Near- and Far-Infrared Saunas

"While Dr. Wilson is to be commended for being a relatively early advocate of thermal therapy, much has changed in the nearly nine years since this book was first published. Similarly, while there is much of value in this book a single citation on page 29 will lead the individual who does his or her own due diligence will discover that Dr. Wilson signifcantly overestimates the depth of which the emitter he recommends will penetrate human skin. More specifically, he claims that infrared heat will penetrate 3" into the skin. ANY infrared emitter capable of such penetration would only be safe in the hands of a professional with advanced understanding of optical spectralband designations.

For the sake of simplicity, let's designate infrared waves into three categories: IR-A, IR-B, and IR-C. The first includes wavelengths between 700-1400 nm (nanometers) or about .7microns; IR-B includes wavelengths between 1.4 and 3 microns, while IR-C includes wavelengths lying between 4-7microns. A micron, in turn, is approximately 1/25,000 of an inch. If an infrared emitter could penetrate three inches into the skin, it would be penetrating 75,000 microns, which is 75millimeters. Keep in mind that the shorter the wavelength of infrared light, the more powerful it is.

Let's consider the human eye. The average length of the adult eye from the cornea to the optic nerve is approximately 24-26mm, or about 1". If an IFR "lamp" produce heat that could penetrate 3" and an individual looked at such a lamp, there could be sufficient tissue damage to cause blindness. There is a difference between "penertation" and "absorption" that Dr. Wilson does not take into account. Imagine pouring water into a bucket of sand. Most of the water would be absorbed by the top "superficial" layers of the sand, while a small "diffused" amount would "penetrate" deeper into the sand. In terms of infrared emitters, an emmitter that produced IR-A would be considered a Class IV, "High-Power, High-Risk device and would not be available to the general public.

So, what's the bottom line? The lamp DR. Wilson advocates will only penetrate into the most superficial layer of the skin, the corneous. The only emitter I know that produces even a small, marginally significant degree of IR-A is the Philips Vitae emitter distributed by a German company callled EOS. A very small, clinically benign amount of IR-A can penetrate to the subcutaneous level of the skin where fat cells are stored. It should be noted that these emitters have highly sophisticated design features incorporated into them (reflectors, etc;) which negate the possibility of any tissue damage.

Whatever clinical benefits people experience using the emitter suggested by Dr. Wilson are in all likelihood the result of copious sweating, which in itself has considerable therapeutic advantages. Such gains ARE NOT the result of the emitter penetrating 3" into the skin but to hyperthermia. Put simply, sweating is good medicine.

Finally, I am a strong advocate of infrared saunas that employ "full-spectrum emitters". The only ones I know on the market cost between $7,000-$10,000 dollars and are almost as a rule not manufactured in the the U.S. It seems a bit of a reach to me to suggest that one could, for instance, build a timepiece in their own home that would keep time as precisely as a Rolex (or even a Timex). The design of state-of-the-art, safe, and efficatious Infrared Saunas is an expensive, time consumning process that involves a team of craftsmen, engineers and clinicians from various disciplnes. I would do a great deal of research before I even considered trying to construct my own, and, in fact never would, for the reasons I mentioned."

"Before embarking on either sauna treatment for heavy metal detoxification or long term daily sauna treatment ponder a couple of clinical facts.

1. True, heavy metals do get excreted in sweat, however, the amounts will be IMMATERIAL. For example, the concentration of lead in sweat is similar to that of urine, which means you really have to kid yourself to use it as a sensible therapy.

2. Apart from heavy metals, there's a whole range of other VERY IMPORTANT trace and major minerals which you loose in sweat. So if you decided it's a good idea to spend 15 minutes in the sauna daily think again. For example, you are likely to loose much of your iodine body storage within a matter of the first week. If you keep visiting sauna for weeks or months you will notice a remarkable degradation in your long-term memory and concentration. I have a couple of sad examples in my personal circle. Not to mention those thyroid specialists who are itching to see you helping them repay their mansion mortgages.

So do yourself a favor - even if you do believe in miracles of alternative advice, at least try not to harm yourself in pursuing your health quests. Everything is good only in moderation."

smudger wrote:If you keep visiting sauna for weeks or months you will notice a remarkable degradation in your long-term memory and concentration. I have a couple of sad examples in my personal circle.

rdkml wrote:In short, I recommend the "near" infrared saunas. I haven't used mine in awhile (a $70 or so DIY 6 bulb version).

CausticSymmetry wrote:The comments made by the reviewer are not accurate.

It does secrete heavy metals. How do I know?  Clinical observation consistently shows this.
Just as important as heavy metals is the xenoestogens,  phallates, etc.

If one uses one chronically, then replacing mineral salts is pragmatic.

Columbo wrote:I purchased a FIR sauna and the EMFs were off the chart, literally the needle hit the max. Worse yet is when you get sweaty you conduct electricity even more. Wouldn't recommend anyone use those if you value your health.

I also purchased a near infrared sauna (google saunaspace), super low EMF. And gets a great sweat on. I created a few notes here way back, nutshell, sweating pretty much detoxes every toxin you could imagine: https://goo.gl/sxKcy0

My concerns are I'm not sure what effect such intense heat has on hair health -- I noticed quite a few hardcore proponents of saunas are quite bald (like Dr Wilson; same for proponents of cold therapies, like Wim Hof). So I hit pause on the idea of saunas... still not sure where I stand.

And yes mineral depletion may be very significant issue too.

Gut feel, a gentle sweat 3 times a week from exercise and focus on getting plentiful and balanced amount of healthful minerals (which naturally act as antagonists to the more harmful ones) is probably preferable?? I dunno

Columbo wrote:Delphine, for getting an awesome sweat on and all the detox benefits that go with that, and also for getting super deep sleep, I can highly recommend. And I'm sure the red light has some nice benefits too.

The two question marks for me...

I'm not sure about intense heat in relation to hair loss. As I mentioned I noticed quite a few sauna fans were baldies. Obviously could just be coincidence but it cast a shadow of worry for me. For example, when exposed to intense heat, heat shock proteins are created which can be inflammatory. Whether the process is hormetic/healthy (like exercise) or not, I just don't know.

The good mineral loss is probably manageable but should definitely be addressed from the start.

For the moment I'm sticking to less intense sweating via exercise as a middle (and my sauna is collecting dust). I'd love more info on heat/saunas in relation to hair health