Health and Light
John N. Ott

The Effects of Natural and Artificial Light on Man and Other Living Things.
How light can work for you ...
for your health, your emotional well-being and your vibrant energy ...
no matter where you live or work!

Published by Pocket Books – New York
Copyright 1973 – John Ott Pictures, Inc.
First printing 1973 – ISBN: 0-671-80537-1
Reprint edition (April 1, 2000) – ISBN: 0-898-04098-1

[ This is a Must Read Book for ALL Parents, and a MUST HAVE BOOK for ALL Teachers, School Administrators, Social Workers, Doctors, Clergy and Court Officials !!!

Science Teachers: This book will provide you with dozens of ideas for science fair and classroom projects.   — Tommy — ]


Chapter 7

An Experiment With Phototherapy on Human Cancer Patients

The initial hope for the opportunity to work on some carefully planned and scientifically controlled light research experiments with the experienced personnel and sophisticated facilities of several of the largest corporations in the country rapidly faded into disillusionment. The positive results obtained with the various pilot experiments using fish, chickens and chinchillas produced, in each instance, a reaction of doubt and a suspicion that something not much short of witchcraft was to be suspected. To suggest that light entering the eyes could have any biological function other than producing vision was like seriously talking-twenty years ago-of man's footprints someday being on the moon. A reexamination of each company's research policies, procedures and financial budgets indicated that no provision existed for the study of the effect of light on animals. Furthermore, nothing could be found in the literature to support the hypothesis. This was not the first such disappointment, nor was it to be the last.

However, there was also the bright side of things. Following my last visit as a consultant to the Chas. Pfizer Cancer Research Laboratory in New Jersey, I was offered a ride back to New York City in one of the company's chauffeur driven cars. A physician, Dr. Jane C. Wright, in charge of cancer research at Bellevue Medical Center in New York City was in the same car. We started talking about cancer research and she expressed interest in the time-lapse pictures and the suggestion that there might be a relationship between light energy and viruses and the increasing interest in the cancer virus theory. To my delight, she agreed to ask fifteen cancer patients to spend as much time as possible in natural sunlight without their glasses, and especially their sunglasses. They were also instructed to avoid artificial light sources as much as possible, including television. This experiment was conducted during the summer months of 1959.

At the end of the summer, Dr. Wright advised that while it was difficult to make a positive evaluation, it was the consensus of all those assisting in the program that fourteen of the fifteen patients had shown no further advancement in tumor development and several showed possible improvement. The fifteenth patient had not fully understood the instructions and although she did stop wearing sunglasses, had nevertheless continued to wear ordinary glasses which would of course block most, if not all, of the ultraviolet in natural sunlight from entering the eyes.

As cold weather was approaching, it would not be possible for these people to remain outdoors much of the time in the New York City area. So Dr. Wright made arrangements for me to show the time-lapse pictures and explain the story again to the general research staff of the M.D. Anderson Hospital and Tumor Clinic in Houston, Texas, on January 27, 1960. It was hoped that in view of the results obtained with the pilot experiment in New York, a greater number of patients might be kept outdoors under natural daylight conditions without their glasses the year around in a southern climate with a milder temperature.

However, as I presented my story I became aware that the atmosphere was becoming progressively colder and, in fact, the general response, even before I had completed the story, was stone cold. Dr. Wright, in New York City, started to make plans to repeat the experiment there the following summer, but shortly before the project was scheduled to be started, I received a letter stating that circumstances made it necessary to call it off. In fact, criticism of the project had been so great that it seemed advisable not to make any further mention of the previous year's experiment at all. The main objections were that no patients were actually used as controls and that any such experimental procedures should be first proven with animals.

Although I was careful not to mention the human cancer experiment in my various letters, I did give all the information to another physician in the Chicago area who had been a close personal friend for many years. He was Dr. Samuel Lee Gabby, Senior Staff Member, Sherman Hospital, Elgin, Illinois. He agreed to set up some experiments using the C3H strain of mice, which is highly susceptible to spontaneous tumor development, and subjecting them to different lighting environments. I assisted him in setting up the equipment and maintained a close working arrangement throughout the experiment.

Thirty pairs of test mice were kept in a room lighted only by daylight white fluorescent tubes. Thirty pairs of test mice were kept in another room lighted only with pink fluorescent tubes, and, as a control, eight pairs were kept in a room where they received daylight filtered through ordinary window glass.

The control mice in the daylight cages developed cancer some two months later than the test mice which were kept in the room with the daylight white fluorescent tubes, and three months later than those under the pink fluorescent lights. The different lighting conditions also notice ably affected the litters born during the experiment. The litters of mice under pink fluorescent light consisted of only one or two offspring instead of the normal six to fifteen under the daylight white fluorescent, or under outside light coming in through the ordinary window glass.

The full text of this report was submitted to the Illinois Medical Journal, but unfortunately was not published. It was unofficially presented to several members of the Illinois branch of the American Cancer Society reviewing committee, but did nothing more than stir up further criticism of my good friend, Dr. Gabby, who had collaborated with me.


Excerpts from Chapter 14

Photobiology Comes Of Age


With all the accumulating scientific evidence of the biological effects of light, both on the skin and through the eyes, I feel there is justification for further comment on a number of simple observations which I believe indicate the need for more controlled studies. It is my hope that these additional observations may suggest some basis for selection of the parameters to be included in future light studies, and not taken as an attempt to suggest any instant cure for cancer or other human pathologies:

(1.)  Shortly after the experiment with human cancer patients at Bellevue Medical Center was terminated, a personal friend of mine told me of an acquaintance of his, a man in his early seventies who had just been diagnosed as having terminal lung cancer. This man lived in the southwest and wore sunglasses most of the time. My friend sent him a copy of "My Ivory Cellar" and a set of the instruction sheets that had been given to the 15 patients in New York City for living outdoors as much as possible and avoiding artificial light sources. The elderly lung cancer patient agreed to follow the instructions. The tumor completely disappeared and he lived for approximately eight years before dying of a heart complication. The diagnosis of lung cancer had been made at a large veterans' hospital, but unfortunately, we were unable to obtain any further medical details regarding the diagnosis.

(2.)  In 1961, the Communicable Disease Center of the U. S. Public Health Service in Atlanta reported that a school in Niles, Illinois, had the highest rate of leukemia of any school in the country. In fact, it was five times the national average. I made a point of visiting the school and talking with the superintendent, the head maintenance man and also some of the teachers who had been at the school since it was built. I learned that all of the children who developed leukemia had been located in two classrooms, and that the teachers in these particular classrooms customarily kept the large curtains drawn at all times across the windows, because of the intense glare from the extensive use of glass in the construction of the new, modern building. On examining these curtains I found that they were not completely opaque, but more of a translucent type of material that allowed some of the outdoor light to penetrate and which gave them a greenish appearance. With the curtains constantly closed, it was necessary to keep the artificial lights on in these two classrooms, and I learned from the head maintenance man that the original tubes installed were "warm white" fluorescents, which are very strong in the orange-pink part of the spectrum.

After several years of this regular procedure of keeping the curtains closed and the lights on, the classroom teachers of these two particular rooms left the school and their replacements preferred to leave the curtains open and the lights off unless needed. I also learned that at about this time there was a general replacement of the warm white fluorescent tubes and that the new tubes were cool white, which are not as strong in the orange-pink part of the spectrum, and which were not lit continuously, but only as needed. As of the time of my visit in 1964, there had been no further leukemia cases reported for several years. No explanation for the previous unusually high rate of leukemia at this school had ever been found, but the problem no longer existed and the situation had returned to normal.

(3.)  At a dinner given prior to one of my lectures, I sat next to the daughter of the late Dr. Albert Schweitzer. Our conversation dwelt mostly on her experiences as assistant to her father at Lambarene, on the west coast of Africa. I asked her about the rate of cancer of the people in that area, and she replied that when her father had first started the hospital they found no cancer at all, but that now it was a problem. I asked if the people living there had started installing glass windows and electric lights in their otherwise simple surroundings and she said they had not.

Then I half jokingly asked her if any of the natives wore sunglasses. She looked startled and then told me that the natives paddling their dugout canoes up and down the river in front of the hospital often wore no more than a loincloth and sunglasses, and indeed, some wore only the sunglasses. She further explained that sunglasses represented a status symbol of civilization and education and had a higher bartering value than beads and other such trinkets. There is, of course, no scientific proof of a correlation between the wearing of sunglasses and cancer, but it does raise an interesting question.

(4.)  I learned from another elderly acquaintance that he had been diagnosed as having cancer of the prostate, and surgery had been recommended. I found that he had for many years been wearing eyeglasses with a light pink tint, and was able to persuade him to stop wearing these and get some new full-spectrum clear ultraviolet-transmitting spectacles. I also advised him to cut down as much as possible on watching television and spend more time outdoors, or at least on an open screened porch. He has now gone for three years without surgery and the problem has apparently disappeared.

(5.)  A physician interested in our light research studies advised me that a close friend of his had been diagnosed as having a terminal cancer of a fast-spreading type. This physician advised that under such circumstances, life expectancy of approximately four months was the most that could be hoped for. He told me that while there was no evidence that installing the new fluorescent tubes with the added ultraviolet in his hospital room could do any good; he could not see that any harm could be done. Accordingly, I personally helped to install the fluorescent tubes in the patient's room and later provided some for his room at home when he was able to leave the hospital following surgery. The physician also approved of some additional ultraviolet ocular therapy, with very short exposures to low intensities of short wave ultraviolet produced by a germicidal type lamp, to try to make up the trace amounts of this part of the W spectrum that are now recognized as penetrating through the atmosphere. Because of the known harmful effects from too much of this short wave ultraviolet radiation, the exposure prescribed was minimal. This patient also continued to receive chemotherapy. He lived for another ten months and was remarkably active and free of pain during this time.

(6.)  Another case was that of a friend, a middle-aged woman suffering from a severe case of exophthalmic goiter, or Grave's disease, with severe swelling of the eyes. She had had the maximum of radioactive treatment without responding and had been told by her physician that the chances were that she might lose her sight completely in the near future. She was willing to try anything, even if there was no proof that it might help her, as long as her physician agreed that it could not make the situation worse.

She installed the new full-spectrum fluorescent tubes, with the long wave black light ultraviolet added, in her kitchen and other rooms where she spent most of her time. During the summer she and her husband went to their cottage in the north woods and took the fluorescent tubes with them. That particular summer the weather was cold and rainy most of the time so that she was not often able to get outdoors into the sunlight, which, she said, helped her more than the fluorescent lights did indoors. On her return to Florida in the fall, her physician authorized the added ultraviolet therapy to supplement the full-spectrum fluorescent tubes, with short exposures to low intensities of short wave ultraviolet, again to try to duplicate the trace amounts of these wavelengths in natural outdoor sunlight.

Now, two years later, this woman's condition is greatly improved. The redness, soreness and constant watering of her eyes has stopped. The diplopia, or double vision, has completely disappeared and she can see better and feels better than before the light treatment was begun.

(7.)  The husband of the woman mentioned above had been troubled with skin cancer and on several occasions had undergone minor surgery. He was again having considerable difficulty and his physician had recommended further surgery. However, on his own initiative, he decided to try the same ultraviolet ocular therapy that he was giving his wife for her eye condition, to avoid watching television and to follow the other general instructions. Immediately, his skin cancers began to disappear, and within a matter of four or five months his skin appeared perfectly normal without surgery or other treatment.

(8.)  Because of the increasing number of reports of vandalism in Sarasota we began to leave our kitchen light on all night as a security measure. The kitchen light happens to be one of the new full-spectrum fluorescent tubes with the added long wave ultraviolet, and the glass in the kitchen window had been replaced with ultraviolet transmitting plastic, as had all the windows and sliding doors in the rooms where we spend most of our time indoors.

Suddenly, I noticed that both an orange tree and a grapefruit tree just outside of the kitchen window were bursting into bloom completely out of season. The blossoms of the orange tree nearest the kitchen window were exceptionally large – in fact, a full two inches across. This was doubly unusual because the lights were on only during the nighttime, and the intensity that reached the trees was extremely low.

A report about this phenomenon in our local newspaper brought a phone call from a registered nurse whose mother had been operated on for a cancer that was considered terminal at the time. After the operation, she brought her mother home. She told me she had placed a small ozone lamp in her mother's room to keep down odors in the sickroom. She said, however, that the small ozone lamp was defective; the light shield was missing, so that the short wave ultraviolet light was shining out into the room.

The location of the light was about fourteen feet from the bed, but as there was a large overstuffed chair in between, it was not possible to determine how much of the time the cancer patient may have been able to see the light directly, and how much of the time she might have received only indirect light reflecting from the walls and ceiling. The light was on continuously during the day and was also used as a night-light. She had intended to buy a new shield to replace the missing one, but due to all the confusion at the time she never did. This had happened more than two years ago, and now, her mother, who is in her eighties, is apparently in excellent health and very active for one of her age. A check on this elderly patient's medical record indicated that the type of cancer she had was not of the fast-spreading type, but the circumstances of her recovery still seem to merit investigation.

Observations of this kind must be viewed with extreme caution. On the other hand, I feel strongly that they should not be ignored, especially when so many such coincidences seem to fit into an overall pattern. Further research on the biological implications of light is greatly needed, and I must note, with great satisfaction, that experiments with both laboratory animals and with a limited number of patients under medical supervision are being carried on within the limits of a restricted budget. The results to date are continuing to show clearly an indicated relationship between light environment and tumor development.


Excerpts from Chapter 15

Routine Opposition To New Ideas As Standard Procedure


No matter how hard one tries to soft-pedal such stories as our turn-down by the American Cancer Society, the word spreads, and the fewer actual facts that are released, the greater seem to be the rumors and exaggerations. Several doctors made a point of contacting me to find out exactly what had happened. All seemed amazed and almost indignant that the recommendations of such a distinguished doctor as the Chairman of the Tumor Research Committee of a leading hospital should be so completely ignored without his being asked a single question – especially when his recommendations were supported unanimously by the hospital research committee of other doctors all prominent in their individual disciplines. Some recalled that scientists like Pasteur, Fleming, and Goddard would never have qualified for research funds during the early development of their great discoveries; something must be wrong with our present scientific approach to anything that is new or different from existing conjectures dealing with unsolved problems - problems like cancer. A reexamination of present policies might be in order, in connection with the much-publicized appeals for vast sums of money for cancer research in order that "not a single possibility be neglected."

One of the physicians particularly distressed by the American Cancer Society turndown was Charles Galloway, M.D., a staff member at the Evanston Hospital, and an assistant professor of gynecology at Northwestern University Medical School, with which the hospital was affiliated. He telephoned and asked me to come to his office, explaining that one of his patients had a condition of leukoplakia of the cervix, which is generally considered to be an indication of a pre-cancerous condition. He further explained that he had attended one of my lectures, and had read My Ivory Cellar. He had told his patient of the experiment with the fifteen patients conducted by the head of cancer research at the hospital in New York City some years previously. He added that his patient wanted to see if getting out into the sunlight more might help her situation.

Dr. Galloway explained that as a result of a routine medical examination back in 1957, he had found that this patient had a definite area of leukoplakia of the cervix and that he had removed it at that time with minor surgery. A new area of leukoplakia very quickly appeared immediately adjacent to the scar tissue. This was cauterized once and removed three additional times, up to 1960, but each time it quickly reappeared. In 1960, he suggested that a complete hysterectomy would not only be advisable but necessary. It was at this point that the patient indicated that she wanted to try getting out into the sunlight more, and Dr. Galloway asked me in to his office. That was in February 1960.

I gave him a set of the same instructions that had been given to the fifteen patients in New York. However, now, as the result of lectures that I had given to the research people of several of the leading plastic companies, new ultraviolet-transmitting lenses were available for eyeglasses, and also ultraviolet-transmitting material was available for use in windows and sliding doors. This patient immediately obtained a pair of the new ultraviolet-transmitting eyeglasses and also had the UVT plastic put in the windows and sliding doors of rooms in her home where she spent most of her time. By May of that year, Dr. Galloway advised me that the area of leukoplakia was definitely smaller, and that he would temporarily, at least, postpone performing the hysterectomy. By October 1960, the area was still smaller, and at that time he decided to remove it again with minor surgery.

Since then (as of this writing) there has been no reappearance of the condition. Dr. Galloway decided major surgery was no longer indicated and that everything seemed to be perfectly normal. He has given his patient a clean bill of health. Today, twelve years later, this same patient has had no recurrence of the condition, and no further surgery, major or minor, has been necessary. She has also stopped wearing sunglasses, After the first year had passed with no reappearance of the leukoplakia, Dr. Galloway was sufficiently impressed with the results that he arranged for me to meet Charles Huggins, M.D., head of The Ben May Laboratory for Cancer Research, associated with the University of Chicago. Dr. Huggins, well known for his work in relating tumor development to the malfunction of the pituitary gland, was a recipient of the Nobel Prize several years later. Studies had been underway for some time by Huggins and his staff to determine the effect on cancer in humans through treating the pituitary with drugs, implantations of radioactive beads and by the removal of the pituitary. Removing the pituitary would mean that the patient would have to be given daily dosages of the hormones known to be produced by that gland in the human body.

I attempted to discuss with Dr. Huggins the work of Rowan, Benoit, Assenmacher and others, and the indicated influence of light received through the eyes on the pituitary gland, but was stopped short by his saying that he did not think it possible that light entering the eyes could influence the pituitary. However, as a courtesy to our mutual friend, he took me out to their animal laboratory room and introduced me to Katherine L. Sydnor, M.D., who had been conducting a research project with rats for the past two years. Dr. Sydnor had been experimenting with administering carcinogenic chemicals to the rats and keeping them under different light conditions. Some were also kept in total darkness, and others subjected to various periods of artificial light of different types of both incandescent and fluorescent. Some of the rats had been blinded and the eyes actually removed and the eyelids sewn together. Dr. Sydnor was just completing this project and planning to leave the university within a matter of a few days for a year’s study at a cancer research institute in London, England.

My visit with her was brief, but she showed me the rats and remarked in particular that the fur of those kept under total darkness was soft and smooth in texture, and also quite thick and fully developed. The rats exposed to the artificial lights were of the same breed but looked entirely different; the fur was coarse and extremely bristly. A good many of the animals under the daylight white fluorescent light were completely bald on the tops of their heads and, in many instances, this baldness continued down the ridge of the back. Dr. Sydnor advised that the rats would be sacrificed within the next few days and promised to call me before leaving for London if any significant results were observed in the rats at autopsy. I received a phone call and she told me that the tumor development in the rats kept under the lights was significantly greater than in those kept in total darkness, and that those rats kept under the regular incandescent light showed considerably more and larger tumor development than the rats under daylight white fluorescent.

I asked if this information would be published. The answer was that the results came as such a complete surprise that the experiment would have to be repeated several times before publication of anything so startling could take place. Since she was leaving for England, it was uncertain when or if the experiment could be repeated.

This additional bit of evidence that light influences tumor growth certainly added support to the overall picture. Each of the several individual experiments by themselves had not aroused much general interest, but if all the results could be put together in one combined report and submitted to the various cancer societies and research centers, some recognition or further progress might be made.


Excerpts from Chapter 16

Signs of Encouragement


As this book goes to press, it is gratifying that more and more medical and scientific research studies are dealing with the biological effects of light. It is my sincere hope that some of the simple observations made possible through time-lapse photography may have been helpful in stimulating further interest in this important subject.

For example, the following letter just received from the Wills Eye Hospital is very encouraging:

Dean John:

Our preliminary experiments dealing with the effects of light on animal tumors are still in progress but we do have some encouraging results. It is still too early to express any formal conclusions because we have had to devise a suitable model for testing your hypothesis.

We have been working with the Harding-Passey malignant melanoma in BALB-C mice and our latest results indicate that mice kept under simulated daylight as compared to cool white fluorescent light develop tumors at a slower and diminished rate. We feel that the work deserves repetition and additional variations in experimental design. We plan to determine if the abovementioned results are valid and, if so, if the light exerts its effects via the visual tract or via the skin. We are also looking to you for additional experimental light sources as we have discussed and are prepared to test these as soon as they become available.

I will keep you informed with the progress of the work.

With best regards,
Theodore W. Sery, Ph.D., Director of Research
Wills Eye Hospital and Research Institute

These results, though still of a very preliminary nature, do nevertheless seem to tie in with those previously reported by Drs. Wright, Gabby, Scanlon, Galloway and Sydnor mentioned earlier in this book.


"Health and Light"  by John N. Ott  –  the whole book
The Effects of Natural and Artificial Light on Man and Other Living Things.


Help is on the way for fair skinned people who are reluctant to get the sunshine they need for fear of getting burned.

Study Sheds Light on Healthy Tan Hormone

Winona Daily News
Sunday, August 1, 2004

Los Angeles Times — Fair-skinned people take note: Someday, there might be a way to protect against sunburn and get a healthy, skin-protecting tan at the same time. Researchers at the University of Arizona say they have found a way to use synthetic hormone to reduce skin damage in people with sensitive.

The study published in the Archives of Dermatology, found that the synthetic hormone could be combined safely with short exposures to sunlight or UV-B light to get a darker tan — and more melanin in the skin, said Robert Dorr, professor of pharmacology at the University of Arizona.

Usually, "people go out into the sun, get a little sun damage, and then that damage signals the production of melanin," which darkens and protects the skin, he said. The study used Melanotan-1, a synthetic version of a pigmentation hormone found in animals and in pregnant women. The hormone can darken skin and produce melanin without sunlight.


Let There Be Light;  The Healing Art of Spectro-Chrome
(Dinshah P. Ghadiali)
By Steven Ross, Ph.D.

Copyright 1997–2004 World Research Foundation

[ Rescued Web Page that was removed from the web March 2004. ]


The effects of color and light on the human system are subjects of continuous scientific investigation. The research and experiments of the late Dinshah Ghadiali proved that the body could be tuned or adjusted from disease to health by systematically exposing it to colored light. An example of this effect is found in the medical practice of treating premature babies with Bilirubin Syndrome (jaundice) by exposing them to blue light, although the methodology is somewhat different from Ghadiali's.

Dinshah Ghadiali was born of Persian descent in Bombay, India, in 1873. At the age of eleven, he became assistant to the Professor of Mathematics and Science at Wilson College in Bombay. In his early career, Dinshah was Superintendent of Telephone and Telegraph for Dolphur State in India.

The year 1897 marked a permanent turning point in his medical career. The niece of a friend was dying of mucous colitis. The attending physician was using the then accepted drugs, to no avail. Having read Edwin S. Babbitt's work, The Principles of Light and Color, and Blue and Red Light, by Dr. Seth Pancoast, Dinshah was aware of the theory of chromopathy (healing with colored light).


Purchase two classic works on Spectro-Chrome:
Click here for Let There Be Light  by Darius Dinshah, the son of Dinshah Ghadiali

Click here for Spectro-Chrome Metry Encyclopedia  by Dinshah Ghadiali


Dinshah treated the young woman according to Dr. Babbitt's technique. The light from a kerosene lantern, filtered through an indigo colored glass, shone on her. Milk was placed in a bottle of the same color, exposed to the sunlight, and then given to her to drink. Dinshah writes, "The urgent straining to evacuate, which occurred perhaps a hundred times a day, abated to ten after one treatment; after three days she was able to get out of bed." This case was the beginning of Dinshah's intense investigation into the effects of colored light on the human organism.

In April of 1920, Dinshah introduced his system of healing with colored lights to the world in New York City. (He had taken up permanent residence in the United States in 1911.) He named his development Spectro-Chrome. In the next four years Dinshah trained over 800 professionals and lay persons. He also designed and sold color projectors and accessories.

The first indication of opposition to Spectro-Chrome emerged in the pages of the January 1924, Journal of the American Medical Association. The article ridiculed Spectro-Chrome and its originator as being preposterous, closing with the statements, "Some physicians, after reading this article, may wonder why we have devoted the amount of space to a subject that, on its face seems so preposterous as to condemn itself. When it is realized that helpless but credulous patients are being treated for such serious conditions as syphilitic conjunctivitis, ovaritis, diabetes mellitus, pulmonary tuberculosis and chronic gonorrhea with colored lights, the space devoted to this latest cult will not be deemed excessive."

An indictment in Buffalo, New York in 1931 charged that Dinshah feloniously defrauded a purchaser by falsely representing Spectro-Chrome as a healing system. He defended Spectro-Chrome with the testimony of three physicians: Dr. Kate Baldwin, Dr. Martha Peebles and Dr. Welcome Hanor.

All three of the medical experts gave sworn testimony before the New York Supreme Court. Dr. Kate Baldwin, M.D., F.A.C.S., was Senior Surgeon at the Women's Hospital of Philadelphia, and had been using the Spectro-Chrome system for ten years. When she was asked by the prosecution if Spectro-Chrome would cure cancer, Dr. Baldwin stated that in many cases it would. She testified that she had used it to cure gonorrhea, syphilis, breast tumors, cataracts, gastric ulcers, and severe third-degree burns, "I may commence at the top of the head and cover practically every part of the body: ordinary inflammatory conditions of the eye, cataracts, glaucoma, hemorrhage into the retina and sclera, infection of the sinuses, bronchitis, pneumonia, pleurisy, tuberculosis, heart conditions (functional and organic), acute indigestion and ulcers of the stomach, asthma and hay fever, hiccoughs that had for ten days resisted all classical methods, cured in less than one day, all sorts of infections (local and systemic), abscesses, jaundice, kidney conditions, ppendicitis..."

In fact, in an article printed in the Atlantic Medical Journal of April 1927, Dr. Baldwin stated that after thirty-seven years of active hospital and private practice in medicine and surgery, she produced quicker and more accurate results using Spectro-Chrome than with any other methods, and there was less strain on the patient.

Urging the medical profession to investigate the effect of color light on burns, she cited the following case history, "In very extensive burns in a child of eight years of age, there was almost complete suppression of urine for more than 48 hours, with a temperature of 105 to 106 degrees. Fluids were forced to no effect, and a more hopeless case is seldom seen. Scarlet was applied just over the kidneys at a distance of eighteen inches for twenty minutes, all other areas being covered. Two hours later, the child voided eight ounces of urine."

Dr. Martha Peebles also gave sworn testimony at the trial. Dr. Peebles was a doctor of medicine for twenty-four years, including twenty years working for the Department of Health for the City of New York. She was a physician for New York Life Insurance, and was a physician to the American Expeditionary Forces during World War I. During the war, she would attend up to 61 operations daily. She stated that she had been forced to retire due to ill health, but using the Spectro-Chrome system had restored her health. She had used seventeen color machines over ten years, and had treated cancer, hypertrophic arthritis, poliomyelitis, mastoiditis, and many other medical conditions.

Dr. Welcome Manor, M.D., a medical doctor for over thirty years, provided sworn testimony that he had treated cancer, diabetes, gonorrhea, syphilis, ulcers, hemorrhage, neuritis, spinal meningitis, heart disorders, uremic poisoning, and other medical conditions.

The jury did not find Dinshah's healing system "preposterous." Ninety minutes of deliberation resulted in a verdict of 'Not Guilty.'

In 1947, Dinshah was tried in court for "mislabeling." Dinshah was found guilty and was forced to surrender all of the books, magazine articles and papers he had written on Spectro-Chrome to be burned! The estimated worth of the material that the government destroyed was $250,000. Dinshah was placed on five years probation, ordered to disassociate himself from Spectro-Chrome, and to close his institute.

In 1958, the FDA obtained a permanent injunction against Dinshah's institute. He worked under the limits of the injunction until his death in 1966.

A very interesting statement was made by Dr. A. J. Ochsner, M.D., F.A.C.S., who was an author on several texts on surgery during those years, "In a personal experience with septic infection, the pain was so severe that it seemed unbearable. When the use of electric light was suggested, it seemed unlikely that this could act differently from the other forms of therapy that had been employed. Upon applying the light, however, the excruciating pain disappeared almost at once, and since this experience, we have employed the light treatment in hundreds of cases of pain caused by septic infection, and quite regularly with results that were eminently satisfactory, not only in relief of pain, but also because the remedy assists materially in reducing the infection."

Dinshah's son, Darius, is alive and well, living in New Jersey. He has produced two books dealing with his father's work. Both of these books, Let There Be Light, which was written by Darius, and a reprint of his father's 1935 work, the Spectro-Chrome Metry Encyclopedia, are available from the World Research Foundation.

I have had personal experience with the Spectro-Chrome system over the last twenty years. My father, Stan, was told by physicians that he would not regain the use of his legs due to a spinal infection. Through the use of the Spectro-Chrome, my father did regain the full and complete use of his legs. I have personally been involved with, and witnessed results in, the application of Spectro-Chrome in over one hundred severe medical conditions. In the majority of these cases, the medical profession had nothing to offer those who chose to utilize this therapy.

There are several hundred articles published in reputable scientific and medical journals relating to the effects of light on biological functions, such as Volume 453 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, "The Medical and Biological Effects of Light." Here is an entire conference dedicated to the biological effects from the use of light and color.

I believe that color therapy is one of the most successful, yet non-invasive therapies in the world! It is also one of the easiest to use; it can be done by laypersons.

The medical profession has utilized color therapy for many years, such as in the example given in the beginning of this article. They may not want to call it as such, but it is.

A couple of years ago, I was asked by my brother if WRF had information concerning a therapy for his injured dog. The young dog had broken out of the yard, and been hit by and dragged under a car for approximately 90 feet. The dog was being brought to a veterinarian daily for fresh bandages. After our recommendation of color therapy, my brother began color tonations about one week after the accident. After four days of color tonations, the veterinarian remarked that he had not witnessed an animal healing so quickly from that type of injury. When my sister-in-law began to explain what they had been doing, the veterinarian said that he did not want to know. His next statement was, "Keep doing it, whatever it is."


Why Good Light is Important to Poultry
2002 © Warnking Elektrotechnik GmbH

Natural daylight is an essential life factor, which assists the biological systems of humans, animals and plants. Natural daylight has a positive effect on the general healthiness of body and mind and improves the body’s ability to resist disease.

For all Life on earth natural daylight is an essential Factor

Daylight is not only important for visibility, but is also biologically significant i.e. to the loading of the pineal gland behind the eyes, the thalamus, the hypophysis, which is the day/night rhythm, the cortex where sight is formed, the non-arbitrary nerve system as well as the hormone glands. The entire metabolism of the body is affected by daylight or lack thereof.

The colors of light each affect the healthiness of both humans and animals in their own way. One of the most important colors of light is UV-B, which amongst others, is significant in the construction of Vitamin D (leading to the construction of calcium and carbohydrates — like the phosphor metabolism). UV-B light also plays an important role in the construction of the immune system, which fights against infections. This light is vital to functions like fertility, sex drive, blood pressure, heart activity, blood circulation, growth and muscular development.

Natural daylight, which is produced by the sun, consists of light waves of different lengths i.e. from 280 to 780mm. Each color of light has its own wavelength. Blue light for example, has a short wave length whereas red light has a long wavelength. The spectrum of sunlight is composed of the following visible and invisible colors of light:

  Ultra-violet A, B and C –
      violet – blue – green –
          orange – red – infrared


Comparison of Light Spectra

Natural Daylight — Real full spectrum tubes (5700 K)
And, so-called full spectrum tubes (6000-6500 K)


The Poultry Species sees the world through different eyes

From scientific studies, it would appear that the poultry species recognize colored light differently to the human species. Poultry recognize UV-A light as well as other colors of light in a different way to humans.


Ability of recognizing light colors by poultry

Poultry are also more sensitive to the current flickering of strip lighting. Humans are unable to notice mains voltage of 50 Hz. However, poultry distinguish frequencies of up to 300 Hz. This is also defined as the "disco effect". The recognition of mains voltages heightens the stress levels in poultry.


Ultraviolet A + B Light are the Vitamins and Minerals of light

In the medical world, UV radiation is often related to skin cancer and the gap in the o-zone layer. However, various investigations have proved that a certain amount of natural UV-A and UV-B light is absolutely essential for all life on earth.

Blue and ultraviolet light both assist in attaining the clarity/brightness, color, sharpness, space, contrast and seeing in the dark at required levels.

When humans or animals are totally or partially deprived of UV-B light, the immune system weakens and the susceptibility to illness increases. During winter therefore, or if consistently kept in a closed environment with artificial light, the important spectral UV-A and UV-B colors are absent. At such times, humans are at an increased risk of heart failure, winter depression, as well as metabolic and glandular disorders.

It is not known for certain whether humans or animals can live healthily without UV-A and UV-B light. However, like most things in life, moderation is normally the safe course.

Excessive sunbathing or use of sun beds exposes the body to high doses of UV-A radiation (power of lighting = about 130,000 Lux), and thus increases the risk of damage to healthiness and sanity. However, when using a lesser power of lighting (400 to 2000 Lux), UV damage is practically non-existent.


FULL SPECTRUM OF STRIP LIGHTING STIMULATES

HEALTH, GROWING AND WELL–BEING

One-sided artificial light of normal strip lighting, energy saving lamps, bulbs and halogen lamps only contain a small amount of natural daylight. With lasting use, they weaken health and performance levels. There are also lights, which pretend to produce brighter light. However, these deviate even further from natural daylight. Only full spectrum lights compare satisfactorily with natural daylight.

Care should be taken as regards to so-called "daylight" strip lighting. These lights are often sold under the name of "Daylight" or "Natural Daylight". They have a higher color temperature (white light), but always depict a large deviation from the natural daylight spectrum.

Very unequal light spectrum of large similarity between full-spectrum Standard strip light strip light and natural daylight (nearly no UV-A and UV-B) The use of monochromatic light (green, red or blue), is often advertised. Alongside the benefits of these lights, there are also important disadvantages to consider. For example, red light causes an increase in the construction of the sleeping hormone, melatonin, (leading to inactivity and lethargy). It also increases blood pressure, leads to enlargement of anti-bodies as well as premature sexual maturity.

The absent UV light in the above lighting is of extreme importance to animals. Amongst others, it is responsible for bone construction, immune system, protection against allergies, achievements, well being, stress levels, blood pressure reduction, calcium metabolism etc..


Good lighting — a must for poultry!

Natural daylight is essential, not only for sight, but also for healthiness. Each different color of the natural daylight spectrum contributes to the health of poultry. Poultry sight is sharp and more sensitive to light changes. This therefore requires a modern high frequency guidance of the light. Full spectrum strip lighting in conjunction with modern electronic armatures is a perfect alternative for natural daylight. An optimum quality of light will be achieved. Achieving the correct quality of light is a major priority in poultry rearing, the results of which will become evident in production results.


ELECTRONIC BALLASTS SAVES ENERGY AND REDUCES STRESS

As poultry sight is very sharp, it is important to use the correct ballasts. Until 15 years ago, conventional TL ballasts were generally used in poultry sheds. The technique has been improved in recent years and modern high frequency electronic ballasts are now used.


What has been improved with regard to conventional ballasts?


  • Energy saving of about 30-35%
  • Longer life duration of lights (50%)
  • Less heat development which decreases the risk of fire
  • Flicker free driving system using the 33.000 Hz technique (50 Hz of conventional systems cause stress and other health problems because of the Cortisol hormone)
  • Better and sure ignition of light (also at a lower outside temperature)
  • Good dimmable ability to 1% or less, with relative high energy savings
  • Since May 2001, European legislation forbids the sale of conventional systems. Spare parts are also no longer available. The loss ballasts construction parts of the conventional system may be sold until 2005, but these are very expensive.


Comparison of conventional and modern ballasts

By just looking at the outside of the ballasts, no obvious difference is visible between the conventional and modern versions. However, the following attributes will assist in making the distinction:

  • A conventional light flickers at the moment of ignition
  • Conventional lights are heavier
  • Old and defective tubes are disconnected in new ballasts, whereas they flicker in conventional lights thus increasing the risk of fire.


GOOD LIGHT NOT ONLY DETERMINED BY LUX AND LUMEN

Until recently, the light current and power of lighting was considered in the building process of poultry houses. The light current is the amount of light, which is expressed in Lumen. The power of lighting is the amount of light, which is falling per square meter on a surface area. The unit of power of lighting is expressed in Lux. Standard values like "3 watt bulb per square meter", or "20 Lux on the floor" are complicated in the practical sense. The construction of the light spectrum has a very significant affect on the quantity of required light.


1 Lux = 1 Lumen per 1 square meter

Lux measuring apparatus is often used to measure the power of lighting. However, there are important disadvantages in this system i.e.

  • Only the yellow-green light spectrum is analyzed.
  • Only measured values of identical sources of light can be compared with each other
  • The possibility of light variation at the sensor can cause inaccuracy, whereas a digital measuring apparatus is much more reliable.
  • In poultry houses the power of lighting varies from 20 to 200 Lux. As a comparison, on a warm summer afternoon the power of lighting is about 130,000 Lux. Because of the great measuring range of the usual Lux-apparatus, the accuracy can vary by up to 20 to 200 Lux.

To ensure a good quality light is attained, it is no longer adequate to only adjust the correct light current and power of light. Other distinctive criteria should also be taken into consideration. Therefore, a Lux measuring apparatus is not enough because it cannot measure the quality of other light functions such as seeing contrasts, sharpness, colors and brilliance.


Optical Quality of Light versus biological Quality of Light

The optical quality of light varies from the biological quality of light. With an equal brightness impression, the light qualities of the full daylight spectrum are fundamentally better than standard artificial sources of light. Also, when for example a Lux measuring apparatus is used to compare with a standard bulb, it would show equal measure values, but there would always be a totally different impression of brightness. The difference in the experience of brightness is caused by the different ways light is recognized.


-- Note Worthy --

Could this be the beginning of "Star Trek Technology"?

"Tiny flashes of infrared light can play a role in healing wounds, building muscle, turning back the worst effects of diabetes and repairing blinded eyes. Wound-healing time was cut in half on board the USS Salt Lake City, a nuclear sub. And, diode flashes improved healing of Navy SEALs’ training injuries by more than 40 percent. Also, a prototype was used by U.S. Special Forces units in Iraq

This Food and Drug Administration-approved, handheld LED device – playfully called Warp 10 for its Star Trek style – was originally developed by NASA to stimulate plant growth. Now, the agency wants to use the gadgets to build astronauts' muscles during weightlessness. DNA synthesis in muscle cells quintupled after a single application of LEDs flashing at the 680–, 730– and 880–nanometer wavelengths."

Here is the full article


Using Light RAYS to Treat Disease
Light Rays NOT Light Waves !!!

S.A.D. – Winter Depression Caused by Lack of Light
The audio segment has more information about the Vita-Lite corporation.

The Art of Healing Ourselves

Using Hydroponics to Understand the Earth's Life Processes
On the Atomic Level

Tommy's History of Western Technology

Site Link List

The Tortoise Shell  "Science of Health"  Newsletter
— Putting an End to Disease on Our Planet —

Tortoise Shell Life Science Puzzle Box – Front Page

View this page Full Frame