instances of objection here, and hope that in this we will help you to spread light (not heat!) regarding LLLT.

For instance, to be credible we must use English that is accurate. In the title: "Brand New" and "Seemingly Incurable" are examples of misuse of an English which is colloquial (i.e. used in everyday casual speech, not in academic writing). They are cliche phrases, that advertise clothing and baseball bats, not advances in medicine. Laser is not a "brand", and for many countries, is not "new" either. Perhaps it would be better as a title to say "The Growing Use of Laser Technology as Applied to Trenchant (and/or Traumatic) Conditions".

We notice that the author is based at the Laser Cure Clinic, Pune, India. Thus we can see why he uses the word "cure" in his text. However it is against our professional ethic to claim cures for a procedure. At most we can claim to help, or to improve a condition. Palliative care may be the most realistic and honest claim that we can make. This is a laser that we use, not a magic wand! There are scientifically observable cellular changes, and we are still discovering the extent and limits of photo-biostimulation.

(P.1;l.2) "no side effects". It is true that there is no increase in pain, or nausea, or any kind of trauma following laser therapy. BUT, depending on the condition treated (and the laser device used) there may be at first excessive, and later decreasing tiredness - enough to require rest from usual duties; or there may be extra and unusual thirst. These are not so much side effects as results, but they are tangible and should be mentioned.

(P.1;l.4) The writer could not possibly have expertise in all of the conditions cited later (Ps.2-4 ibid); and would be wise to write a) from first hand experience only, or

b) give careful citations and references, and

c) a bibliography for the further use of the professional enquirer.

(P.1;ll.10-15) From his own text, we see here that laser is not "new". For a more coherent description of the biological action of LLLT we suggest the following:

"The term 'laser' is the acronym for the term Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation - which simply describes the process of producing a desirable light frequency.

Low Level Laser Therapy uses only low energy lasers, which are different from the high energy lasers used in industry, surgery, dentistry. The light applied in (prophylactic) laser therapy uses only the 'good' healing spectrum of light, and leaves out the harmful light rays (e.g. ultra violet light).

Light is the source of all life. Human tissue absorbs light energy (e.g. photons) where it stimulates and modifies the metabolic processes - similar to the action of sunlight on the vital processes of plant life (photosynthesis).

Low Level Laser Therapy works well with many levels of disease, pain, and malfunction; balancing the existing natural regenerative, anti-inflammatory, and analgesic capacities of the body. This is a painless, non-invasive, drugless treatment for sports injuries, arthritis, poor blood circulation, and pain management.

Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is already a popular treatment around the world in England, Europe, Russia, China etc. The New Zealand practice of LLLT complies with the standards set by the European Medical Laser Association.

(*Note: when writing in English an acronym has the terms of its reference written in capitals first, and is subsequently written with the capitals only - hence LLLT.)

Finally, on P.4, lls 2-3: "Children love this painless non-invasive, drugless therapy...". We understand what is meant, but it is not accurate. There are lots of things that children 'love', including sweets and rides on a merry-go-round, but we don't necessarily give children what they love. It would be better, as a father and as a doctor, to say that children are relieved that there is no pain experienced with laser treatment, as they may still have pain from their presenting condition, which may or may not diminish according to each individual case.

Once we have lost a reader's attention by over-enthusiastic extravagant and/or inaccurate statements, we have lost a chance to spread the real news about laser technology and its now indispensable role in medical practice.

We are very busy, and we decline to re-write the above paper. But we do consider writing research material to help our profession; based on serious and applied research which is valid, reliable (and thus repeatable), and scientifically based - preferably with double-blind subjects.

So our main points are: insufficient referencing, inaccurate use of English, and an extravagance of claims which might do us all more harm than good over time. While so many people who have a scientific background remain sceptical about the therapeutic use of LLLT, we should be careful not to alienate them by using a populist vocabulary. Our aim is to educate about LLLT, not advertise it. Success, spread by word of mouth as we go along, will be the best advertisement of all. ...