On today’s episode we dig in a bit deeper on the research behind Erchonia lasers with Steven Shanks and Travis Sammons. We discuss why research matters and what clinicians should look for when considering adding any type of medical device into their clinic. To learn more about Erchonia’s reserach you can go to: https://www.erchonia.com/research-articles/
Dr. Chad Woolner: All right, everybody. Welcome to episode two of the laser light show on today’s episode, we have with us Steven Shanks and Travis Sammons from Erchonia, and we’re going to be talking today about why research matters. So let’s get to it.
Growing up in Portland, Oregon, I used to love going to laser light shows at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry. They would put on these amazing light shows with incredible designs synced up to some of my favorite music. From the Beatles to Pink Floyd to Jimmy Hendrix and Metallica; they were awesome. Little did I know then that lasers would have such a profound effect on my life decades later. As a chiropractic physician, I have seen first-hand just how powerful laser therapy is in helping patients struggling with a wide range of health problems. As the leader in laser therapy, Erchonia has pioneered the field in obtaining 20 of the 23 total FDA clearances for therapeutic application of lasers. On this podcast, we’ll explore the science and technology and physiology behind what makes these tools so powerful. Join me as we explore low-level laser therapy. I’m Dr. Chad Woolner along with my good friend Dr. Andrew Wells and welcome to The Laser Light Show.
All right, welcome to the show Steven and Travis, excited to have you guys both here with us. So, Travis, tell us a little bit about your, your role at Erchonia? What do you do at Erchonia?
Steven Shanks: Sure. So, I work as the Clinical Affairs Manager, really side by side with the President Steve Shanks heading the research Erchonia. So it’s kind of really every project we have is a three to five year process. We start by choosing the conditions that we want to study. We developed the protocol we submitted to FDA, just so they can review it, make sure we have all the assessments, although outliners lined up properly. Then from there, we set up the clinical study, and we find the correct physicians. We get the data back, typically after another two years. And then we submit it to the FDA. So that’s another year’s process in itself.
Dr. Chad Woolner: And how long have you been with the company? Travis?
Travis Sammons: Just about 15 years,
Dr. Chad Woolner: Just about 15 years? Yeah. flies by?
Travis Sammons: You know what’s interesting about Erchonia like, I’ve had a chance to talk to quite a few of the people that have founded and worked at Erchonia and it seems like everybody there has been there for 15 years to like 35 years, but it’s it’s a I know that it’s a family company, which is very reassuring to me as a doctor, but that says a lot about your company and the fact that people seem to be everyone who works there seems to be a lifer. So you guys must be doing something good for your employees and people that work there.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Not only very fortunate, I was gonna say to not only that, but the doctors who use Erchonia. You know, once they start using Erchonia you know, lasers, they, they’re, they’re in for life as well. That’s what I noticed as well. So I wanted to kick this episode off where we’re talking about research and I wanted to start with a story here. I remember. So I live in Asheville, North Carolina and downtown Asheville is very much known for being a hippie commune. So if you’re a retired deadhead, if you’re a hippie, if you’re into natural health care, somehow you’ve been through or live in Asheville. And there’s this one particular grocery store that’s in the heart of this center. And, it’s called Earth fair if you’ve ever been to Ashley Earth fair. And this is like, where all the people who are in international health care congregate, it’s where they buy their groceries, it’s where they hang out in the cafe. And our office was right next to this grocery store. So I spent a lot of time there. And this one guy knew that I was a chiropractor. And one day he was working at the food bar there and one day he came up to me, he goes, and I’m not exaggerating. He’s like, Hey, man, you’re the chiropractor, right? And like, yeah, chiropractor. He goes, he goes, let me tell you the future of healthcare, man. It’s sound waves man. It’s sound waves. And like, what do you like? What are you talking about? It’s like tuning forks, bro. Tuning forks. I’m like, I have no idea what you’re talking about. Like, I kind of like oh, that sounds really interesting. Like that’s really cool. You seem to be into that. He’s like, Yeah, man, check it out. And, and the interesting thing was there is actually a lot of cool stuff coming out with Soundwave and vibrational therapy, but the way that he presented it to me was like, just totally like it was him being him but it didn’t lend itself very much credence and credibility. And so I got my food and laughed and didn’t give it much thought but I remember that guy, he was passionate about it. But the thing that strikes me a lot about you when you get into bioenergetics in the field of healing through energy and light and sound and vibration through lasers. Sometimes it can come across to healthcare professionals and to the public as something that is not real, as hokey and isn’t real. And I hope that I don’t mean this in a bad way. But sometimes even as a chiropractor I, you know, we hear like, Hey, that’s not, it’s not based in science. So there’s no evidence to prove that a chiropractic works. But the thing that really struck me about Erchonia is that they backup their claims with evidence and research. And that is no small feat. We had a little side conversation before we started recording this episode on how difficult it can be to get FDA clearances, and to actually study the things that you’re doing for particular therapies. And that’s what this episode is all about. And so if you’re curious about this, this is not like, you know, sometimes we talk about research, sometimes it tends to be, there can be a very dry subject, but it’s not. And I really want to do this episode, because for doctors who are considering using your cornea or lose using your cornea, or maybe if you’re a patient, listen to this podcast, we want you to know that our Erchonia has done the work, the really, really difficult work, the time consuming work, the expensive work, to bring this technology to the forefront. And we really feel that this is the future of healthcare. And that’s what we’re gonna talk about today. So that’s why we’re so excited to have Steve and Travis on here today to talk about how they pioneered this research in low level laser therapy. So I thought I’d kick it off with that story. And hopefully at the end of this episode, you’ll see that this is not something that is, you know, this is something that’s been proven in research. And so yeah, let’s let’s start there. So we share this little you guys share the story on the last episode, the first episode about getting your first FDA letter so maybe we can maybe start there and kind of go through the evolution of the research.
Travis Sammons: Yeah, just one comment when you were talking about medical devices. Obviously, we had a lot of meetings. 90% of all medical devices have no research of the other 10% of it. Most of it’s not blinded to control. So medical device manufacturers file substantial equivalences of other devices. I’ll give you a perfect example. You guys are chiropractors, you’re probably familiar with class four lasers. Sure. Okay, so class four lasers started out as the heating pad in 1976. So they were FDA cleared, because heat was therapeutic back then. Then diathermy, follow the follow substantial clip off of eating pets. About 2004 2005. The FDA came in and said, I’m sorry, the manufacturers came and said, Look, we can heat the skin and do the same thing dial thermal heating pads they’re doing with no research, as long as they raised the temperature, what was the 40 to 4535
Steven Shanks: to 40 degrees Celsius 30.
Travis Sammons Yeah, so they could get 510 K. So if you look at the class for lasers, there’s no research behind them. There’s no blade controlled clinical trials, and the mechanism of action is heat. But when you look at the research that comes off low level lasers, so anyway, I just had to throw that in here, because that’s why a lot of these medical devices like 10s units, ultrasounds, they were all round before 1976. So you have to be grandfathered in, never proven to work. Unfortunately, when we started doing low level lasers, there was no category for low level lasers. So the category for low level lasers now is n h n. And to this day, if you want to get into that category, you have to do blind controlled clinical trials. Why is there that’s why there’s not a lot of low level lasers FDA cleared.
Dr. Chad Woolner: So what’s that category? And H N does that. What’s that stand for?
Travis Sammons: NHSN: not heating heat lamp. So when we got the indication from the FDA, we sat down with Richard Feld, who proved all devices at that time. And he said, Look, we don’t have a category for light for devices, low level lasers or biostimulation lasers. So we’re going to create this category called nh n, which means not heating a heat lamp, which is the dumbest thing ever. It doesn’t even make sense. You can imagine how bad we got beat up when we first introduced the product categories. But that’s the FDA. Yeah, right. The FDA doesn’t have to make sense.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, you’re working with the government, say no more. It’s okay. We understand.
Steven Shanks: At that point, we were so happy. I don’t care what you call it.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Right. Right. Yeah. So you have I imagine you have to be a little bit wild and crazy. To take on a to take on the research and to prove what you’re doing through the FDA like that. The thought of that, like the thought of me actually like, man, what if we were to try to take a product to market? That sounds like? That sounds dumb almost. I don’t mean that like, I don’t mean that in a negative way. Like, kudos to you guys for having the drive.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, after after our lesson this after our last episode, Andrew and I were talking just as a sidebar and I was saying if that were me, and I was doing something, and the FDA sent a letter saying, hey, you need to like cease and desist or do research to prove this or whatever, I’d be like, Okay, guys, it was fun while it lasted, but we’re done now, like that would be able to fold it. And so that’s it that says a lot in terms of, of your guyses mission, your resilience, your desire, and drive to really, to really do things right. This, it’s that incredible, really is.
Steven Shanks: Well, the funny part about that is at that time, I had a full time job when I got the letter. And if it wasn’t for Deborah, I’ve got my family secretary, who, of course, is the government, we would have never figured out how to get to the regulatory pathway. Oh, really? So if you know, when my dad, you know, asked my dad, you know, Dad, where should I go with this? He goes, Steve, he goes, you’re not hurting anybody? He goes, do what you got to do. That’s kind of how we
Dr. Andrew Wells: Wow, that’s amazing. What? So tell us what, tell us what it looks like to get FDA clearance for, for a particular therapy? Or what does that process look like in terms of effort, time costs, what kind of hoops do you have to jump through to do this?
Steven Shanks: To me, it looks like a bottle of champagne. But originally, the process was not as complex as it is now, our first FDA submission was, I don’t know, maybe five 600 pages. Now it’s 10 1000s. of pages, regulatory gets worse and worse and worse, takes longer and longer and longer. But I’ll let Travis kind of walk you through the process we currently have.
Travis Sammons: Yeah, yeah. And to start with, there’s really two different pathways to get FDA cleared. Go over the simplest form first, it’s, as Steve mentioned, filing suspension equivalent. So any device, if you go to fda.gov, you can find a device that’s cleared. And if you file a substantial equivalent, just saying your device has similar outputs, you can basically get through without submitting any clinical data at all, the difference between that. And then the other pathway that Erchonia takes is new indications for use, that’s where it gets tough. You have to prove it through double blind placebo controlled study. Plus you have the scrutiny of the FDA, they’re gonna review every single document, because you’re now asking for an indication that’s unproven. And that pathway takes, again, it takes two to five years. Wow.
Dr. Andrew Wells: What is? So what is it? Let’s actually start off with maybe some of the initial clearances that you guys have for things like neck and back pain, and maybe take us through the evolution of the different clearances?
Steven Shanks: And correct you have now how many different clearances do you have in level, like therapy, we’ve got 20 different 510 cases. And as we upgrade devices, we can file substantial equivalence. So every, you know, if we’re going to upgrade a device, we’ll file some potential closure ourselves. So probably 40 to 5510 cases, but 20 original ones.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Can you explain what a 510 K is?
Steven Shanks: Yes, so I suggest every doctor that’s going to buy a medical device, asking for their 510 K 510 K is a marketing statement from the FDA, that that’s a license that allows you to make that medical claim. So for instance, in 2002, all we had was chronic neck and shoulder pain. We couldn’t advertise anything else. So, you know, as we go on, now, we have an overall indication for chronic neuromuscular pain, we have another indication for overall post surgical pain, those things have taken us 15 years to develop.
Travis Sammons: 510 K is the same terminology as FDA market clearance. And just I was surprised, you know, the more seminars and more I deal with society a lot of them are unsure the difference between FDA approval and FDA clearance, they almost looked down at FDA clearance, but kind of set this the facts straight as straight FDA approval is strictly for drugs or high risk devices. FDA clearance applies to low risk or non significant risk devices which are Erchonia.
Steven Shanks: Okay, so yeah, I think most people don’t know if you want to bring a pharmaceutical to market. You’re looking at what is statistically significant. So if I treat 1000s and 1000s of patients, and I’m five to 10% Better than placebo which most drugs are, they have to weigh that against side effects. With us, ours are not only statistically significant, they’re clinically meaningful. So for instance, if you’re in a low back pain study, to be in a clinical trial, you have to have a minimum of 50% pain reduction. And on a scale of one to 100, you have to be 50 or above. Plus, we do disability studies with low back pain. So that’s a secondary measure. If your pain comes down, and your disability goes up, that’s not a successful patient. So most doctors don’t look at the research. When you look at the research where our pain comes down, and our disabilities go up. That’s exactly what should happen. So we have a harder process, in my opinion, than drugs, because we’re statistically significant, or clinically meaningful.
Dr. Chad Woolner:
Yeah, the bar says a little bit higher.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yes, so you’re increasing the effectiveness, but you’re decreasing the risk for the patient. Absolutely. And you mentioned when you’re asking others, like, if a doctor is looking at buying a piece of medical equipment asking about the 510 K, why is that? Why is it important for the doctor? What? Why should the doctor be concerned with that?
Steven Shanks: If somebody’s marketing a device without a 510? K, it’s illegal. Why is that bad? Say the FDA comes in and confiscates the manufacturer and tells them to recall all their devices. Well, the doctor just bought the device now it’s getting picked up.
Dr. Andrew Wells: While so not only could they lose their investment on the machine, but they’re also liable for marketing claims. Is that what you’re saying?
Steven Shanks: They can be liable for marketing claims. So say they treat a patient. And this happens in a doctor’s office, I treat a patient, the patient claims, it happened from the device, we’ve gone through this. You know, they’ll say what happened to the device? Well, if you don’t have a 510 K, and you’re selling advice illegally, and you go to court, that manufacturer could stand behind you. Some things that doctors don’t think about yet?
Dr. Chad Woolner: Well, I was just gonna say, I would have to imagine that a significant I don’t know what number it is, maybe you’ll know the numbers better. But a significant number of Doc’s are doing this unknowingly, probably myself included, you just you have to be you know, if you’re using stuff in your clinic beyond adjusting, you know?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, I, I would say 99% of Don’t, don’t ask to, you know, the salesperson. They don’t do their own research in their investments, you know, some of these classes for lasers that are substantial to, you know, a $300 heating pad. They haven’t done any research and you know, those things are 50 $60,000 for a glorified heat lamp.
Dr. Chad Woolner:Yeah, that’s crazy.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Maybe, and maybe this will be helpful for docs when looking at the research what, what, and, Travis Forgive me if I mess this up, but what clearances or approvals do you have for what are the different therapies that are approved for Erchonia lasers.
Travis Sammons: For pain indications, we have neck and shoulder pain, low back pain, plantar fasciitis, overall overall muscle skeletal pain, and overall postoperative pain. So really, between the overall muscle skeletal and overall postoperative pain, we really encompass most conditions, you know, 85 to 90% conditions out there. Besides neuropathic pain and pain, and interesting enough, we actually have a double blind placebo controlled study currently ongoing for that right now. Outside of paint, we have that last indication, even for obesity. We have indications for nail fungus, acne.
Steven Shanks: I think it’s pretty much it. That makes pretty much all of our 25 10k clearances.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Very cool. And are you able to tell us what clearances are in the works? So what could we maybe be expecting over the next two to five years?
Travis Sammons: Yeah, absolutely. So currently, we have level one studies on neuropathy, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, tendonitis, autism.
Steven Shanks: We’re doing one toenail fungus, we’re mimicking a drug clinical trial trying to show that we’re better than uvula.
Travis Sammons: Yeah. Those are probably in the next forecasts in the next two years or so. Outside of that we have pilot studies, so it’s more preliminary stages for reptile dysfunction, macular degeneration, spinal cord injuries.
Dr. Andrew Wells; Wow.So you’re getting into like, go ahead.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Oh, no, I was just gonna say any studies on brain brain related stuff, Alzheimer’s, MS, things like that.
Steven Shanks: So yes, we’ve done that. pilot studies on Alzheimer’s and autism, we’ve obviously got a blind controlled clinical trial on autism, the FDA decided not to accept that study. So we’re starting another one. What we saw in the first clinical trial, it was amazing. But like, for instance, low back study, we had to do chronic neck and shoulder pain. Just because you submit to the FDA doesn’t mean you’re gonna get that 510 k, right. So a lot of our studies unfortunately have to reap, redo them. And at that point, we make a decision, do we want to go through the process again, spend all the money, but we believe in it, so why wouldn’t we do it?
Dr. Chad Woolner: Right? My question is, when they don’t accept a particular study or whatnot? What are some of the reasons? I mean, are they just random, stupid reasons? Or are they glaring? Like issues there that are like, Okay, that’s fair, or is it just kind of like, super random?
Steven Shanks: Well, what for autism study, we did research in Cuba because it was cheaper. The FDA tried to go audit the site Cuba, the government would let them in.
Dr. Chad Woolner: That’s a problem.
Steven Shanks: So for the neck and shoulder one, I think, because they didn’t prove they had any devices approved. This goes back to 2002. That they just wanted us to do another one. And it’s kind of funny that the results are almost exactly the same. That’s cool. So it’s for the low back. We did a blind controlled clinical trial, they audited one of the sites. They asked the doctor, did you know the difference between rolling the placebo? The doctor said yes. Well, the doctor at the end of the patient, after they treat the patient in their study, they have to ask the patient, did you get the relative? Did you get a placebo? Well, the doctor is looking at the data. If he’s got a 60% pain reduction, you’re gonna say, okay, he’s got drill. If he’s got a placebo, you’re gonna say it’s a placebo. He forgot to tell him that. So the FDA, you know, maybe it’s to do another back study. And that study, we had to send every piece of paper from every clinical trial site. So they went through it with a fine tooth comb, but we still got the education.
Dr. Andrew Wells: That’s cool. Yeah, I would tell me, the thing that fascinates me about what you’re doing is, I’m really curious to know what the what the potential mechanism of action is, or what the research is with things related to brain health, whether it’s autism, brain health, spinal cord injuries, how is this actually working?
Steven Shanks: I might let Travis get that. Talk to you about that. But one of the things that back when we were on our first episode, back in 99, we were too dumb to know how far these things penetrated. So we didn’t have a, we didn’t have a closed door. So all the research said you need infrared lasers to penetrate deeper, which is ridiculous, that’ll create photochemical effects. We knew back then, back in those liposuction studies, we could emulsify fat, you know, five, six centimeters in the body. We also published a study on 589 consecutive patients showing systemic effects. So these things penetrate throughout the whole body, but I’ll talk more about the mechanisms.
Travis Sammons: Yeah, so with brain health, obviously, it’s gonna depend on the condition quite a bit. One thing we do know, the simplest form of mechanism with visible lasers, mitochondrial health. So if you look at dementia, their mitochondria is slowly dying off. So if we can help regenerate mitochondria, or nerve axons. So Steve, I know you are part of the one study we did in Cuba with cue EEG testing. Yep. So it was really neat to study and perform a functional MRI before and after, you can see that whole connectivity in the brain just lights up.
Steven Shanks: Yeah, so we do a lot of mechanism studies like interleukin 10, which is the immune system, apoptosis, necrosis, TNF alpha. So one of the things when approved is a brain function, how we’re affecting the brain. So we would laser patient, and it looked at cue EEG to see what areas of the brain would light up. It’s a published study, you can, we can send you a copy of it. But we wanted to prove to ourselves that we can affect deep areas of the brain. So then we went back, and just laid out the vagus nerve, and found out well, we can also light up the brain. And with each different wavelength, you get a different photochemical effect, which is kind of some of the new science we’re adding in our clinical trials.
Dr. Chad Woolner: So do you have a fairly firm grasp on what wavelengths do what in terms of the brain like this wavelength does? Does this type of thing or this wavelength do? Do you have or is it still you’re still kind of investigating that?
Steven Shanks: We do and I’m like, what we’ll do is we’ll do a pilot study, we have a new device coming out, hopefully, to the, towards the end of the year using a green and a violet laser. A lot of the system that basic research Travis will start doing with some of the doctors would do a small pilot study. And we’ll Travis Sammons: We did a study at the University of Illinois, we looked at three to three wavelengths of mitochondria function, red was the best at mitochondrial function, you know, look at some other wavelengths, Violet was great at reducing apoptosis.
Steven Shanks: Green Green, helped stem cells differentiate. So as we collect this data, we’ll go out to do a pilot study before we ever get to a clinical trial, because by the time we’re in a clinical trial, we have a pretty good idea of what we’re getting.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Sure. That’s cool.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, that’s exciting. Yeah, I mean, I would imagine like, this is really like, where you guys are at now as a company is really at a pretty fun stage with, you know, having a really firm understanding of a lot of the potential applications. And so now I would imagine, each day you guys get up, you get to like, look in front of you at all these cool things that are happening. It’s how’s that feel?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, it feels pretty good. But it’s, you have to be patient.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Takes a long time. Still a lot of work. Yeah. A lot of patients have no doubt.
Steven Shanks: Yeah. And I’m not the most patient guy.
Dr. Chad Woolner: I can appreciate that. No, I totally can especially. Especially, my guess is you can see, based on your, your past, you can see a lot into the future, wanting, you know, then and you’ve probably got, again, working with the FDA is not the easiest partner in terms of that. Quite a bit of a series of hurdles to get to where you can already see things are going, you know, does that make sense?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, it does. I’d say we got enough research on our hands right now. stuff we have to get started. That’ll take us well, in the next 1015 years when I’ve gone traveling, so I have plenty to do.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah. Well, that’s exciting.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah, I’m thinking like this. So if you were to rewind, if someone like from the chiropractic profession back in the day if BJ Palmer had his hands on intercolonial laser like what he would be doing with with that, I always wondered if some of like the old school philosophical guys, you know, your DVDs and BB DD and BJ Palmer’s would have their hands on this affecting brain health and affecting energy affecting ATP production, decreasing apoptosis, what they would be doing with these things. Have you ever had those conversations like fireside conversations after hours that are Erchonia?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, I’m sure you guys know Dan Murphy. Yeah. Yeah, Dad’s just a he’s a wealth of information. So I think they would grasp the technology and make it better. Fortunately, for Unfortunately for us, because those guys could talk about what they want were regulated by the FDA.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Right? Yeah.
Dr. Andrew Wells: That reminds me of when we talked about this in the first episode about John dinov, Freo, I think he was probably at liberty to say some things that maybe you guys couldn’t, because of the company, but he was talking about abuses, making some really interesting claims. And maybe you can answer this question, the big question I have for him was, he was talking about using lasers on the brain. And that’s the first time I’d ever heard that. And my first thought was, Is that safe? So using a laser on the spinal cord, or brain or nerve tissue is that safe?
Steven Shanks: There, if you’re using visible light, especially with the wavelengths that we’re using, there’s no known side effects, we’ve been treating the areas of the brain for like chronic neck and shoulder pain, our first clinical trial back in 1998 2000, we treat same side cerebellum, opposite side cortex, the thought being, same side cerebellum is going to run your, your your body function, but the higher levels of the brain. So the pain is going to be potentiated by the brain, and it’s going to reach the brain. So if we could slow the brain down, and go to say, like the nerve root, and then treat the inflammation, we could knock out pain. So we’ve been treating the brain since, you know, 2000, we have no side effects. And if you went to clinical trials.gov, I doubt you’d find any side effects with low level lasers. We have a document from the FDA that says they consider all our clinical trials non significant risk.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Well, is that the lowest level of risk that they issue? It?
Steven Shanks: Yes, yep.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Wow. Okay, that’s interesting. That makes sense, too, because we’re dealing in light, right? We’re dealing with some very elemental things. We were talking before about light, sound vibration, like this is very foundational stuff. And so I’m guessing that’s where the safety comes in. Because we’re not introducing foreign men. Obviously your devices are man made but the light is not man made right.
Steven Shanks: It was the lightest Demand made because it’s a diode. But it’s a process. The other interesting thing about these things is when you know I mentioned that research in the first episode about the research we did with Dr. Neeraj. And we, he was doing a surgical procedure. And we were in a process trying to get the most of the fat as fast as possible. So we would send up different wavelengths. And then we would send them higher powers, because we thought, well, if we increase the power, it should work better. What we found out is that as we increase the power, results decrease. So now you got these guys treating people’s heads with 1020 30 Watt lasers. That’s absolutely insane. You know, I still went back to Arn Schultz last week. It’s like biological activity. And that’s, you know, one of the reasons why I think we have no side effects because we’re on a lower spectrum. And with our lasers, we divide the line over an area to decrease the power on one one spot.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah, that’s something we’re actually going to talk about. We’re gonna say we’re going to talk about this, this actual concept in the whole episode number six. And actually, that’s where Dr. Dan Murphy is going to be talking about the difference between power versus penetration wavelength. And I think that’s important to know, because I think a lot of people think well, more power means deeper penetration means better outcome. But that’s not what you’re saying is that’s not necessarily the case. It’s the wavelength that matters. Not so much the not so much the power, is that correct?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, Travis talked about the Eevee in the light. And what creates photochemistry? What doesn’t? Go ahead?
Travis Sammons: Yeah, so there’s a pretty big misconception out there. If you just look at scientific journals, it’s not backed by any research, it’s more of a marketing ploy. That you need longer wavelengths, so infrared to penetrate deeper, shorter wavelengths. Take your violet, your green, they’re more for skin conditions, your acne psoriasis things of that sort. But Steve and I are coming to find out though, and it’s based on the simple physics of laser or light, every wavelength is determined by the electron volt Evie. So you can take a 635 nine or red laser, and cranked up power up all day output the milliwatts, but it does not change the actual Photon energy, which is electron volt, the more electron volts, the lower the wavelength, the more systemic effect you’re going to have. Because what one cell doesn’t use, it has that cascade effect cascade effect where it continues to pass the energy down the electron transfer. So what we’re seeing is stuck these kind of take it full circle here is what a lot of people deemed in green and violet, just for skin conditions we’re finding are actually have a deeper, not depth of penetration, I try to stay away from that word, but systemic effect. So for example, we use red lasers for non-invasive fat loss. We did a study on obesity, so we were treating the subcutaneous fat.
Steven Shanks: And we showed that green lasers actually worked better for that, we actually have a pad to prove this theory. So when we had our first Zerona laser like yours, your clients might know about it, we used the red laser. There’s 23% more energy in a green laser than a red laser. So what we did is we went back and were blinded to control clinical trials, and did the exact same pop patient population. And you took 25% of time off to Verona. So what we found out is that not only can we take time off the procedure, but we also got a better result. So the way we see it, the shorter wavelengths are better. So we were issued a process patent on that theory, I think it was probably back in 2010 2011.
Dr. Chad Woolner: That’s powerful.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah, that’s it’s no, just not powerful. It’s the frequency. That’s right. Yeah. Yeah, I you know, I think that’s and this is why we’re having this discussion, because a lot of what doctors do here in terms of this technology is a lot of marketing. And we’re facing you know, the the content that companies are putting out oftentimes is their, their their customer content is marketing. And if you dig down a little bit past that, I think it’s important to understand if there’s any research to back up their marketing claims. And we talked about this in this episode. There are a lot of reasons to do that. Number one, to protect your business. So if somebody ever says hey, this device hurt me, you need to be able to back up the claims that you made from a marketing standpoint and from a clinical standpoint, but also from an efficacy standpoint if every doctor wants to get good results with their patients. And I think it’s important to rely on the research and with the information, the data shows evidence versus just taking your sales reps word for it. And I’ve seen this time and time again, in practice, we’re pitched on all kinds of different devices and technologies and therapies and marketing. And oftentimes, it’s the salesperson leading with this information and giving you information that you want to hear, so that you’ll buy their device. And that’s the, I think the very unique thing about Erchonia is very quickly and very upfront, you’re getting clinical information, you’re getting research, you’re getting information that you should be, this is the stuff that should be driving our decisions in terms of what we add to our clinic. And that’s such a refreshing thing to hear from her Erchonia. And I think we ought to take this approach to all of the different products and services and therapies that we apply to our clinics. So yeah, it’s refreshing and chiropractic. And I think, you know, chiropractors tend to be the Mavericks in health care. And we were talking offline about this. And you know, chiropractors being the leading, paving the way in terms of nutrition, you know, what you eat has an impact on your health, what supplements you take, have an impact on your health, the medical community is has finally caught up to that. And I think with you know, that’s why we’re doing this, this podcast is because we want to get this clinical information, mixed with marketing information, to have the biggest impact on your patient population and on your business. And so this is really refreshing, guys. I love this.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, my unique perspective is I’ve been a marketer for years. And I don’t know if all other marketers are the same way I would have to assume so. But we tend to be a little bit jaded when it comes to research and evidence, because we’ve just exactly what Andrew said, there. We’ve heard it all before, you know. And so it is, I would say the same thing echo exactly what Andrew said is I find it very refreshing that Erchonia, very much. And I don’t know if you guys would agree with me when I say this, So correct me if I’m wrong here. But it appears to me that Erchonia is an education and research company, the first laser company. Second, was that fair to say?
Steven Shanks: Yeah, I would say that, I would say what you guys are called Marketing. Most of it, I would call you legal marketing.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Right. Right. done correctly. Yeah. And, and that’s, that’s powerful, too for dogs to hear this, you know, the whole episode title here, what we’re trying to focus this around is why research matters is I don’t know if I’ve ever been in a situation where you feel 100% safe making the claims that you make knowing that what you do you know what I mean? I think most chiropractors feel fairly comfortable with some of the basic claims that are made with chiropractic and chiropractic adjustments. There’s really great research out there supporting it for a lot of the common musculoskeletal things. And then there’s other research that’s out there too, backing up a lot of other stuff, but just hearing the depth of research that’s gone into Erchonia. And the various applications that you’re talking about there should give Doc’s a tremendous amount of comfort, knowing that when you’re marketing it for these various conditions that they have been approved for, you have some solid ground there beneath you to back up these claims. So that’s awesome. Super cool.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah. And marketing, like any marketer will tell you that having good research and evidence is a powerful marketing tool in and of itself. And so that’s the, you know, it makes it makes me so if you’re a doctor who’s heavy in marketing, which we are, it should give you comfort, knowing that the things that you’re promoting, I actually have, you know, science to back it up and like, like Steve said, it’s legal to say these things.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah. So awesome.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Is there anything? Oh, go ahead.
Dr. Chad Woolner: No, that’s, I think you’re going where I’m going? Yeah.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah, I was just gonna say, Steve and Travis, is there anything on the research side, as we’re kind of closing up this episode that you want doctors to know, that we haven’t discussed already?
Steven Shanks: Nothing that I can think of? I mean, we could go on all day.
Travis Sammons: But yeah, I mean, I think just to wrap it all up, maybe, as Steve mentioned, if you’re investing, you’re obviously investing your hard earned money, but you’re also investing reputations online as a chiropractor? Office? Yes. Obviously. As for the 510 K cares asked for the research as well. What level of research? Is it just a case study? Or is it a level one double blind, placebo controlled study? The other thing I’ve seen quite often just gotten a glance at other competitors’ websites is so used research. This has nothing to do with their device, their device and emits 60 watts of power. But the research on the websites has 15 milliwatts, so it’s 1000 times less powerful. So I would just, again, take the extra time before you invest and make sure to look everything over clearly.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, so I would ask one last question, too, right. I think already you guys have given a tremendous About a food for thought for dogs in terms of considering the research, any other resources that you would point them to honor Erchonia site or wherever else in terms of like, exactly what you’re saying, like so let’s say I’m a doc who’s like, I’m going to entertain the idea of maybe implementing a laser device in my clinic, where would you recommend they go to start maybe doing some of their own research? And or is there like a handy place where it’s like, these are the things that you need to this is the checklist or the, you know, the kind of, you know, these are, these are the things that the baseline standards that any company or device should meet? Where would you point docs for that type of information?
Steven Shanks: If you go to pubmed.gov, and you put in a low level laser, there’s gonna be over 10,000 publications. If you’re looking at class for laser, you might find 10, and none of the studies are good. So you can go to clinical trials.gov Type in the name of the device, if they’re doing any research, the device will pop up, they also have to put what research results were.
Dr. Chad Woolner: So it’s their failure to see.
Steven Shanks: It is. Yeah. And if we find out a lot of times, if a guy goes on, you know, say you spent 20 $30,000 on a laser, and he finds out this thinking works and like he said it was gonna he’s already made the investment. Right. So every patient is getting that laser. You know, we see some of these guys have Chinese high power lasers on people’s brains. It’s just insane.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Yeah, yeah, so that’s good, good information to have good food for thought this is a good process for Doc’s in terms of if they’re interested in these things.
Dr. Andrew Wells: Yeah, and check out their Erchonia website. If so if you want to learn more about the research, if you want to see what research they’ve done, the clinical trials that they’re doing and working on if you go to the ER corneas website, so ERCHONIA a.com they have a Resources tab, and you can look at all the research there that we’re talking about, as it pertains to, or Coneys lasers.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Awesome. Well, Steven and Travis, thank you guys seriously, so much for your time. We appreciate you guys being here. I think this has been really, for me personally, informative. I’ve learned a lot of new stuff, I kind of get the feeling as this goes on. I’m gonna be learning a lot more selfishly. This has been great for me personally. But I think this is gonna help a lot of Doc’s and ultimately, again, I think this is going to help us help a lot more people out there in the world. So thank you guys for being here on the show with us today.
Steven Shanks & Travis Sammons: Our pleasure. Thanks for having us. Awesome.
Dr. Chad Woolner: Okay, docs. Well, this wraps up episode two. We will chat with you guys on the next episode. Have a good one.
Thanks for listening to the laser light show, be sure to subscribe and give us a review. If you’re interested in learning more about our Erchonia lasers, just head on over to Erchonia.com. There you’ll find a ton of useful resources including research news and links to upcoming live events, as well as the Erchonia community where you can access for free additional resources including advanced training and business tools. Again, thanks for listening and we will catch you on the next episode.