Is LLLT for Tinnitus by Dr. Wilden a Scam?

And yes - the very reason why scientists use rats for inner ear healing scenarios is that it does apply to humans if not why even bother ...

We still don't know to what extent and how much laser is needed for human to achieve the same result but at least it's safe to say that there is a high probability that LLLT does something beneficial - will this improve hearing loss ?

Maybe a long shot but there aren't many other affordable and side effect free options available so why not give it a shot ?

 

For 13 months my T is getting higher and higer, adding new sounds bla bla... Actually I went to Norway without any believing that I would get positive results. If you believe that; the date I went to Norway and my spontaneous remission date matched together,that's fine with me. You are free to believe what you want to believe.

At the beginng you said there is no double blind studies, I gave you only one example, ( in fact I would give a dozen, but from that point this is a matter that I will not do). Now you say large scale studies. If anyone from this forum would tell you a large scale clinic study, most probably you will say "ohcome on guys we need peer-rewieved large scale double blind studies" In case of giving you an example of that kind of study, probably you will ask "what about triple blind studies? " bla bla bla. That kind of conversation has not an end and will continue forever. You will not get satisfied. You will float at the top of the tank as olive oil while you think we are sinking.

The worst thing that you have made is linking the shemesh and wilden together, want us to think wilden is con-artist as shemsh... this is an old trcik my friend, think about the newer ones.

Finally; forget about the wilden or other clinics, just focus on phototherapy.Names don't have a value...

 

Expecting the US government to do their due diligence is like expecting a 4 year old to clean the house correctly even after you've explained to them how to do it.

 

But they have over a Billion dollars of reasons to do so.

 

You're not wrong, but the problem with government entities like the defense department is that they can use that figure as a reason to demand more funding. They'll almost always put a higher budget requirement than what is needed so they can ensure more money comes to their groups. So if tinnitus doesn't exist as a problem, they lose that funding & padding money.

 

The price of that laser gadget alone tells me that its a scam.

 

The HARVARD Study below has absolutely nothing at all to do with LLLT and Tinnitus.

It only indicates potential bio-chemical processes in NEWBORN MICE; under a clinical controlled laboratory environment, the Blocking of certain molecular activities showed to induce hair cell differentiation limited to very low frequencies.

What in the World does this study and the mechanism of action have to do with WILDEN and his LLLT business.

This study is just a "baby window" for future research, nothing to do with LLLT.

Unfortunately, I am now convinced that Wilden is another con artist living high on the hog. Putting this article on his website serves no purpose except to make incorrect correlations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harvard researchers regenerate sound-sensing cells of mice with hearing damage

February 21, 2014


Harvard stem cell scientists have made an unexpected and potentially useful discovery that the sound-sensing cells of the mammalian ear—called hair cells--can be replaced, at least at low levels. Despite years of evidence indicating that ear sensory cells do not regenerate if lost, new research from the laboratory of Albert Edge, PhD, shows that it is possible for newborn mice.

The next step is to learn if the findings can be applied to older animals, which may lead to ways to help stimulate cell replacement in adults and to the design of new treatment strategies for people suffering from deafness due to hair cell loss.

"The finding that newborn hair cells regenerate spontaneously is novel," said Edge, a Harvard Stem Cell Institute Affiliated Faculty member at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary.

The team's previous research revealed that the induced inhibition of a set of proteins that control neuron division—known as the Notch signaling pathway—increases hair cell differentiation, and can help restore hearing to mice with noise-induced deafness.

In their latest work, published in Stem Cell Reports, the investigators found that blocking the Notch pathway in supporting cells near the ear that express a protein called Lgr5 can also lead to hair cell differentiation, mimicking the natural hair cell regeneration observed in the newborn mice.

"By using an inhibitor of Notch signaling, we could push even more cells to differentiate into hair cells," said Edge. "It was surprising that the Lgr5-expressing cells were the only supporting cells that differentiated under these conditions."

Combining this new knowledge about Lgr5-expressing cells with the previous finding that Notch inhibition can regenerate hair cells will allow the scientists to design new hair cell regeneration strategies to treat hearing loss and deafness.

HSCI Principal Faculty member Konrad Hochedlinger, PhD, was a collaborator with Edge on the study.

The research was supported by the National Institutes of Health, an NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, the Tillotson Corporation, the Shulsky Foundation, and Robert Boucai.

Cited: Lgr5-Positive Supporting Cells Generate New Hair Cells in the Postnatal Cochlea. Stem Cell Reports.February 20, 2014. [Epub ahead of print]

This story was provided by Cell Press.

See also: 2014,Research Update,Hearing Loss

 

So why bring it up?

 

The "Harvard study" is displayed on Wilden's website like the Holy Grail.

This study has been used by Dr Wilden as a bite, to "lure more suffering people" into paying him money for a self-proclaimed "cure" that does not exist.

May I suggest that if you are going to share a discussion here then at least READ all of the previous commentaries - thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What the study implies and what it does not imply:

It does not express or state that LLLT can contribute to helping damaged hair cell repair, it does not state anything about regeneration of hair cells or secondary support cells, it does not involve any discussions about improvement in hearing thresholds and there is no mention of a tinnitus effect.

I believe this was done in a laboratory environment in culture where they induced a controlled level of stresses.

Conclusion: LLLT may help to reduce a bio-chemical process that causes additional damage to hair cells or other supportive adjacent cells involved in the cochlea's biological make up. However, the very strong drugs of gentamicin or lipopolysaccharide are used in conjunction with the application of LLL.

All of this has nothing to do with supporting Wilden's claims that his process "improves audible hearing for persons with severe hearing loss, the regeneration of new hair cells across many frequencies, reduction or cure for Tinnitus."

Tinnitus causation can be anywhere in a brain hemisphere, anywhere in a nerve bundle, auditory nerve, brain stem location, muscular location, TMJ, Dorsal Cochlea Nucleus, etc. The cause of tinnitus is not just a matter of the cochlea in many cases. Some people with tinnitus have normal hearing.

It is a small window into a potential to help stop a damaging process, but it does not correlate with Wilden's claims of repair, rejuvenation, restoration, long term positive results, and the reduction or cure of tinnitus.

Wilden would be the person to "throw this up on his website" only knowing that the average person will be impressed - but impressed by what.! Anyone with a science background or one who takes the time to read it a few times can see exactly what is being expressed - a potential to alter a negative bio-chemical process caused by noise induction and/or oxidative drug effects - but there is nothing at all about the proliferation stages, after inflammation, concerning repair processes or re-growth, etc.

HARVARD STUDY:

Abstract

Hearing loss is a serious occupational health problem worldwide. Noise, aminoglycoside antibiotics and chemotherapeutic drugs induce hearing loss through changes in metabolic functions resulting in sensory cell death in the cochlea. Metabolic sequelae from noise exposure increase production of nitric oxide (NO) and Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) contributing to higher levels of oxidative stress beyond the physiologic threshold levels of intracellular repair. Photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy is a light treatment involving endogenous chromophores commonly used to reduce inflammation and promote tissue repair. Near infrared light (NIR) from Light Emitting Diodes (LED) at 810 nm wavelength were used as a biochemical modulator of cytokine response in cultured HEI-OC1 auditory cells placed under oxidative stress. Results reported here show that NIR PBM at 810 nm, 30 mW/cm2 , 100 seconds, 1.0 J, 3 J/cm2 altered mitochondrial metabolism and oxidative stress response for up to 24 hours post treatment. We report a decrease of inflammatory cytokines and stress levels resulting from NIR applied to HEI-OC1 auditory cells before treatment with gentamicin or lipopolysaccharide. These results show that cells pretreated with NIR exhibit reduction of proinflammatory markers that correlate with inhibition of mitochondrial superoxide, ROS and NO in response to continuous oxidative stress challenges. Non-invasive biomolecular down regulation of proinflammatory intracellular metabolic pathways and suppression of oxidative stress via NIR may have the potential to develop novel therapeutic approaches to address noise exposure and ototoxic compounds associated with hearing loss.

© 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

 

From what I understand Wilden is a genuine ENT specialist of the inner ear not just a LLLT only guy .
So his site may have other ear related info which makes sense like stem cells or whatever is Research news . There isn't much on LLLT only for the ear. Human studies cost Money and if firms haven't found a way to make money they won't invest much .

There was a some poster here who went there and Wilden suggested only a very minimal amount of sessions as the hearing damage was light , so again if he just wanted money to cure hearing loss he could have asked for a lot more .

Wilden wrote that on average people get a 20% hearing loss improvement with LLLT - I don't think he sells it as a tinnitus cure because this 20 % may not be sufficent to silence tinnitus for everyone .

So again , if your expectations are to get a 20% improvement of hearing loss then yes it may work - if you expect to be cured from tinnitus then obviousely you haven't figured out how LLLT works and its limitations .

 

Hi Mike, I didn't see anywhere where Wilden proclaimed a "cure". He does call it a treatment, but that is a much less extreme claim. I haven't read every page on his website though. Do you have a link by any chance that shows him making this claim?

 

I did and didn't see any reference to this is which is why I asked. Your original post makes no mention of where this article comes from or why it is relevant.

 

Chronic Tinnitus and/or Severe Hearing Loss, like many other medical conditions, is certainly challenging in many ways.

If one reads / studies much of the information at: ATA, NIH and TRI there is much to decipher through.

In choosing a selective treatment for Tinnitus there is much to consider; it's not an easy task.

Regarding this LLLT thread, I will complete my discussion opinions here.

I wish the best for those who want to try (experiment) with LLLT for tinnitus or hearing loss.

I wish the best for those who try other modalities in seeking improvement.

May I say Good-Bye and to all "be of good health."

 

As I wrote in my very first post, I started this discussion as a new thread because many people at tinnitus talk approach this subject in the dark with preconceived notions. Many people want to convince themselves that there is a "magical cure" in the application of an instrument that Dr. Wilden promotes. Yet to this date, Dr. Wilden has avoided any involvement in clinical studies, which can easily test and determine effectiveness of treatment. Therefore, I am asking for any medically collaborative scientific proof that "LLLT" therapy works significantly better than placebo.

I understand that many acute sufferers want a "cure" and not a management method; this is a natural tendency. However, to this day no "cure" sold by any self-proclaimed guru has yet proven to work better than placebo.

Therefore, I am kindly asking all acute tinnitus sufferers to stop "spamming" this site with wishful thinking and argumentative tones. You can write a million times all over the internet that "LLLT with Dr. Wilden" indeed works, but this does not change anything; without significant scientific documentation there is nothing more than personalized anecdotal dialogue.

I am kindly offering a suggestion, based on medical data, that all acute Tinnitus sufferers (12 months or less) consider waiting aproximatetly one year to see if a natural healing process takes place. After a one-year period they are welcome to experiment with whatever they want. Then one-year later after the use of LLLT or treatment with Dr. Shemesh (and at least 2 years after the onset of Tinnitus), kindly write us back and tell us your story. Perhaps another option to consider is to go to a recognized Tinnitus clinic and start with selective sound therapy which manages (but not cures) Tinnitus in 70 to 80% through process of Habituation. Sound therapy, over time, has proven to diminish symptoms of hyperacusis, lower the volume of Tinnitus and reduce one's emotional responses to the ringing.

If you need to lift your self-belief and emotional desires, then start a new thread like "I HOPE THAT LLLT THERAPY BY WILDEN IS NOT A SCAM"

I also had horrible severe Tinnitus that almost killed me. I traveled to see Dr Shemesh in Israel and spent about 15 thousand US dollars for clinic fees, medicine capsules, travel expenses and lost wages. The end result was zero. Absolutely no help at all. I personally met in Israel five other tinnitus sufferers and contacted those 2 years later - nobody was cured, nobody got any better, no one received any medical benefit.

I remember very well that when I was in the acute phase like many others I stubbornly believed that Dr. Shemesh was a god sent Messiah. I was so desperate and emotionally exhausted that I argued with others that this man has "the cure" and that other noted scientists and ear specialists are simply too stupid to see his genius. In this time period "I was in the dark with preconceived notions" believing in someone I called a Messiah. I wanted him to prove that everyone in the medical community was wrong and he would surely cure me; I simply did not care about logical inquiry because I was in absolute agony. But now I know the truth that Dr. Shemesh is a con artist and most likely so is Dr. Wilden. Sometimes the truth simply hurts: to this date, we do not have a clinically proven cure for Tinnitus, but on a positive note we have several options of managment protocols that can offer improvement.

Read more here and see the parallels:

https://www.tinnitustalk.com/threads/dr-shemesh-israel-clinic-bluff-or-serious.1733/

 

@Henry1492 I sort of agree with a lot of what you're saying but I think it's weird that you keep bringing up Dr. Shemesh in a thread that claims to be about LLLT. Dr. Shemesh has never offered LLLT, has never written about LLLT, and has literally nothing to do with LLLT.

As for clinical studies and data, as you are no doubt aware, there have been a handful of studies assessing laser therapies on tinnitus patients; mostly, uncontrolled studies have speculated that there is some benefit, but controlled and blinded studies have been a lot more conflicted, often (but not always) showing no difference from placebo. However, because this has been entirely investigational, there's no standard protocol, and overall the power levels of the lasers used have been significantly lower than what is suggested by laser proponents.

I don't really have a horse in this race, but I think it's strange that you'd accuse anyone of "spamming" the board, when it is you who has started a new and largely redundant thread. The existing LLLT discussions are well confined to the two existing threads, and I don't see how the people who routinely post in them are "spamming"; they keep to themselves, mostly post experience reports of their own treatment attempts, and in general do not invade other parts of the forum and try to convince people that LLLT is something they need to be thinking about.

So, the discussions of LLLT that happen here are in that regard similar to discussions of various drugs, alternative therapies and cognitive approaches.

If discussion was prohibited unless people were speaking of established cures for tinnitus with good clinical data behind them, our post count would instantly drop to zero because there is no such thing.

So, what's your agenda? You seem to have a deep understanding of this forum, and yet your account is a week old and you haven't posted outside this thread. This is, generally, indicative of someone who has previously been active under a different account.

As I said, I don't exactly disagree with the gist of what you're saying, but the way you have approached it makes me deeply skeptical of your motivations.

 

Someone who pays thousands of dollars , travels all the way to the Middle East just to get a bunch of anti oxidants and vitamin pills - stuff which can be cheaply bought at any local drugstore down the street - does not have the mental ability to distinguish what is a scam or not.

These type of persons don't do their homework - they want to believe in something so much that this becomes a reality in their mind and of course when results don't show up they claim to be scammed.

This Shemesh stuff isn't even elaborate enough to qualify as a scam .

Now back to LLLT - this is not a tinnitus cure . Tinnitus isn't so simple to cure .

Even the am-101 folks aren't cured from tinnitus ...

Wilden does not claim it - no studies demonstrate it- so if anyone is still under the impression that LLLT cures tinnitus, again they haven't done their homework

Wilden claims however that on average his patients using his high power laser while overprotecting their ears all the time - very important point in the protocol - get a 20% improvement of hearing loss.

Also studies on rats shows that LLLT can protect ears better from future acoustic traumas .

In the best case scenario where mild hearing loss was well recovered on LLLT because the person responded very well to LLLT - then MAYBE his tinnitus can get softer,thinner and easier to habituate . Not disappear but easier to habituate .This is exaclty what Wilden told one of his patient Hansi Cross.

That's all there is to it - no scam , no miracle either ! just one small tool inside our rather empty toolbox of noise damage repair

 

This is what I have been thinking. Putting aside the attempt to link Wilden and Shemesh, two separate contributors to this thread have: (a) accused Wilden of saying things he does not say, incorrectly using quotation marks in the process; (b) not acknowledged when (a) is pointed out to them; (c) dodged answering questions addressed to them.

Interesting stuff.

 

Who is really behind this aka ? That is the question

 

I was under the impression that people went to Dr.Wilden because of their T , not hearing loss ?
Is there something I am missing here , because ...so far , no one has been able to provide proof that Dr.Wildens treatment does help with hearing loss , let alone T .

Also , the hallmarks of a scam are outrageous prices , which give them an aura of legitimacy.
This , the scammers know , ergo , Mr. Israel Guru with his 3.500 dollar chat session and Dr.Wildens 2.500 Euro LED Laser thingy .

 

Schemish is definitely a scam artist, and as for Wilden, if he had a double blind study done on his LLLT by a independent source to prove it works better than a placebo laser it would improve his credibility. He is a scam artist until proven otherwise IMO.

 

Just to clarify one more time in case it is necessary, I am definitely not saying that Wilden is the real deal or that LLLT is gonna solve anyone's tinnitus.

@RaZaH & @just1morething you both express doubts about Wilden. Personally speaking I feel no urge to argue with how you guys expressed these doubts and indeed I actually share them to a greater extent nowadays than I used to. What bothers me is when I see people misrepresenting what somebody else says, or using other dodgy tactics. I don't understand why LLLT seems to provoke this sort of behaviour as much as it does.

 

But we already have independant double blind studies on LLLT and cochlear regeneration and prevention due to noise damage.

We already have anecdotal evidence from credible long time poster like ATEOS who got some hearing loss improvements on LLLT.

Some even posted audio grams

I already have had my 20% hearing loss improvement since my 4khz 35db dip improved to 25 Db so as far as I am concerned the Wilden ballpark average result claim has been met after 2-3 months on LLLT

When I started LLLT I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss any opportunity to get some hearing back

Worst case scenario it does nothing at all and I have wasted 2100 usd but that amount has zero effect whatsoever on my life overall

Unlike the trobalt stuff - no double blind studies here as well btw- you don't risk permanent and risky side effects and in a one year long Treatment the money spent would be close to medication costs as well anyways

As long as you set you expections right - no tinnitus cure !

 

WHAT ARE THE HARD DATA FACTS (RESULTS OF DOUBLE BLIND STUDIES) ABOUT EFFECT OF LLLT ON TINNITUS AND HEARING LOSS?

LLLT has been used for 25 years in Europe and more recently in the USA as a treatment for pain and post-surgical tissue repair. It has been proposed that laser light may aid in the repair of tissue damage. A proposed mechanism is the stimulation of the mitochondria in the cells to produce more energy through the production of the andenosine triphosphate (ATP). It has been additionally postulated (but never proven) that LLLT may improve cochlear function.

Literature search via Pubmed revealed:
- two studies showing an improvement in hearing thresholds and tinnitus,
- one study showing equivocal results, and
- seven studies showing no effect (no difference between LLLT and placebo).

Double blind studies that find LLLT useful:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17625032
Haydarpasa Military Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey, 2008; 45 patients: 30 LLLT, 15 placebo
Study found attenuation of the reported loudness, duration and degree of annoyance; however, authors claim that the potential therapeutic effects are still obscure requiring further studies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19205171
Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, Piacenza, Italy, 2008; 46 patients: 26 LLLT, 20 placebo
Approximately 61% of irradiated patients had tinnitus severity decreased by one class, in comparison to 35% of the placebo group.

Double blind study that find LLLT equivocal:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=mirvakili+mehrparvar
Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Scienes, Iran, 2014; 120 patients, 60 LLLT, 60 placebo
LLLT could effect on recovery of Tinnitus caused by hearing loss, however after three months study revealed that effect of LLLT is decreased with passing time. Additional studies are necessary to prove long term efficacy.

Double blind studies that find LLLT useless:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10481503
Katedra i Klinika Otolaryngologii AM w Białymstoku, Poland, 1999; 32 patients, 16 LLLT, 16 placebo
Results indicate that there is no relationship between the effect of low-power laser and changes in cochlear micromechanics.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11016286
Arhus Universitetshospital, Arhus Kommunehospital, Denmark, 2000; 49 patients, 25 LLLT, 24 placebo
Low-power laser treatment is not indicated in the treatment of tinnitus. Reports of significant benefits of this treatment in previous studies may be explained by the placebo effect.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11981384
Nagoya University School of Medicine, Japan, 2002; 45 patients, 25 LLLT, 20 placebo
No significant difference was observed between the active and placebo laser groups with regard to outcome of loudness, duration, quality, and annoyance of tinnitus. In one patient who received active laser treatment, acute hearing deterioration occurred after the third irradiation.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18843180
San Raffaele Hospital, 'Vita e Salute' University, Milan, Italy, 2009; 60 patients, 30 LLLT, 30 placebo
Soft laser therapy demonstrated no efficacy as a therapeutic measure for tinnitus.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24024040
The University of Iowa, 2013; 30 patients: 9 LLLT, 10 placebo, 11 control
No statistically significant differences were found between groups for any of the auditory tests. Additionally, no clinically significant differences were found in any individual subjects. (Study focused on LLLT and hearing loss, not LLLT and tinnitus).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=ngao++tan
University Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia 2012; 43 patients: 23 LLLT, 21 placebo
Transmeatal low-power laser stimulation did not demonstrate significant efficacy as a therapeutic measure in treating tinnitus.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25606834
Islamic Azad University, Iran, 2015: 66 patients: 33 LLLT, 33 placebo
5-mVlaser therapy with a wavelength of 650 nm is no better than placebo for improving hearing thresholds overall or for treating tinnitus with regard to age, sex, environmental noise level, and the duration of tinnitus.

 

Effect of low-level laser treatment on cochlea hair-cell recovery after acute acoustic trauma.
Rhee CK, Bahk CW, Kim SH, Ahn JC, Jung JY, Chung PS, Suh MW.
Source

Dankook University, Medical Laser Research Center, Cheonan, Republic of Korea.

Abstract

We investigated the effect of low-level laser radiation on rescuing hair cells of the cochlea after acute acoustic trauma and hearing loss. Nine rats were exposed to noise. Starting the following day, the left ears (NL ears) of the rats were irradiated at an energy output of 100 to 165 mW/cm(2) for 60 min for 12 days in a row. The right ears (N ears) were considered as the control group. Frequency-specific hearing levels were measured before the noise exposure and also after the 1st, 3rd to 5th, 8th to 10th and 12th irradiations. After the 12th treatment, hair cells were observed using a scanning electron microscope. Compared to initial hearing levels at all frequencies, thresholds increased markedly after noise exposure. After the 12th irradiation, hearing threshold was significantly lower for the NL ears compared to the N ears. When observed using an electron microscope, the number of hair cells in the middle turn of the NL ears was significantly larger than that of the N ears. Our findings suggest that low-level laser irradiation promotes recovery of hearing thresholds after acute acoustic trauma.​

They used 100 mw to 165 mw on the tiny cochlea of tiny ears rats for one hour a day to get a result .

The list you put together only demonstrates that using 1% of the strength (5 mw) of the strength used at the clinics will have close to no effect which we totally agree.

Also Most of these studies did not look into hearing improvements only tinnitus which can have many other causes and is hard to treat anyway and not a cure for laser.

Why did all of these studies use the same useless 5mw laser for only short times ?

We know that light won't even penetrate skin, flesh and bone if it's too weak.

Besides offering a possible improvement from noise damage when used in appropriate strenght - 500 mw - not 5 mw ! - , LLLT can protect hearing from future damage which is also very important for us.

Highlights
-LLLT was performed in rats after noise exposure.

-ABR measurement revealed that LLLT accelerated recovery of auditory function.

-Outer hair cell survival rates were significantly elevated in the LLLT group compared to the non-LLLT group.

-Immunoreactivities against iNOS and cleaved-caspase 3 were decreased in the LLLT group compared to the non-LLLT group.



Abstract
Noninvasive low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is neuroprotective, but the mechanism of this effect is not fully understood. In this study, the use of LLLT as a novel treatment for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is investigated. Sprague–Dawley rats were exposed to intense noise and their right ears were irradiated with an 808 nm diode laser at an output power density of 110 or 165 mW/cm2 for a 30 min period for 5 consecutive days. Measurement of the auditory brainstem response revealed an accelerated recovery of auditory function in the groups treated with LLLT compared with the non-treatment group at days 2, 4, 7 and 14 after noise exposure. Morphological observations also revealed a significantly higher outer hair cell survival rate in the LLLT groups. Immunohistochemical analyses for inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and cleaved caspase-3 were used to examine oxidative stress and apoptosis. Strong immunoreactivities were observed in the inner ear tissues of the non-treatment group, whereas these signals were decreased in the LLLT group at 165 mW/cm2 power density. Our findings suggest that LLLT has cytoprotective effects against NIHL via the inhibition of iNOS expression and apoptosis.​

Note:
They tried two power level on rats, 110 and 165 mw
The only found that there was an effect on the 165mw, not the low power (for 30 min)
The first study I posted above from Korea was one hour using less power in one group but double irradiation time

For the human studies they only did one minuscule power of 5 mw ! and even less time...and found no effect which pretty much relates to what they found for rats too.

So far I haven't seen any independent study which tries different power on humans at least anything close to that or close to what LLLT clinics use

 

I recall doing a critical review of that paper here:

https://www.tinnitustalk.com/thread...tus-—-efficacy-debate.7650/page-10#post-88577

This study is of course the most infamous of them all - a study designed to fail (and who better to employ for that than an employee from a hearing aid company...):

https://www.tinnitustalk.com/thread...itus-—-efficacy-debate.7650/page-9#post-88136

If your problems stem from your encounter with Dr. Shemesh, then why not write a few words about him in the appropriate thread on that? Seems like you are giving Dr. Wilden the blame that Dr. Shemesh deserves. Not sure I follow your line of thought here (if there is one at all - or just mere psychological projection).

This has been proven.

Personally, I don't think LLLT or any one therapy has the capability to treat a condition of a heterogeneous nature such as tinnitus. At least not with today's medical standards. It will require a multifaceted approach - and in this regard - LLLT could still be interesting to study.

 

I read with much interest replies of Bobby B, Ragnoboz 2 and attheedgeofscience defending the LLLT.

My logical questions is: have the three of you been cured / significantly helped by LLLT or you wrote your contributions only to keep your spirits up ?

 

You still haven't answered my very logical question: why did you create a new account to create this thread, instead of just posting this from your existing, well-known account on this forum?

 

Yes I have Experienced improvements in hearing levels at 4000khz from 35 to 25 Db a month ago so far that is in line with the 20% hearing improvements on average claimed by Wilden.

And I am not done yet I plan on continuing for a year at least .

I am now using a much more powerful device that is hospital grade and has various wavelengths between 600nm to 1500nm up to 1800mw and I feel I got further improvements in hearing in terms of overall sound quality , smotheness and reactive t and ear pain to music and certain frequencies which was my biggest issue.

Baseline constant T is slightly softer but not that much since LLLT isn't a really a chronic tinnitus cure I am not expecting this to change much .

Where I live I cannot find tests over 8khz but I do hear them Better on the general fuzz site slide on my PC.

So yes I am quite satisfied to have chosen this type of Treatment early on after acoustic trauma - but I am not using LLLT it's more like MLLT which stands for medium level light therapy as its quite powerful to reach deep into the tissue behind the cochlea where the nerves are .
Each session is only 4 minutes long with pulse .

The 30mw device sold by Wilden isn't going to be as effective for sure .maybe that's the scam part you are referring to although there may be some European regulations on laser power that are in play here .

I also had realistic expectations - the constant hiss isn't going to be totally silenced but the reactive effects and H are the ones that have greatly improved so far

 

I wonder why he created a new thread when one on this subject already exists:
https://www.tinnitustalk.com/thread...apy-lllt-for-tinnitus-—-efficacy-debate.7650/

 

@Henry1492

Here is a study we would like your valuable input on:

trigeminal neuralgia and How LLLT helped cure the nerve pain (permanently)

http://www.superpulser.com/download/Low-Level Laser Therapy for Trigeminal Neuralgia_July-August 2008.pdf

Note : 808nm and 200mw was used in this study - this is far above what the Wilden devices sold to the public can do but available on the lucky laser - which is cheaper too

TN is due to wearing away or damage to the protective coating around the nerve (the myelin sheath).

So what does the myelin sheath has to do with hearing loss ?

http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/press/...ween-exposure-to-loud-sounds-and-hearing-loss

exposure to loud sound damages the myelin which is the protection sheet around cells. We have now shown the closer links between a deficit in the “myelin” sheath surrounding the auditory nerve and hearing loss. It becomes obvious why hearing loss is correlated with auditory signals failing to get transmitted along the auditory nerve.

Now again, this may not apply to chronic tinnitus at all, but for Hyperacusis, ear pain to sounds, reactive T and hearing loss due to nerve damage may benefit from LLLT provided the treatment is done with sufficient power, coverage of nerves and the correct wavelengths to penetrate deep enough.

The above study is focusing the laser where the nerves exits the bones under the skin and thus they can hit the target under the skin.

For the cochlea and nerves behind it, we have a much bigger issue.

The cochlea is cast in one of the thickest bone portion of the skull - and hidden behind the turn of the ear canal - our target is harder to hit hence even 200mw may not work.

I posted a study which showed that LLLT has difficulties penetrating the bones.

I am using 500mw pulsed during short times for a few minutes on the lucky and my other device has even longer wavelenghts (600nm to 1500nm) which can penetrate through bone even better and deeper and work well too - provided you don't do too long irradiation at a time.

There were many studies done on nerve regeneration and no particular wavelength works better , they even did a study on nerve regenaration using far infrared light like 3000 nm and it worked too but it will generate too much heat with watery tissue as its absorbed by water (like the liquid in the cochela) , so the "window of opportunity" in terms of absorption is 600 to 1500 nm

This is key in this LLLT treatment - understanding that if its not done correctly it won't work at all - you need to reach the target.

Just shining some low power light into the ear at random angles isn't going to work the best.