Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 , Thank you for the long and detailed description of your " discovery " . I have an interesting historical anecdote to add. When I was a child in the 1950's I had a great aunt and uncle who were then in their 80's. My parents told me that they had a lamp that would help them with all kinds of ailments, and that they swore by it. They apparently got it in the 1920's or 1930's, but that the lamps were recalled (or confiscated) by the American Food and Drug Administration. My aunt and uncle kept it hidden and never turned it in. I never saw it, but was told that it used different colured filter slides that were inserted into the housing so that the light emitted could be changed to different colours for different ailments. During that era the AMA (American Medical Association) held a firm grip on orthodoxy and refused, ridiculed, and covered up most knowledge outside of " scientific drug therapies " by labeling everything " quackery. " I am not surprised if there were indeed some properties of light that were unknown to these medical professionals, who seemed to fear the unknown rather than be attracted to the possibilities that it might yield. But even as Hahnemann found out when he discovered homeopathy 200 years ago, there are no great profits to be made from simple (and highly diluted, in his case) remedies. It is a long and slow path to open the doors to alternate realities, to find that there are other ways to heal the body -- for the body heals itself, when given a chance by removal of unbalancing factors and given a little help by " biological catalysts " , whether they be coloured lamps, homeopathic substances, herbs, crystals, etc. We have to be open-minded and willing to try them. Ray Weisling from Java Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 , Thank you for the long and detailed description of your " discovery " . I have an interesting historical anecdote to add. When I was a child in the 1950's I had a great aunt and uncle who were then in their 80's. My parents told me that they had a lamp that would help them with all kinds of ailments, and that they swore by it. They apparently got it in the 1920's or 1930's, but that the lamps were recalled (or confiscated) by the American Food and Drug Administration. My aunt and uncle kept it hidden and never turned it in. I never saw it, but was told that it used different colured filter slides that were inserted into the housing so that the light emitted could be changed to different colours for different ailments. During that era the AMA (American Medical Association) held a firm grip on orthodoxy and refused, ridiculed, and covered up most knowledge outside of " scientific drug therapies " by labeling everything " quackery. " I am not surprised if there were indeed some properties of light that were unknown to these medical professionals, who seemed to fear the unknown rather than be attracted to the possibilities that it might yield. But even as Hahnemann found out when he discovered homeopathy 200 years ago, there are no great profits to be made from simple (and highly diluted, in his case) remedies. It is a long and slow path to open the doors to alternate realities, to find that there are other ways to heal the body -- for the body heals itself, when given a chance by removal of unbalancing factors and given a little help by " biological catalysts " , whether they be coloured lamps, homeopathic substances, herbs, crystals, etc. We have to be open-minded and willing to try them. Ray Weisling from Java Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 , Thank you for the long and detailed description of your " discovery " . I have an interesting historical anecdote to add. When I was a child in the 1950's I had a great aunt and uncle who were then in their 80's. My parents told me that they had a lamp that would help them with all kinds of ailments, and that they swore by it. They apparently got it in the 1920's or 1930's, but that the lamps were recalled (or confiscated) by the American Food and Drug Administration. My aunt and uncle kept it hidden and never turned it in. I never saw it, but was told that it used different colured filter slides that were inserted into the housing so that the light emitted could be changed to different colours for different ailments. During that era the AMA (American Medical Association) held a firm grip on orthodoxy and refused, ridiculed, and covered up most knowledge outside of " scientific drug therapies " by labeling everything " quackery. " I am not surprised if there were indeed some properties of light that were unknown to these medical professionals, who seemed to fear the unknown rather than be attracted to the possibilities that it might yield. But even as Hahnemann found out when he discovered homeopathy 200 years ago, there are no great profits to be made from simple (and highly diluted, in his case) remedies. It is a long and slow path to open the doors to alternate realities, to find that there are other ways to heal the body -- for the body heals itself, when given a chance by removal of unbalancing factors and given a little help by " biological catalysts " , whether they be coloured lamps, homeopathic substances, herbs, crystals, etc. We have to be open-minded and willing to try them. Ray Weisling from Java Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 Dear , You may find this interesting. In the past, ultraviolet radiation was used as a treatment for skin problems by some dermatologists. When I was little, I had a skin sensitivity to metal objects like, medallions with neck chains. In addition to an ointment, part of my treatment was, you guessed it, exposure to light under an ultraviolet lamp! After one visit, the doctor let me keep the protective goggles I had to wear during treatment. I'm not sure how effective this treatment was, or if it is still used or not. I was treated by an alopath (regular physician) in 1964. More grist for the mill, Joe Weisling wrote: > , > > Thank you for the long and detailed description of your " discovery " . > > I have an interesting historical anecdote to add. > > When I was a child in the 1950's I had a great aunt and uncle who > were then in their 80's. My parents told me that they had a lamp that > would help them with all kinds of ailments, and that they swore by > it. They apparently got it in the 1920's or 1930's, but that the > lamps were recalled (or confiscated) by the American Food and Drug > Administration. My aunt and uncle kept it hidden and never turned it > in. I never saw it, but was told that it used different colured > filter slides that were inserted into the housing so that the light > emitted could be changed to different colours for different ailments. > > During that era the AMA (American Medical Association) held a firm > grip on orthodoxy and refused, ridiculed, and covered up most > knowledge outside of " scientific drug therapies " by labeling > everything " quackery. " I am not surprised if there were indeed some > properties of light that were unknown to these medical professionals, > who seemed to fear the unknown rather than be attracted to the > possibilities that it might yield. But even as Hahnemann found out > when he discovered homeopathy 200 years ago, there are no great > profits to be made from simple (and highly diluted, in his case) > remedies. > > It is a long and slow path to open the doors to alternate realities, > to find that there are other ways to heal the body -- for the body > heals itself, when given a chance by removal of unbalancing factors > and given a little help by " biological catalysts " , whether they be > coloured lamps, homeopathic substances, herbs, crystals, etc. We have > to be open-minded and willing to try them. > > Ray Weisling > from Java > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Please read the list highlights thoroughly before posting to the whole group. See http://rosacea.ii.net/toc.html > > When replying, please delete all text at the end of your email that isn't necessary for your message. > > To leave the list send an email to rosacea-support-unsubscribe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2001 Report Share Posted January 29, 2001 Hello Thanks for your kind words. Sorry I didn't want to bring you near to tears by my story - only joking ! I'm a great believer in that something good can always come out of something bad providing you remain positive about the situation. The last few years have been a struggle but if conventional treatments had worked on me then, I doubt if I would have ever tried the lamp and we would not be in the position we are now. At least having rosacea has enabled me to learn more about the disease and some aspects of dermatology. I now know the names of many complex medical terms plus names of drugs which I wouldn't have ever been able to pronounce let alone spell or understand the meaning of before my introduction to the disease ! Having said this I would still gladly give up all this knowledge and not have rosacea. I think it is important that we don't become carried away by the lamp at the moment just in case the trial results are not conclusive. We will just have to be patient for perhaps a few months. In answer to your questions. From the information I have the lamp is outside the ultraviolet spectrum of light as the blue light is 440 nanometres and the red is 660 nanometres. (I am of course using all red tubes). Because of this there are no side effects although women who are sensitive to sunlight - i.e. polymorphic light eruption are recomended to dicuss the use of the lamp with their doctor before using it. Hope this helps. Regards Re: LAMP > Hi , > I was touched by your story and by the fact that you took the time and > effort to share it with others. Sorry you had such difficulty dealing with > some physicians. That shouldn't be the case at all. Am changing to a new > computer tomorrow and am not sure that I can transfer my Outlook Express > e-mail files successfully to the new computer. So, in case I lose touch with > the group for a while, I am trying hard to send all messages tonight. And I > just want to convey my feelings/response to your message to the group. > For my own interest, do you know if the lamp is an ultraviolet lamp? And, do > you know what spectrum it was? Is the red light by any chance, infra-red > light? Thanks for any info you may have. > > Sy M.D. > Sy Skin Care > http://www.lindasy.com > Voice:Toll-free 877-sy (546-3279) > Outside US: > FAX: > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2001 Report Share Posted January 31, 2001 Re: LAMP > Dear , > > You may find this interesting. In the past, ultraviolet radiation was used as a treatment for skin problems by some > dermatologists. When I was little, I had a skin sensitivity to metal objects like, medallions with neck chains. In > addition to an ointment, part of my treatment was, you guessed it, exposure to light under an ultraviolet lamp! > After one visit, the doctor let me keep the protective goggles I had to wear during treatment. I'm not sure how > effective this treatment was, or if it is still used or not. I was treated by an alopath (regular physician) in > 1964. > > More grist for the mill, > Joe > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2001 Report Share Posted January 31, 2001 Re: LAMP > Dear , > > You may find this interesting. In the past, ultraviolet radiation was used as a treatment for skin problems by some > dermatologists. When I was little, I had a skin sensitivity to metal objects like, medallions with neck chains. In > addition to an ointment, part of my treatment was, you guessed it, exposure to light under an ultraviolet lamp! > After one visit, the doctor let me keep the protective goggles I had to wear during treatment. I'm not sure how > effective this treatment was, or if it is still used or not. I was treated by an alopath (regular physician) in > 1964. > > More grist for the mill, > Joe > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2001 Report Share Posted January 31, 2001 Re: LAMP > Dear , > > You may find this interesting. In the past, ultraviolet radiation was used as a treatment for skin problems by some > dermatologists. When I was little, I had a skin sensitivity to metal objects like, medallions with neck chains. In > addition to an ointment, part of my treatment was, you guessed it, exposure to light under an ultraviolet lamp! > After one visit, the doctor let me keep the protective goggles I had to wear during treatment. I'm not sure how > effective this treatment was, or if it is still used or not. I was treated by an alopath (regular physician) in > 1964. > > More grist for the mill, > Joe > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.