715:
treatment of almost any condition— I encountered the concept on an
Internet health and wellness page, wanted more info, came to Knowledge, found none, and so did some research and put together an article. If it really is the same thing as low level laser therapy, then by all means, merge it (I read over that article and still wasn't entirely sure myself).
714:
I am not opposed to a merge, so long as "red light therapy" is added to the list of alternate names on the article page. I am not at all opposed to the inclusion of references that discredit the application of this type of therapy, and I don't personally believe it is particularly effective for the
640:
on the subject is enough to cross that hurdle imo. Of course, we should not be presenting the claims about the treatment as facts without MEDRS to back up those claims. But we can still discuss those claims and we are doing our readers a service by having the article and highlighting the lack of
484:. Despite this recent trend to declare some sources "reliable" and others "unreliable", the fact remains that no source can be judged to be (un)reliable until you know what sentence it's supposed to be supporting. I agree that there are very few sources that could support claims about
385:(a broad survey article that contains a mishmash of conventional medical treatments, outright quackery, and wellness products), and whether it ought to be all about red light, or converted to a larger article about modern products that shine different colors of lights on people.
488:
in relation to this subject. (The same can be said about every single drug candidate in pharmaceutical industry's pipeline, by the way.) However, there exist many reliable sources for describing this as an electronic consumer product, which is what it actually is.
439:
The current article does not cite reliable sources. If the article author(s) reviewed relevant guidelines and policies regarding article creation and asked for help, perhaps they could craft an article with sufficient reliable sources. Suggestions:
353:
It's a notable subject even if there isn't excellent scientific evidence about it (yet). The existence of scientific evidence is not what makes something notable. Note that there are multiple different things that involve red light. This is not
335:
the topic has gained some notice in sources, but not much. There certainly doesn't seem to any MEDRS-compliant evidence of efficacy, so I've trimmed the article's content to what can be acceptably sourced from the references provided.
210:
561:
as a non-notable bit of pseudoscience, now much reduced without the glowing woo. If one day proper controlled trials are carried out, then we might be able to cover it, but without reliable sources this fails
451:
417:
has some specific advice about how to differentiate the related articles. A merge to LLLT (which would then need to be renamed) is not entirely unreasonable, according to them.
367:
204:
163:
264:
110:
95:
456:
444:
302:"all biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge."
170:
136:
131:
381:), rather than a scientific subject, it's obvious that Knowledge should mention it. The only unsettled questions are how to present it in
375:
140:
123:
313:
485:
225:
592:- I'm wondering if it might be good to keep the article so that people might land on the page and learn objective information.
90:
83:
17:
192:
674:
283:
Um could you provide some links to those terms so I can see what they mean? I don't speak acronym all that well. Thanks.
413:
is a review that declares it to be promising for acne in humans, but there is insufficient evidence to recommend it yet.
371:
104:
100:
507:. What you wrote here and above makes good sense and I have learned a lot reading your responses. Much appreciated!
624:
per WhatamIdoing. There is confusion in this discussion between notability and proven effectiveness. Notability
536:
186:
373:
741:
720:
288:
40:
414:
378:
724:
705:
652:
616:
579:
551:
523:
498:
475:
426:
394:
345:
325:
292:
275:
256:
65:
182:
693:
664:
647:
597:
575:
359:
53:
494:
422:
390:
251:
127:
232:
737:
606:
547:
513:
465:
362:("red laser sometimes improves wound healing"). This is the "wellness trend" involving mostly red LEDs.
36:
692:
According to the linked CNET article, it looks like red light therapy has many names, one of which is
369:
716:
355:
284:
365:
481:
218:
642:
571:
61:
198:
490:
418:
407:
400:
386:
268:
242:
119:
79:
71:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
736:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
670:
601:
508:
460:
701:
682:
629:
341:
321:
297:
628:
require that clinical trials have taken place. It does not even require that there are
306:
363:
633:
567:
382:
57:
637:
157:
673:, but that doesn't mean it's not notable. There seems to be sufficient coverage.
636:
without that, and the fact that a reputable publisher (Simon & Schuster) has
563:
697:
678:
337:
317:
410:
403:
696:. That article looks much more developed, so a merge might be better.
632:
present in the article. A subject can still meet notability through
677:
another article that appears to be reliable. Thoughts on this one?
732:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
377:
If you keep in mind that this is a consumer product (one with
539:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
153:
149:
145:
217:
545:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
241:No MEDRS used. Not prodded because of project ARS.
406:is a review, but the research is all in rats, and
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
744:). No further edits should be made to this page.
263:Note: This discussion has been included in the
613:(I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)
520:(I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)
472:(I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)
452:"red light treatment" AND (Humans) AND (Humans)
358:("red laser activates pharmaceutical drug") or
480:Whether a source is reliable depends upon the
503:Thank you for your very helpful explanations
445:Google Scholar search for "red light therapy"
265:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
231:
8:
111:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
596:EDIT (27 Mar 2020 @ 12:43 UTC) - Thank you
379:excellent potential as a Halloween costume
262:
301:
7:
24:
314:Knowledge:Article Rescue Squadron
486:Knowledge:Biomedical information
96:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
669:As discussed. It seems to be
685:) 19:03, 29 March 2020(UTC)
86:(AfD)? Read these primers!
761:
725:15:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
706:19:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
653:00:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
617:19:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
580:15:47, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
552:03:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
524:07:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
499:16:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
476:21:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
427:16:34, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
395:16:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
346:23:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
326:23:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
293:21:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
276:21:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
257:21:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
457:RSS for the Pubmed search
66:15:53, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
734:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
694:Low-level laser therapy
665:Low-level laser therapy
435:Reliable sources needed
399:For biomedical claims,
360:Low-level laser therapy
54:Low-level laser therapy
603:- Mark D Worthen PsyD
594:What do others think?
510:- Mark D Worthen PsyD
462:- Mark D Worthen PsyD
84:Articles for deletion
356:Photodynamic therapy
309:= proposed deletion.
641:medical evidence.
450:Pubmed search for
615:
614:
554:
522:
521:
474:
473:
278:
248:
120:Red light therapy
101:Guide to deletion
91:How to contribute
72:Red light therapy
752:
638:published a book
612:
611:
609:
604:
550:
544:
542:
540:
519:
518:
516:
511:
471:
470:
468:
463:
273:
246:
236:
235:
221:
173:
161:
143:
81:
34:
760:
759:
755:
754:
753:
751:
750:
749:
748:
742:deletion review
717:A loose necktie
607:
602:
555:
546:
535:
533:
514:
509:
466:
461:
437:
285:A loose necktie
269:
178:
169:
134:
118:
115:
78:
75:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
758:
756:
747:
746:
728:
727:
711:
710:
709:
708:
687:
686:
655:
619:
582:
543:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
526:
454:
448:
436:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
348:
330:
329:
328:
310:
304:
280:
279:
239:
238:
175:
114:
113:
108:
98:
93:
76:
74:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
757:
745:
743:
739:
735:
730:
729:
726:
722:
718:
713:
712:
707:
703:
699:
695:
691:
690:
689:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
666:
661:
660:
656:
654:
651:
650:
646:
645:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
620:
618:
610:
605:
599:
598:Spinningspark
595:
591:
588:
587:
583:
581:
577:
573:
572:Chiswick Chap
569:
565:
560:
557:
556:
553:
549:
548:North America
541:
538:
525:
517:
512:
506:
502:
501:
500:
496:
492:
487:
483:
479:
478:
477:
469:
464:
458:
455:
453:
449:
446:
443:
442:
441:
434:
428:
424:
420:
416:
412:
409:
405:
402:
398:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
383:Light therapy
380:
376:
374:
372:
370:
368:
366:
364:
361:
357:
352:
349:
347:
343:
339:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
308:
305:
303:
299:
296:
295:
294:
290:
286:
282:
281:
277:
274:
272:
266:
261:
260:
259:
258:
255:
254:
250:
245:
234:
230:
227:
224:
220:
216:
212:
209:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
184:
181:
180:Find sources:
176:
172:
168:
165:
159:
155:
151:
147:
142:
138:
133:
129:
125:
121:
117:
116:
112:
109:
106:
102:
99:
97:
94:
92:
89:
88:
87:
85:
80:
73:
70:
68:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
733:
731:
662:
658:
657:
648:
643:
625:
621:
593:
589:
585:
584:
558:
534:
505:WhatamIdoing
504:
491:WhatamIdoing
482:WP:RSCONTEXT
438:
419:WhatamIdoing
387:WhatamIdoing
350:
332:
271:CAPTAIN RAJU
270:
252:
243:
240:
228:
222:
214:
207:
201:
195:
189:
179:
166:
77:
49:
47:
31:
28:
663:Merge with
566:and indeed
415:This review
205:free images
247:the PROD.
738:talk page
671:WP:Fringe
586:Undecided
37:talk page
740:or in a
644:Spinning
630:WP:MEDRS
626:does not
537:Relisted
411:30850041
404:30853864
298:WP:MEDRS
164:View log
105:glossary
58:MelanieN
39:or in a
333:Comment
307:WP:PROD
211:WPÂ refs
199:scholar
137:protect
132:history
82:New to
675:Here's
634:WP:GNG
608:(talk)
568:WP:GNG
559:Delete
515:(talk)
467:(talk)
312:ARS =
183:Google
141:delete
698:Jlevi
679:Jlevi
649:Spark
338:RexxS
318:RexxS
244:Roxy,
226:JSTOR
187:books
171:Stats
158:views
150:watch
146:links
50:merge
16:<
721:talk
702:talk
683:talk
659:Keep
622:Keep
600::0)
590:Keep
576:talk
564:WP:N
495:talk
423:talk
408:PMID
401:PMID
391:talk
351:Keep
342:talk
322:talk
289:talk
253:wooF
219:FENS
193:news
154:logs
128:talk
124:edit
62:talk
233:TWL
162:– (
52:to
723:)
704:)
578:)
570:.
497:)
459:.
425:)
393:)
344:)
336:--
324:)
316:--
300::
291:)
267:.
213:)
156:|
152:|
148:|
144:|
139:|
135:|
130:|
126:|
64:)
56:.
719:(
700:(
681:(
667:?
574:(
493:(
447:.
421:(
389:(
340:(
320:(
287:(
249:.
237:)
229:·
223:·
215:·
208:·
202:·
196:·
190:·
185:(
177:(
174:)
167:·
160:)
122:(
107:)
103:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.