{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02109375, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01640625, 'mean_word_length': 4.569565217391304, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
100 positive double-blind studies: enough or too little?

A major argument among the opponents of laser therapy has been the absence of scientific documentation. This was a valid position in the 80s and partly in the 90s. But today, is this still a sound argument. There are more than 2,000 published studies in the field, including meeting abstracts and anecdotal reports. The vast majority of these papers reports positive effects of LLLT in vitro and in vivo. It is fair to argue that negative results are less prone to be published, but certainly more than 80 percent of the published studies are positive. In the field of dentistry, for instance, the positive percentage is well above 90 percent. The present literature study will look at the heart of the positive documentation: the positive double blind studies. It may come as a surprise to many critics that there are more than 100 positive double blind studies in the field laser therapy. This is a god base for a further understanding of the effects of low level laser in the clinical setting. We must, however, be as critical as the sceptics themselves in order to obtain a constructive dialogue between 'attorneys' and sceptics. In this paper, a critical review of 100 positive double blind studies will be presented.