The Debate is over — Low pressure hyperbaric oxygen therapy proves its effectiveness
Major News — A landmark study, in a mainstream and peer-reviewed hyperbaric medical journal has just been released, and it supports the use of lower pressure protocols for hyperbaric medicine. This is groundbreaking, because for over two decades now, there has been a constant and heated debate going on between hyperbaric physicians on the use of low pressure protocols, and whether or not they were as effective as higher pressures. Advocates of lower pressure protocols have clearly focused their opinion on the scientific rationale of the gas pressure laws of physics and say that ANY pressure will have a physiological effect – they also have growing support from empirical data. On the other hand, skeptics of lower pressure protocols say “where is the research”, and they also quote that “most of the clinical research is at higher pressures”.
This study should finally put these to rest. Here, they looked at 3 different pressure protocols: 1.3 ATA (ambient air), 1.5 ATA (pure oxygen), and 1.75 ATA (pure oxygen). They then added all 3 pressure protocols to a standard intensive exercise program for CP children and followed them with for an 8-month period of time. The results were astonishing. Not only did they find that all 3 hyperbaric oxygen pressures gave significant improvements, but there was no difference between the pressures. More startling to skeptics of lower pressure protocols, the lower pressure protocol did not even use the conventional pure oxygen, and instead only used regular ambient air.
Why this is groundbreaking is because typically in past studies, a lower pressure protocol using regular ambient air has been used as the placebo dose in studies. This is really the point of contention. The supporters of lower pressure protocols argue “how can you use 1.3 ATA ambient air as a placebo when the laws of physics clearly show that this is actually a treatment dosage” This study clearly supports their notion pressure is the key variable in hyperbaric oxygenation therapy. Pandoras box is open! <view study>
Major News — A landmark study, in a mainstream and peer-reviewed hyperbaric medical journal has just been released, and it supports the use of lower pressure protocols for hyperbaric medicine. This is groundbreaking, because for over two decades now, there has been a constant and heated debate going on between hyperbaric physicians on the use of low pressure protocols, and whether or not they were as effective as higher pressures. Advocates of lower pressure protocols have clearly focused their opinion on the scientific rationale of the gas pressure laws of physics and say that ANY pressure will have a physiological effect – they also have growing support from empirical data. On the other hand, skeptics of lower pressure protocols say “where is the research”, and they also quote that “most of the clinical research is at higher pressures”.
This study should finally put these to rest. Here, they looked at 3 different pressure protocols: 1.3 ATA (ambient air), 1.5 ATA (pure oxygen), and 1.75 ATA (pure oxygen). They then added all 3 pressure protocols to a standard intensive exercise program for CP children and followed them with for an 8-month period of time. The results were astonishing. Not only did they find that all 3 hyperbaric oxygen pressures gave significant improvements, but there was no difference between the pressures. More startling to skeptics of lower pressure protocols, the lower pressure protocol did not even use the conventional pure oxygen, and instead only used regular ambient air.
Why this is groundbreaking is because typically in past studies, a lower pressure protocol using regular ambient air has been used as the placebo dose in studies. This is really the point of contention. The supporters of lower pressure protocols argue “how can you use 1.3 ATA ambient air as a placebo when the laws of physics clearly show that this is actually a treatment dosage” This study clearly supports their notion pressure is the key variable in hyperbaric oxygenation therapy. Pandoras box is open! <view study>
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
Aging
Anxiety
Arthritis
Athletes
Autism
Bone Healing
Brain Health
Cancer
Cellular Energy
Cerebral Palsy
Chronic Infection
Concussion
COVID-19
Degenerative Disc Disease
Depression
Diabetes
Drug & Alcohol
Eczema
Erectile Dysfunction
Fatigue (chronic)
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome
Fibromyalgia
Fragile X syndrome
GI Tract
Hearing
Heart
High Blood Pressure
HIV infection
Hyperbaric Ambient Air Pressure
Inflammation
Liver Disease
Macular Degeneration
Migraine Headaches
Mild Hyperbarics (m-HBOT)
Mold
Multiple Sclerosis
Obesity
Organ Transplant
Osteoporosis
Pain (chronic)
Parkinson's Disease
Protection
PTSD
Pulmonary Fibrosis
Spinal Cord Injury
Stem Cells
Stroke
Surgery (plastic/reconstructive)
Teeth and Gums
Tissue & Nerve Regeneration
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
Vision
Wound Healing