Multiwave Locked System (MLS) laser therapy is marketed  as a healing and pain-relieving treatment based on simultaneous application of 808nm continuous light, and 905nm pulsed light from laser diodes.
I do not question that generic Low Light Laser Therapy can be beneficial to different ailments , although some do question it . But the company owning the patent claims MLS to be superior. This concerns me, because cost remains a major limitation in amount&quality of medical care all around the world, and health of many people can be influenced by such claims if these are widely accepted as truth without supporting evidence.
And here are serious red flags.
A) Numerous clinical studies have shown MLS to be beneficial, but they almost always compared to control groups that got entirely no light treatment. I found a single study to compare MLS to generic LLLT with questionable significance . To me, nothing seems to prove MLS is any better.
B) The name sounds like pseudo-scientific techno-babble. Sure, two pulsed lasers could be phase-locked. But how can one "lock" a series of pulses to a continuous wave? And should they call it "multiwave" when they just add light from two laser diodes?
C) The exact choice of 808nm CW laser diode and 905nm pulsed laser diode may seem to be based on some sophisticated medical knowledge. But it all may be also about cutting costs: The former are mass-produced for pumping Nd:YAG lasers (like green pointers), the latter are mass-produced for pulsed LIDAR in consumer electronics. Searching for cheap & powerful laser diodes emitting in the pass-band of haemoglobin on Ebay gives these two as the obvious choices.
Or am I missing something? Is there any supporting evidence that the patented MLS is any better than simple near-infrared light from cheap laser diodes?
 e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-level_laser_therapy and refs. therein
 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28783464/ (study on 75 patients only, with marginal advantage of MLS results for treating neck pain)