LED Light Therapy for Older Skin: What the Trials Measured, and What They Never Tested

LED Light Therapy for Older Skin: What the Trials Measured, and What They Never Tested

The short version

  • We sell these treatments. Not one of the trials below reports testing our panel, so none of this is evidence about our equipment, only about red and near infrared light in general.
  • What they measured was the appearance of lines. Hydration and elasticity were measured in one trial and did not move (Mota, 2023).
  • Nothing was quick. Every protocol ran for weeks, eight to twelve sessions at minimum, and no study tested a single session.
  • Three sessions a week did no better than two, and those authors concluded two seem to be sufficient (Bragato, 2025).
  • The research base is small, with methodological flaws and industry funding (Glass, 2021).

What the trials actually tested

Four trials matter, most run on roughly this age group.

  • 95 women aged 45 to 60, randomised, sham controlled, double blind, a red 660 nm LED mask for 21 minutes, two or three times a week for four weeks (Bragato, 2025).
  • 137 women aged 40 to 65, split face, ten sessions over four weeks, red 660 nm one side, amber 590 nm the other (Mota, 2023).
  • 136 volunteers, 30 sessions at twice weekly, measuring collagen density by ultrasound against a control group (Wunsch, 2014).
  • 60 people aged 30 to 65, all of Asian descent, recruited in Korea, a home mask at 630 nm and 850 nm for sixteen weeks (Park, 2025).

The split face trial reported wrinkle volume around the eyes down 31.6 per cent on the red side and 29.9 per cent on the amber side. Both sides of every face received light, so there was no untreated side to compare against.

The Wunsch study found a broad 570 to 850 nm spectrum gave no advantage over red alone. Worth remembering when a spec sheet lists more wavelengths.

The mechanism is an explanation, not a measurement

The usual account is that red light is absorbed inside cells and lifts mitochondrial energy production (Glass, 2021). None of the skin studies measured that in anyone's face.

A 2026 review calls that pathway plausible but incompletely verified (Wu, 2026). A plausible mechanism is not a measured one.

How long before anything showed up

The shortest protocols that produced measurable change ran four weeks at two or three sessions a week. Wunsch ran 30 sessions, roughly fifteen weeks.

In the home mask trial, week 8 is the earliest point at which a difference from sham is reported (Park, 2025). The paper does not say whether earlier points were assessed, so that is the earliest reported difference, not a proven onset.

What did not change

This is the part the marketing skips. In the split face trial, neither red nor amber improved hydration or elasticity (Mota, 2023). Both were measured and did not move.

In the sham controlled mask trial, three blinded specialists scoring photographs found no significant difference between the light groups and sham (Bragato, 2025). The significant results came from software, and only in two areas of the face.

Satisfaction scores were higher in the light groups in both Brazilian trials. Leaving that out would be as slanted as leaving out the nulls, but it is a soft endpoint from people who knew they had joined a light study.

Who ran the work

The first author of the 2014 collagen trial gives his affiliation as a commercial light consultancy, in a paper testing two light sources (Wunsch, 2014). The two Brazilian trials share a programme in Sao Paulo and some authors.

That does not make either wrong. It does mean this is a smaller body of work than four trials sounds.

Why the goggles stay on

The 2026 review of red light aimed directly into children's eyes found case reports of retinal injury, and concluded safety cannot be generalised across red light devices (Wu, 2026).

A facial panel is a different exposure and we are not suggesting it does what a myopia device does. That conclusion is still reason enough to cover your eyes.

Tell us about your medications

Photosensitive drug eruptions happen when a medication is combined with ultraviolet or visible radiation. Drugs consistently implicated include amiodarone, doxycycline, hydrochlorothiazide, naproxen and tetracycline (Blakely, 2019).

That review names no LED source and does not establish LED as a trigger. We ask as a precaution, not because a study shows a problem.

Several of those are common over fifty, so tell us what you take when you book. Same for recent isotretinoin or an active skin condition.

What to actually do

  • Treat it as a couple of months of visits, not a one off, and not a replacement for what already works.
  • Two sessions a week is what the only frequency comparison supports. Do not pay for a third on the strength of it.
  • Keep the sunscreen and the moisturiser. Nothing here replaced either.
  • Cosmetic retinol stays as it is. Prescription retinoids are medicines in New Zealand, so changing one is a conversation with whoever prescribed it.

We sell these treatments, so read this last bit carefully. We cannot tell you what our panel will do for your face, because the studies were not run on it. Anyone quoting a percentage off somebody else's trial is selling, not reporting.

The Verdo team

Frequently asked questions

Do these studies apply to the panel you actually use?
No, and we would rather say so up front. None of the trials we cite reports testing a Celluma panel, and a PubMed search for the brand name returns no records at all. The research tells you something about red and near infrared light in general, not about our equipment.
How many sessions before anything showed up in the research?
The protocols that reported measurable change used eight to twelve sessions across four weeks at minimum, and one ran 30 sessions. In the sixteen week home mask study, week 8 was the earliest timepoint at which a difference from sham is reported, and the paper does not say whether earlier points were assessed. No study tested a single session.
Should I book three times a week rather than two?
The evidence does not support paying for the extra visit. In a sham controlled trial of 95 women aged 45 to 60, three weekly sessions did no better than two over four weeks, and the authors concluded two seem to be sufficient. That was their mask and their protocol, but it is the only direct comparison of frequency we could find.
Will LED help with dryness or loss of firmness?
The split face trial measured both and found no improvement in hydration by corneometer or elasticity by cutometer, even though periocular wrinkle volume fell by roughly 30 per cent. Those two things were measured and did not move. Hydration is a job for your routine.
Why the goggles, and what should I tell you about medications?
A 2026 review of red light devices used in children's myopia management noted case reports of retinal injury and concluded safety cannot be generalised across devices, so we cover the eyes rather than assume. On medications, tell us if you take anything associated with photosensitivity, or if you have recently used isotretinoin. It is a precaution, not a known interaction with LED.
Back to blog

Keep reading