What Red Light Therapy Device(s) Would You Recommend?

[Casey Claar]

Posted by John Hilton (here)

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
some people reading may not have known there is a difference between UV and LED light

Forgive me but that sentence makes no sense. Various Light Emitting Diodes are available, which can produce a variety of frequencies from near infrared all the way up to near ultraviolet. You choose the frequency/frequencies that you require. Red and red + near infrared are the most popular right now but other colours are available.

My preference is for sunlight. I get up early every morning, walk steeply uphill and observe the (usually red) rising sun over the sea as I walk downhill.

As for a decent red+infrared lamp, I don't think you can beat this:

Kerbl Infrared Lamp Tempered Glass 150 W
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002B5F6JC

Obviously, you can't pulse it - it gives a steady light - but you can dim it if desired.

Thank you, John, yes that should read "between UV and LED light therapies, through devices specifically offered in clinics and hospitals; the former will include the shorter wavelengths and higher energy, while the latter involves only the longer wavelengths and lower energy. While the sun, with which I have an exceptional relationship, has not offered help with what I go to red light therapy for -- the red light therapy has had observable benefit, notably with skin related issues. It entirely took care of a skin eruption on my face that had begun presenting back in roughly 2010 and was gradually advancing into quite an eye sore. And more recently, just this past month completely healed a bleeding and itching wound that appeared out of nowhere on my back.

I can highly recommend the device I have chosen as well : the mitoPRO X

What has yours helped you with? I would love to hear!

[John Hilton]

I haven't used mine yet. I lent it to a sick friend. Unfortunately, she died from sepsis - a result of half-hearted nursing care that allowed skin ulcers to form. I can't remember where I stored it. Oh, I think I lent it to another sick friend. I must get it back before he returns to England.

[JohanB]

I use the “NoMore” nasal device occasionally, believing it does help with my snoring (my wife says) and chronic blocked nose.

https://try-nomore.com/

[Michi]

Hello Casey
Just recently I got aware of the Red Light Therapy when I watched a related youtube video from Redacted:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CL7UuBFdocE

Despite it's perhaps exaggerating title and its sales-intent, it gives quite some insights on the effect of such devices.
The featured device is from Redlife (https://myredlight.com) and at it's shop you can find all kind of sizes of panels.

A comparable German manufactor (for those interested) I found at: https://www.mitolight.de/mito-light-starter-5-0/
The keypoints to look out for on such devices are:

• frequency wavelengths: 480, 590, 630, 660, 670, 810, 830, 850, (1060) nm
• Rated Power: 200W and higher
• Irradiance data: R+NIR: 6 inches – 140 mW/cm2 and higher (solar meter)
• LED angle: 30 degrees

[Michi]

I located (and ordered) a much more affordable and of similiar size to the Mito Starter via Alibaba from Saidi at China.

Before ordering I had an rather extensive chat to question some value discrepancies on their website and got also a photo on the irradiance messurement taken at 5 inches distance and the unit appears quite promising and has also the 940 and 1050nm wave lengths.



Once I have the unit, I will post my experiences here.
Has anybody already had experiences with this or comparable units?

Background:
In end of February this year after weeks of nerve pains I went to my house doctor and he referred me to the hospital in which I was diagnosed with malign B-Cell Non-Hodkin Lymphom (Cancer).

I stayed there 10 days and was assured, that type of cancer has a very high healing success rate.
After receiving several chemos and several sittings Immunotherapy with Rituximab I am since April/June, cancer-free.

My premise is by implementing photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy, I bring my body in such good condition where cancer can't develop anymore but foremost I would like to rekindle my muscles and joints and bones.

[Harmony]

Michi, so glad you are well again and recovering well. There are numerous threads about help for cancer, like this one All About Cancer and many more, if you search for the word cancer and tick thread titles. Hopefully there will be a member that might have some other experience with using red light therapy as well.

[Casey Claar]

Goodness, Michi, yes, congratulations on becoming cancer-free! How are you feeling now after the chemotherapy? I look forward to hearing your journey with the red light. It is my understanding that only the infra red will penetrate past the level of the skin, and that for this, the red light device must be very close to the body (within an inch, or couple inches).

I hope others will post their experiences here as well.

[Michi]

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
Goodness, Michi, yes, congratulations on becoming cancer-free! How are you feeling now after the chemotherapy?

Thank you Casey
Actually some time into the Chemo (4th chemo) I had to visit again the hospital. I called the emergency ambulance and fortunately they came soon after. At the hospital I was diagnosed with Campylobacter coli bacteria infection. That was due to my compromised imune system. I was treated with intravenous antibiotics and left the hospital after recovery.
Subsequently I got the agreement from my onkologists to end my chemo treatments and only continue with Immunotherapy infusions.

By now everything is back to normal except my muscle strength has weakened. I take weekly part of rehab sport sessions.

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
It is my understanding that only the infra red will penetrate past the level of the skin, and that for this, the red light device must be very close to the body (within an inch, or couple inches).

Actually an important factor for the penetration depth is the wavelength, which can be seen in the following diagram:

Source

Thus deeper pentration also affect muscle and bones.

[Casey Claar]

Posted by Michi (here)

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
Goodness, Michi, yes, congratulations on becoming cancer-free! How are you feeling now after the chemotherapy?

Thank you Casey
Actually some time into the Chemo (4th chemo) I had to visit again the hospital. I called the emergency ambulance and fortunately they came soon after. At the hospital I was diagnosed with Campylobacter coli bacteria infection. That was due to my compromised imune system. I was treated with intravenous antibiotics and left the hospital after recovery.
Subsequently I got the agreement from my onkologists to end my chemo treatments and only continue with Immunotherapy infusions.

By now everything is back to normal except my muscle strength has weakened. I take weekly part of rehab sport sessions.

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
It is my understanding that only the infra red will penetrate past the level of the skin, and that for this, the red light device must be very close to the body (within an inch, or couple inches).

Actually an important factor for the penetration depth is the wavelength, which can be seen in the following diagram:

Attachment 57379
Source

Thus deeper pentration also affect muscle and bones.

Yes, exactly! (on the diagram)

It may have been lazy wording on my part. Only to say, again, in my understanding, is that within the scope of RED light therapy, the infra-red is said to penetrate the deepest.

I am so pleased to hear you are doing fairly well, and that life is predominantly back to normal. May you continue to be so blessed, in every day, within every breath.

Thank you for sharing your healing journey here in this thread

[RunningDeer]

Casey, you asked on another thread specifically about red light therapy for their eyes. As mentioned, I use a red-light and near-infrared light device daily for about 12 minutes for 4 years this November. (model here)

Last week I went for a consultation because my vision is getting more blurry due to cataracts. I’m in the process of going through the steps to correct it. Fortunately the ophthalmologist confirmed there’s no glaucoma or macular degeneration.

It’s hard to say how much red light and near-infrared light therapy has helped. I’m inclined to believe that there are benefits. I say this because three of my siblings had cataract surgery five to seven year ago, and they’re all younger than me by two to six years. My parents had the surgery in their 60’s. (I’m 76)

Posted by Casey Claar (here)
I have a question.

Has anyone here used RED LIGHT THERAPY SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR EYES?

I am looking for information regarding the device you settled on, how exactly you use it, specifically what for and any effect the therapy had.

If you are using red light therapy for something not involving the eyes I would love to hear from you also.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.


Casey

[Casey Claar]

RunningDeer,

I remember your assistance with my questions on that other thread ( and thank you again!! ), it all helped me very much in the choice for the device I would or would not inevitably choose. I appreciate you bringing our discussion over into the mix of this more focused discussion, specifically on RED LIGHT THERAPY DEVICES. Re: red light for the eyes, I, too, began using red light therapy on my face/eyes. The sessions always feel SOOO good, most specifically when focused toward the face. I began with 5 minutes, eyes open, roughly 3-4 times a week --for small chunks of time punctuated with larger periods of rest. Other times, when working on the skin on my face, I may keep my eyes closed for all but 1-2 minutes of the session. I have not been moved to continue with work on my eyes in some time, perhaps 3 months. Not due to any potentially deleterious effect, I just have not felt the call (and, I do, very attentively feel for this first). I am pleased to hear the recent confirmation of your ophthalmologist, of there being no glaucoma or macular degeneration -very good news!

[Michi]

@Casey and @RunningDeer

In the above mentioned Youtube video from Clayton at mark 31:25 John Otto mention 41 clinical studies done on 6400 children.

At around the mark 33:20 the treatment details are covered.

At around mark 13:57 Clayton says, how he is using the device.

So - it looks like you have done everything right ...

[RunningDeer]

Posted by Michi (here)
@Casey and @RunningDeer

In the above mentioned Youtube video from Clayton at mark 31:25 John Otto mention 41 clinical studies done on 6400 children.

At around the mark 33:20 the treatment details are covered.

At around mark 13:57 Clayton says, how he is using the device.

Posted by Michi (here)
Hello Casey
Just recently I got aware of the Red Light Therapy when I watched a related youtube video from Redacted:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CL7UuBFdocE

Despite it's perhaps exaggerating title and its sales-intent, it gives quite some insights on the effect of such devices.
The featured device is from Redlife (https://myredlight.com) and at it's shop you can find all kind of sizes of panels.

A comparable German manufactor (for those interested) I found at: https://www.mitolight.de/mito-light-starter-5-0/
The keypoints to look out for on such devices are:

• frequency wavelengths: 480, 590, 630, 660, 670, 810, 830, 850, (1060) nm
• Rated Power: 200W and higher
• Irradiance data: R+NIR: 6 inches – 140 mW/cm2 and higher (solar meter)
• LED angle: 30 degrees

Thanks, Michi.
And thank you for sharing the uplifting news of your healing journey and recovery.

AI Summary:

The discussion centers on claims that “medbed” technology may represent an advanced form of regenerative medicine, with red-light therapy and pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy presented as existing technologies that could embody some of those principles. The conversation highlights numerous purported benefits—including increased stem-cell and exosome activity, improved mitochondrial function, tissue repair, thyroid function, vision, cognition, pain, and cancer outcomes—while also featuring personal anecdotes from the hosts and other individuals who reportedly experienced improvements. It also advances a broader narrative that pharmaceutical and medical interests have suppressed or discouraged regenerative approaches because they threaten profitable chronic-disease treatment models. The interview ultimately encourages people to investigate the cited research, experiment with red-light/PEMF approaches, and consider commercially available home devices as an accessible form of “medbed-level” technology.

Key Points:

• The discussion begins with a deleted AI-generated video posted by President Trump depicting futuristic “medbeds” capable of regenerating the body and reversing disease.

• The deleted post is presented as potentially significant rather than merely humorous or accidental, with speculation about whether it was intentionally signaling future technology.

• “Medbeds” are described as futuristic healing devices, while red light, near-infrared light, PEMF, stem cells, exosomes, and related technologies are presented as real-world technologies sharing some regenerative concepts.

• The interview argues that light-based medicine has a history extending back more than a century.

• Niels Ryberg Finsen’s early-20th-century work on light therapy and his 1903 Nobel Prize are cited as evidence of the longstanding medical study of therapeutic light.

• The discussion attributes the subsequent decline of naturopathic and non-drug therapies partly to the Flexner Report and the increasing dominance of pharmaceutical medicine.

• A 2022 human pilot study is cited as reportedly finding a substantial short-term increase in circulating stem cells following red-light exposure.

• Exosomes are described as important signaling components involved in tissue repair and regeneration.

• The discussion repeatedly claims that red-light therapy can stimulate stem-cell and exosome activity, cellular energy production, tissue repair, and regeneration.

• Mitochondria are identified as a central mechanism, with light described as interacting with mitochondrial chromophores and increasing ATP production.

• ATP is presented as the cellular energy source needed for numerous biological processes, including cellular repair and programmed cell death.

• Red light is described as potentially supporting cellular respiration and oxygen utilization through mechanisms involving cytochrome oxidase.

• The discussion claims that red light may help the body eliminate certain toxins and halogens and improve thyroid function.

• A study involving people with Hashimoto’s thyroiditis is cited as allegedly showing dramatically better thyroid outcomes with red-light treatment than without it.

• Several cancer-related studies are discussed, including photodynamic-therapy research involving red/near-infrared light and methylene blue.

• Animal studies involving colorectal cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma are cited as showing major reductions in tumor size or complete tumor ablation under particular experimental conditions.

• Human melanoma cases involving methylene-blue injections followed by red/near-infrared light are cited as examples of rapid tumor responses.

• The interview also cites research involving prostate cancer, claiming substantial improvements in remission and reductions in the need for surgery.

• Childhood eyesight research is discussed, with dozens of clinical trials and thousands of children reportedly showing benefits from red-light treatment for slowing vision deterioration.

• The hosts emphasize personal experiences with red-light therapy, particularly improvements in reading vision and reduced reliance on reading glasses after several weeks.

• Similar anecdotal improvements are reported for the host’s wife and mother-in-law, while the host’s son is also beginning to use red-light therapy for an existing vision issue.

• PEMF therapy is presented as complementary to red-light therapy, with the combination described as simultaneously stimulating biological responses through light and magnetic fields.

• Home-use devices are described as providing multiple wavelengths of red and near-infrared light, with different panel sizes offering similar wavelength ranges and varying overall power.

• The interview recommends positioning the devices relatively close to the body and describes sessions ranging from short exposures several times a week to daily sessions, depending on the intended use.

• Blue light is discussed as having more superficial penetration and is suggested for skin-related applications, while red and near-infrared wavelengths are presented as penetrating more deeply.

• The discussion repeatedly acknowledges skepticism and encourages examining peer-reviewed research, study parameters, and potential conflicts of interest rather than accepting claims automatically.

• Alongside scientific claims, the interview advances a strong critique of pharmaceutical medicine, arguing that financial incentives can discourage treatments that might reduce dependence on drugs and long-term medical care.

• Numerous individual anecdotes are presented—including improvements involving thyroid problems, chronic pain, mobility, peripheral vision, cognition, and fatigue—as evidence supporting the broader regenerative-health narrative.

• The interview concludes by portraying commercially available red-light and PEMF devices as affordable, home-based alternatives that could provide some of the regenerative capabilities popularly associated with “medbeds.”

[Henry]

i would not recommend red-light types of therapy.

Wishing those who are suffering in any way, safe healing and happiness.

[Casey Claar]

Posted by Henry (here)
i would not recommend red-light types of therapy.

Wishing those who are suffering in any way, safe healing and happiness.

Would you like say why?