Sir,
The article “The untold saga of chromotherapy in dentistry”, by Sindhuja et al. (2022),[1] presents numerous scientifically questionable ideas with no hint of skepticism. It is appropriate for your journal to describe methods that are being used in clinical practice, but inappropriate to endorse uncritically ideas that are contrary to scientific knowledge.
It is plausible that different colors might have different psychological effects (though many claims are unsupported by convincing evidence[2]), and that light could trigger some hormonal responses. However, since visible light can only penetrate the outer few millimeters of skin, treatment of internal organs by administration of colored light is baseless. Yet, this appears to be one of the main uses of chromotherapy. Even more preposterous is the use of “charged” or “chromatised” water, either ingested or applied topically. Such water has been exposed to a particular color of light and supposedly has absorbed its energy. However, any visible light absorbed by water would merely be turned into temporary vibrations of the water molecules, not preserved as a source of healing energy specific to a particular organ.
Like many so-called complementary therapies, chromotherapy invokes vague ideas of “energy” in the body.[3] For example, the article refers to the “so-called ‘magnetic energy field’ also known as aura”. The authors focus on balancing the forces in the chakras, a prescientific idea that is inconsistent with modern knowledge of anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry. The seven chakras, ranging from the base of the spine to the top of the head, are said to be influenced by the colors in the same order that they appear in the spectrum. This scheme may be esthetically pleasing, but it has no correspondence with reality and does not belong in a medical journal.
The authors appear to accept these treatment methods and basic concepts without question. They do not acknowledge that they have been challenged.
The authors make grandiose claims for chromotherapy. There is said to be a “need of using this therapy as a part of routine treatment in clinical setups” and that for some patients it can “eliminate the root cause of the pathology”.
The article deals with not just dentistry, but all areas of medicine. We are told that Klotsche discovered chromotherapy “to be a comprehensive treatment plan for 123 major illnesses”. Treatments for hepatitis, diabetes, flu, arthritis, obesity, cancer, and other conditions are described. This is potentially dangerous, as patients may employ chromotherapy and delay necessary medical treatments. We are told, for example, that “Diabetes is caused by a lack of orange and yellow hues in the body”, which is absurd. Telling this to a patient will hinder the patient from dealing with the true underlying cause of diabetes. There is no warning to patients that they should first seek standard care.
In addition to the danger of substituting implausible methods for effective treatments, there is the expense of patients paying for what is essentially a placebo. Finally, the endorsement of chromotherapy undermines rational and scientific thinking, which is badly needed today.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgement
I thank Dr. William M. London for reading the manuscript and providing helpful suggestions.
References
1. Sindhuja DSV, Bhateja S, Sharma M, Arora GS. The untold saga of chromotherapy in dentistry. J Family Med Prim Care 2022;11:453–7.
2. Tofle RB, Schwarz B, Yoon S-Y, Max-Royale A. CoColor in healthcare environments - a research report [monograph on the Internet]. Coalition for Health Environments Research; 2004. Available from:
https://www.healthdesign.org/sites/ default/files/color_in_hc_environ.pdf. [Last accessed on 2022 Dec 17].
3. Stenger V. The energy fields of life. Skeptical Briefs [serial on the Internet]. 1998;8. Available from:
https://skepticalinquirer.org/newsletter/energy-fields-of-life/. [Last accessed on 2022 Dec 17].
