Health Boards
Thu-15-07-2021, 11:22 AM
(This post was last modified: Thu-15-07-2021, 11:23 AM by Caroline. Edited 1 time in total.)
In the Netherlands they have researched the possibility of a low dose, long term, regular (every day) treatment.
Results appear to be very good, but take a long time.
Advantage:
- low dose, so never burning of the skin
- no fear for skin cancer, they were looking after that very carefully.
- skin gets a little tougher and even more resistant against skin cancer problems
- very stable clearance
- can be used every day, they have made lamps for under the shower. It’s called sunshower.
Disadvantage:
- if you have very much psoriasis, it can take a long time to work as the dose is so low
- there is only one reseach, there is no follow up research yet
- it is not in the guidelines, as the derms are very slow to adopt it and the derms state there is no follow up research, which, conservative as they are, is still not started. It is kind of a chicken and egg problem, which can be seen more in the medical world.
So they keep to the old. Very damaging approach.
There has been an article in the magazine of the Dutch association. I can photo copy it, but it is written in Dutch, still I can photocopy it, OCR it, google translate it, if anyone is interested.
Researchers were a dermatologist with light treatments as a speciality (one of the ones that are looking outside of the boundaries) and a biologist/technician on light waves etc.
Results appear to be very good, but take a long time.
Advantage:
- low dose, so never burning of the skin
- no fear for skin cancer, they were looking after that very carefully.
- skin gets a little tougher and even more resistant against skin cancer problems
- very stable clearance
- can be used every day, they have made lamps for under the shower. It’s called sunshower.
Disadvantage:
- if you have very much psoriasis, it can take a long time to work as the dose is so low
- there is only one reseach, there is no follow up research yet
- it is not in the guidelines, as the derms are very slow to adopt it and the derms state there is no follow up research, which, conservative as they are, is still not started. It is kind of a chicken and egg problem, which can be seen more in the medical world.
So they keep to the old. Very damaging approach.
There has been an article in the magazine of the Dutch association. I can photo copy it, but it is written in Dutch, still I can photocopy it, OCR it, google translate it, if anyone is interested.
Researchers were a dermatologist with light treatments as a speciality (one of the ones that are looking outside of the boundaries) and a biologist/technician on light waves etc.
