Can red-light therapy reverse skin aging?

Got fine lines, roughness, or uneven skin tone? Those signs of skin aging are inevitable for most of us. Social media influencers would have you believe that red-light therapy—delivered via masks, panels, lasers, or wands—is the fountain of youth. Is it?

What’s special about red-light therapy? 

Red and near-infrared light “get deeper into skin than other light,” says Michelle Wong, a chemist and creator of Lab Muffin Beauty Science, a website and social-media-based platform dedicated to explaining the science behind beauty products. (Wong has promoted several brands of red-light masks on “ShopMy,” a website that “connects creators, brands, and shoppers through curated, trusted recommendations.”) 

Red light waves penetrate just below the top layer of skin, while near-infrared light waves can penetrate an inch or two beneath the skin’s surface. Sunlight exposes us to both potentially beneficial waves, but unlike the sun, red light devices don’t also emit the harmful ultraviolet waves that drive sunburns, skin aging, and cancer. 

Red and near-infrared light appear to speed up the rate at which deeper skin cells generate energy. “And more energy means more collagen production,” says Debra Jaliman, an assistant clinical professor of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. That energy boost also speeds up tissue repair, reduces inflammation and mild redness, and lessens the appearance of fine lines.  

But red-light therapy may not help with the pesky dark spots and uneven skin tone (aka hyperpigmentation) that too much sun exposure can cause. And at-home devices haven’t been well tested in highly sun-damaged skin, says Wong. So if your skin shows signs like yellowing, a leathery texture, or deep wrinkles, see a dermatologist before investing in a red-light device.

The evidence for at-home devices 

How’s the evidence for at-home red-light therapy devices? Not great.  

For starters, the studies are small, and they’re often funded by device makers. Devices also differ widely by brand and by study, which makes the research results less consistent and harder to interpret.  

What’s more, it’s tough to get your hands on clinical trials on specific devices because manufacturers tend to keep their data under wraps (if they’ve done a trial at all).  

For example, we asked two brands for data: LightStim, which sells a wand for $250, and Mito Red Light, which sells a mask for $500. Mito Red Light directed us to a general red-light therapy “research hub” page on its website that, as the company acknowledges, features research on other red-light devices but no studies testing its own. LightStim’s website claims that, in “clinical studies, 100% of participants” saw “improvement in their fine lines and wrinkles in just 8 weeks.” But the company didn’t respond when we asked for details. 

What, then, can you expect from an at-home device? Not miracles. But your skin may start to look slightly smoother after a couple of months, according to a large study testing one particular red-light mask developed specifically for that research. 

In that manufacturer-funded trial of 59 middle-aged adults (mostly women), volunteers were randomly assigned to wear either a combination laser-and-LED mask that delivered red and near-infrared waves or a placebo mask that emitted red light at one-tenth the intensity of the combination mask and no near-infrared waves. Users wore the masks for nine minutes a day, five days a week. After 12 weeks, 86% of those who wore the combination mask had a slight reduction in crow’s feet, versus just 17% of those who wore the placebo mask.  

Other studies seem to agree with that potential anti-wrinkle benefit.  

In a trial testing the Skin Light Dior x Lucibel red-light LED mask in 20 middle-aged adults, the volunteers’ skin was 50% denser from collagen growth and 20% firmer and more elastic after three months. (Three of the study’s co-authors worked for the mask’s manufacturer.) And a study testing a red-and-near-infrared wand by Omnilux reported that nearly 90% of the 19 volunteers showed “moderate-to-marked” improvements in eye wrinkles…though a quarter of the volunteers didn’t think their crow’s feet looked any better. 

But both studies were small and lacked control groups, so we can’t be sure what their results mean. And without larger, more rigorous trials, it’s hard to say whether the gadgets are worth it.

In-office vs. at-home treatments 

Looking for faster (and possibly better) results? 

“In-office treatments use more powerful devices, so you may see the effects more quickly, and treatments can be customized to your concerns,” says Jaliman. (Dermatologists use panels of LEDs that deliver higher doses of light, and some also use lasers, which aren’t typically found in at-home devices.)   

In a randomized trial that tested more-powerful LED panels, 76 middle-aged adults (mostly women) received either red-light treatments, near-infrared treatments, both, or a placebo treatment on just one side of their face twice a week for four weeks. Twelve weeks later, those in the treatment groups had modestly less roughness, slightly improved skin elasticity, and a moderate reduction in wrinkles on the treated side. (Those receiving the placebo treatment showed no improvement.) And in a subgroup of participants, skin biopsies showed that those who were treated with red and near-infrared light had more, and thicker, collagen. (The trial was partly funded by the LED panel’s manufacturer.) 

That suggests that in-office treatments can work…albeit modestly. Another upside: Having a dermatologist administer the treatments makes them safer for people with an underlying skin condition.  

The downside? Seeing a dermatologist for red light treatments can set you back more than $100 per session, and you’ll need to make repeat trips. (Some med spas, salons, and wellness centers offer cheaper treatments at, say, $35 per session, but they tend to lack real medical oversight.) The tab can quickly surpass the price of at-home devices, which cost $400 or more but should last for years. 

“At-home masks and wands are convenient and less expensive than in-office visits over time,” says Jaliman. But “they’re lower-energy devices, so results tend to be subtler and require long-term use.”

Is red-light therapy safe? 

According to a panel of 21 experts, the data showing that red-light therapy is safe is stronger than the data showing that it works. (Four of the panelists disclosed ties to light-therapy companies.) 

That said, red-light treatments can pose some short-term risks. For example, “the light may irritate sensitive eyes with prolonged exposure,” says Jaliman. “Eye protection is important, especially with near-infrared devices.” In-office treatments typically require eye coverings, and some at-home devices come with them. To play it safe, look for brands that provide eye protection or buy your own. 

And don’t use an at-home device for longer than the manufacturer’s instructions recommend, Jaliman cautions: “Overuse can lead to irritation or dryness, particularly in sensitive skin.” Some people experience pain, redness, swelling, and—less frequently—blistering. Those adverse effects may be more pronounced with in-office treatments that use stronger devices, says Jaliman. 

Those warnings apply to pretty much everyone. But red-light therapy is riskier for people who have: 

• Skin that’s prone to discoloration: If you have darker skin or a history of hyperpigmentation that took a long time to fade, red-light therapy could backfire, causing irritation that can lead to dark marks, says Wong. If your skin is prone to discoloration, opt for medically supervised treatments or skip red-light therapy altogether.  
• Skin that’s sensitive to light: “People who take medications that increase their skin’s sensitivity to light may not be good candidates,” says Jaliman. Many drugs can make you sun sensitive. Commonly prescribed ones include antibiotics like doxycycline, retinoids for wrinkles and acne like tretinoin or isotretinoin, and the antirheumatic drug hydroxychloroquine. People with lupus or other health conditions that can make their skin more light sensitive should also avoid red-light therapy. 

Is long-term use safe? We don’t know yet. Red and near-infrared light don’t seem to cause the damage that ultraviolet light does, but skin cancer is still a theoretical risk with repeated treatments, Wong cautions. And since trials recruit only adults, we don’t know the risks for those under 18.

How to pick a red-light device 

It’s not clear how red-light therapy stacks up against other anti-aging options, though sunscreen and vitamin A derivatives like tretinoin likely have “better returns on investment” and work for most people, says Wong.  

But let’s say you’ve checked those boxes. If you still want to try a device—and you’re clear-eyed about the possibility of not seeing results—you could consider at-home red-light therapy.

“Look for devices labeled as ‘FDA-cleared’ from reputable companies,” says Jaliman. (The FDA has cleared some red-light therapy devices for treating signs of skin aging. But FDA clearance just means that the agency thinks the devices pose a low risk—not that they necessarily work. “FDA-registered” is a weaker label that says nothing about whether the device is even safe. FDA approval isn’t granted to red-light devices, though that hasn’t stopped some brands from inappropriately advertising their products as “FDA-approved.”) 

How can you tell which companies are “reputable”? Some “put a lot of effort into their research compared to other brands,” says Wong. Better brands may try to optimize the wavelengths of light that their devices emit or the spacing of their masks’ LED bulbs. Those are bound to cost more. (For example, Omnilux, which tests its products for skin aging benefits, charges roughly $400 for a mask.) 

It’s also worth finding something that you’ll use on a regular basis, Wong stresses, because devices require consistent use to see results. And don’t forget to check the warranty and return policy, she adds.  

Also, before you buy any device, check its technical specifications. The strength of the light it emits (its “irradiance”) matters. So do the wavelength of the light and the amount of energy your skin actually receives from it (its “fluence” or “dose”). And all three differ from product to product.  

Making sense of those specs is easier said than done, though, because scientists have yet to figure out how to optimize the numbers for skin aging while accounting for safety. Consider these rules of thumb, keeping in mind that they could change as more evidence rolls in: 

• Red wavelengths should fall between 630 and 660 nanometers. 
• Near-infrared wavelengths should fall between 830 and 850 nm. 
• Average irradiance should fall between 20 and 60 milliwatts per square centimeter. 
• Fluence should fall between 4 and 18 joules per square cm. 

If a brand doesn’t disclose numbers for its devices (or if it does but they’re far outside the above ranges), don’t waste your money.

The bottom line 

Red light holds anti-aging promise, but the evidence doesn’t live up to the hype. The therapy isn’t right for everyone, it hasn’t been proven safe over the long term, and it can’t outshine the basics: sunscreen and a good topical anti-aging skincare regimen.  

Treatments done by dermatologists deliver faster results but cost more. At-home devices are cheaper but work slowly and require multiple treatments per week. Most importantly, if you have a health condition that affects your skin, ask a dermatologist if red-light therapy is right for you.