Print PDF
Favorite
Email
Receding hairline? Balding? Frustrated with your head? This might help.
A little back story. I'm 22, and I have been cursed with crummy genes, which equate to me starting to loose my hair. I have never one bought creams, gels, pills, treatments, or anything like that. When I heard about laser hair regrowth, I decided I had to check it out and see what was involved.
So I decided to leave a detailed account of my low budget prototype.
Please note that this is only a prototype, a proof of concept if you will.
Also this should go without saying but... DON'T mess with lasers, lasers will destroy your eyes, I know people who worked with lasers, and did not use proper eye protection and now have irreparable damage. They are dangerous, even laser pointers. Don't build this device, I don't know if it works, it could be harmful for all I know. At the time of writing this instructable, it is untested. Its a bad idea to do any sort of self treatment of any kind without consulting a doctor, a lawyer, and prime time medical drama.
I am not responsible if you choose to build this.
A little back story. I'm 22, and I have been cursed with crummy genes, which equate to me starting to loose my hair. I have never one bought creams, gels, pills, treatments, or anything like that. When I heard about laser hair regrowth, I decided I had to check it out and see what was involved.
So I decided to leave a detailed account of my low budget prototype.
Please note that this is only a prototype, a proof of concept if you will.
Also this should go without saying but... DON'T mess with lasers, lasers will destroy your eyes, I know people who worked with lasers, and did not use proper eye protection and now have irreparable damage. They are dangerous, even laser pointers. Don't build this device, I don't know if it works, it could be harmful for all I know. At the time of writing this instructable, it is untested. Its a bad idea to do any sort of self treatment of any kind without consulting a doctor, a lawyer, and prime time medical drama.
I am not responsible if you choose to build this.
Remove these ads by
Signing UpStep 1Things you'll need
First you'll need some basic electronic and hand tools
Soldering Iron,
Desoldering Iron (ya know you'll mess something up),
Power drill,
Measuring implements,
Pliers,
Dremel,
Tape,
Multimeter,
Glue,
Tape
Some things you'll need
Lasers @ ~660 nm
Batteries,
A big hairbrush
Box of electronic junk (for switches, wires, pots, etc)
Circuity to drive the lasers (option depending on the setup)
A sense of adventure!
Also most of my information came from this article that I found floating around somewhere online.. Laser hair therapy It filled in all the gaps for figuring out what needed to happen.
Soldering Iron,
Desoldering Iron (ya know you'll mess something up),
Power drill,
Measuring implements,
Pliers,
Dremel,
Tape,
Multimeter,
Glue,
Tape
Some things you'll need
Lasers @ ~660 nm
Batteries,
A big hairbrush
Box of electronic junk (for switches, wires, pots, etc)
Circuity to drive the lasers (option depending on the setup)
A sense of adventure!
Also most of my information came from this article that I found floating around somewhere online.. Laser hair therapy It filled in all the gaps for figuring out what needed to happen.
| « Previous Step | Download PDFView All Steps | Next Step » |
There are lots of experiments and trials using low power laser and/or LED irradiation for medical uses. Google is your friend, "low-level laser Therapy" or lllt. Vets have used red and infrared LEDs for animal wounds and joint problems for decades. Animals don't need FDA approval for their LLLT treatment, ;-)
Some studies indicate that lasers are "necessary", others not. Most studies indicate that specific wavelengths are important for treatment, but as goals of treatment vary, different wavelengths are stressed for different purposes. Infrared penetrates more deeply than most other wavelengths, followed by red. "Infrared" actually encompasses a number of wavelengths. Some studies indicate specific wavelengths, but it isn't clear whether those were chosen for any reason other than "these wavelengths are available". In other words, 632.9 nanometers was used because it was what they had in accessible lasers. 630, 660, 670, 740, 810, 940 nm, etc are studied now because those are commonly available LED and solid state laser wavelengths. Some studies try to related the "frequency" of various compounds in the body/skin, claiming that specific wavelengths of light make them resonate. "Red is absorbed in such-and-such proteins (or blood, or water, or whatever)". Following that theory, it might turn out that 663 nm was the "perfect" wavelength and gave better results, etc. -- but they still see some results using other wavelengths.
Some limitations indicated from research, SWAGs, and trials are:
Light intensity -- both a lower limit and an upper limit. Measured in Joules, J/cm2, etc. A lower limit might be considered similar to the "turn-on" voltage for an LED. You might get a dim, dim glow at a lower voltage, but once you reach the working voltage of an LED, it suddenly turn "on", and you get much more radiance for each mW input than below the level. Similarly, there is a plateau effectiveness. Once an LED is turned on, the efficiency drops slightly as additional power is consumed. The upper limit is when instead of getting a positive resonance from the cells that are illuminated, there is an exhaustion or burn out. Not the best way to put things, but it's the best I can do. : Below the radiant flux level, there are little, if any beneficial results. Within a (largish) range of radiance, there are positive effects, with the increased benefits tapering off again to "no benefit" at the higher levels. Above that range, there are indications of cell exhaustion, depletion, over-exictation, heck-I-don't-know-just-plain-now-you've-burned-it-out-ive-ness.
HIGH ENOUGH LEVELS WILL DESTROY CELLS also. Burn out those hair follicals, Ace!
Some studies indicate that monochromatic light yields much better results, while others indicate that polarization is important, and others still indicate coherent light is a factor. My thoughts: If it works, use it. If it turns out that laser diodes give a "good enough" result compared to a clinical/medical chemical/gas laser, then good enough is great. If LEDs yield results and you get those, then great. There are enough studies that point to both of those results, as well as that certain frequencies work better for some goals. It's experimentation, after all.
As always, "do NOT look into laser light with REMAINING EYEBALL". As weak as the cheapy laser diodes are, the actual power/mm2 is high enough to do sustained damage. Again: EVEN CHEAP LASERS CAN HURT YOUR EYES. If you're going to fool around, do some research, take some precautions, and don't shine the suckers into your (or others') eyes.
Common thoughts/findings. Red/Infrared increase the ATP/ mitochondrial efficiency in cells. I don't know what the hell that means, but that's what they say. Wavelengths also affect collagen production and indicates skin repair is possible, etc. It's all there, in fine print, on the web. Oh, some wavelengths may spur nerve repair/growth. There is some research in Europe using LED/Laser radiation to remediate nerve damage/lesions in MS patients. Other studies are looking at effects on parkinsons patients.
A whole 'nother set of studies look at red and blue-ish LEDs to treat skin disorders.
And as a final just-for-fun, the original "lasers make hair grow" idea came from experiments in the 60s (I think) trying to prove the dangerous nature of lasers. The main experiment involved shaving the backs of frat boys (to keep the hair from blocking the laser) and lasering one side of the back, to see if it killed the hair. Instead, the hair grew back faster on the lasered side. Back to the ATP/increased metabolism thing. The current thoughts are that the laser stimulation increases blood flow to hair follicles, energizes dormant follicles, and/or stimulates more follicles to grow. Oh, and substitute "rat" in place of "frat boy" above.
BTW----> Subfightr This treatment does in fact work. I have been using my own cheap version for about 3 months. The proper dosage is about 20-30 minutes per section of covered scalp at these power levels. If done properly you will see results in a months time.
First few weeks - No signs of working will appear this early
After 1 month - You will begin to notice that your thin hair is falling out at a much faster rate.
Month 2 - You will see some of your thin hair start to regrow. However. It will grow back noticeably thicker and darker. Each hair will be almost 2x as thick as the hair that fell out at the end of month 1.
Month 3 - You will start to see much more hair growing in and so on.
I still have thin hair up top. However I can see where it is working. In fact I have hair growing where it was completely bald! I just need some help with wiring these damn diodes. There driving me nuts!
Most people stop using the lasers after the very first stage. When there thin hair starts to fall out when that is the stage that shows the treatments are working. Results vary from person to person. There are only with a few types of baldness where this treatment will be no help.
Thanks Gamer6460! Good luck and don't give up to soon! You got to stick to the program!
Google Bio-stimulation to find out more.
I've looked at this link http://www.newhair.com/treatment/other-laser-therapy.asp you posted and I'm sceptical at best. The language suggests bullshit all over the place (sorry if I'm being too sceptical here), "it is believed", "studies suggest", "theoretically", "may", "possibly". These are not the words of FACT.
I'm totally not getting at you here, just this article gets me frustrated. Pseudo science galore!
This sentence, if you can call it that, makes some of the least sense of all:
"Of the lasers in the visible region 670nm laser is considered to provide superior absorption (penetration)." Compared with what? No explanation in the proceeding or following sentences give any impression of what it is compared with.
AAAAAAAaahhhhhhhhhhh as I read this article I'm just getting so frustrated. They've even misspelled fluences at one point, but then spelt it right in the next sentence.
I searched some of the terms I didn't fully understand (biology stuff isn't my strongest point) and this culprit kept turning up
http://www.drkaslow.com/html/low_level_lasers__lllt_.html
equally baseless junk. There's no references in this "science".
Seriously I'm not having a go at the instructable. I'm totally impressed with the fabrication (except for soldering to batteries direct, which I'd never reccomend) but the science behind it looks a complete sham.
The effect may even be present for all I know, stimulated cells - light encouraging such a thing, all sounds relatively plausible, but I've yet to see how, why, etc.
Good luck with the hair growth whatever your method and great that people are willing to try these unconventional methods.