Infrared light therapy: new research on cell communication, mitochondria and systemic effects
New research challenges the simple explanation that red and near-infrared light only "increases ATP". Studies from 2024–2026 show that photobiomodulation can affect ultra-weak photon emissions, extracellular vesicles, redox signals and biological responses that vary with the state of the cell. A small human study also indicates that 850 nm light directed at the body can produce measurable effects in a tissue that was not illuminated directly. Overall, the research points to an exciting perspective: light can function both as energy and as biological information.
A new chapter in the research on red and infrared light
Photobiomodulation - PBM - has long been explained through the mitochondria.
Red and near-infrared light is absorbed by light-sensitive structures in cells, affects electron transport, redox balance, nitric oxide and the mitochondria's production of adenosine triphosphate, ATP.
This explanation is still important.
But it is no longer sufficient.
Recent research suggests that light can also have an effect how cells react to stress, how they send signals to other cells and how a local light stimulation can have biological consequences elsewhere in the body.
This is the main topic of this article.
Uno Vita already has extensive articles on what red light therapy is, basic PBM mechanisms, skin, pulsation, dosage and the difference between red light therapy and infrared sauna. Therefore, we will not go through all this again here. This article concentrates instead on a more recent and far less talked about research front: stress-dependent cell response, biophotons, extracellular vesicles and systemic remote effects of light.
The most important thing first: Four research findings you should know
· In one Scientific Reports-study from 2025, 660 and 850 nm light had little effect on the biophoton emission from healthy nerve cell-like cells and resting astrocytes. When the cells were chemically stressed, the light response became more apparent.
· In the same study, strongly disturbed ATP and ROS levels moved under several experimental conditions back towards the levels before the stress effect.
· A 2024 study showed that 830 nm light at a specific dose increased the shedding of extracellular vesicles from human mesenchymal stem cells more than sixfold.
(The study suggests that near-infrared light does not only affect the cells hit by the light. At a certain dose, the stem cells increased the secretion of small biological 'message packages' - extracellular vesicles - more than sixfold. Such vesicles are used by cells to send proteins, RNA and other signaling substances to neighboring cells and more distant tissues. This provides a possible mechanism for how a local light treatment can initiate wider repair and communication signals in the body)
· A human study from 2025 showed that 850 nm light towards the body could be associated with improved visual function even when the head was physically shielded from the light.
None of these studies alone prove that PBM "normalises diseased cells" or that biophotons constitute a fully mapped communication system.
But together they point to something significant:
The biological response to light appears to be dependent on the state of the cell, and the effect can continue far beyond the first cell to absorb the photon.
Mitochondria - the body's power plant and the core of ageing
To understand why these findings are so interesting, we need the framework: what do the mitochondria do, and what happens when they do not function optimally?
Mitochondria make up 30–40% of the cell's total volume in highly active tissues such as the heart, brain and muscle. They:
· Produces ~90% of the body's energy (ATP) via the electron transport chain
· Controls programmed cell death (apoptosis) – critical for cancer control
· Regulates calcium signaling and neurotransmitter synthesis
· Produces reactive oxygen species (ROS) as signaling molecules in controlled amounts
· Coordinates inflammatory response through NF-kB and other roads
ATP production also falls 40-70% during a normal life. This decline is directly linked to a number of chronic conditions: heart disease (mitochondrial dysfunction in cardiomyocytes), neurodegeneration (Alzheimer's and Parkinson's are both characterized by mitochondrial failure), type 2 diabetes, kidney disease and widespread chronic pain conditions.
Professor Roger Seheult uses an apt analogy: the mitochondria are like car variants that produce heat as a by-product of combustion. Without adequate cooling, the engine overheats – damaging the organelles themselves in a self-reinforcing spiral of oxidative stress.
The 2025 study: Healthy and stressed cells responded differently to light
One of the most interesting PBM studies of the last two years was published in Scientific Reports in November 2025.
Jaimie Hoh Kam and colleagues investigated nerve cell-like Neuro-2a cells and astrocytes. The researchers measured extremely weak light emissions from the cells - so-called biophotons – at the same time as they investigated ATP and reactive oxygen compounds, ROS.
The cells were studied in three situations: in a normal resting state, after chemical stress, and after exposure to red and near-infrared light. The PBM light consisted of 660 nm red light and 850 nm near-infrared light, with two energy levels corresponding to 9.4 and 16.5 J/cm² over two minutes.
Almost no change in healthy cells
In the healthy cells at rest, neither lower nor higher light dose produced any significant change in the measured biophoton emission.
The difference came when the cells were exposed to stress. Under stress, the light treatment changed the biophoton emission more clearly, especially in the Neuro-2a cells and in one of the stress models.
The researchers concluded that red and near-infrared light had little effect on biophoton emission in healthy cells at rest, but a greater effect when the cells were stressed.
The scientifically correct statement is:
Red and near-infrared light affected stressed cell models differently and in several cases more clearly than the same cells in a normal resting state.
It is important to distinguish between stressed cell models in laboratory and sick people. But the discovery is still biologically interesting, and it points towards something fundamental.
ATP and ROS moved back towards the initial level
The researchers in the 2025 study didn't just measure biophotons. They also examined ATP and ROS.
After the acute chemical stress, ATP and ROS rose sharply. When the cells were then treated with red and near-infrared light, these levels were reduced in many cases. Under several conditions, they moved close to the cells' output level.
The authors describe the observation that PBM appeared to restore balance after the severe acute stress.
Here is the concept normalization becomes interesting – but it requires precision:
One should not conclude that red light generally "normalises diseased cells". What the study supports is a more cautious hypothesis:
Under certain stress conditions, PBM can act homeostatically – that is, help to move a strongly disturbed cellular state back towards a more balanced level.
This is significantly different from the idea that PBM just turns up cell activity. Modulation means regulation, not maximum stimulation.
Why can a stressed cell respond differently?
A cell in good homeostasis is already relatively stable. ATP production, membrane potential, calcium, redox balance and signaling pathways operate within a functional area.
A cell under oxidative, inflammatory or metabolic stress is in a different state. The electron transport chain may be affected, redox signals changed and the energy balance disturbed.
The same photon therefore meets biologically not the same system.
A central part of the explanation is the enzyme cytochrome c oxidase (COX) – complex IV in the mitochondrial electron transport chain and the primary photoreceptor for PBM light. When COX is inhibited by nitric oxide (NO) – which typically occurs during oxidative stress and inflammation – it is more easily released by the light, and the mitochondria restore production. In healthy cells, there is little NO inhibition and little to restore. Independent evidence for this is well established in the PBM literature.
This may be part of the explanation for it biphasic dose-response which is well described in the PBM field: a low or moderate dose can produce the desired biological response, while a higher dose does not necessarily produce a stronger effect.
Biophotons - do living cells send light to each other?
Here the research enters a more experimental area.
Living cells produce extremely weak photon emissions that can be recorded with specialized photomultipliers. The phenomenon is referred to as ultra-weak photon emission (UPE) or biophoton emission.
These photons are real and measurable. The big question is what they mean.
One hypothesis is that they are simply by-products of chemical and redox-related processes. A far more exciting hypothesis is that some of the photons can be part of biological information transfer - that a cell can convey information about its activity or state of stress to surrounding cells.
The authors of the 2025 study explicitly mention the possibility that biophotons can be part of cell communication and play a possible role in repair and regeneration.
However, this is one hypothesis, not established physiology. The study does not prove that cells have an optical communication system. What it shows is that external red and near-infrared light can change the pattern of ultra-weak photon emissions in a way that depends on the state of the cells. That in itself is remarkable.
Extracellular vesicles – an already recognized biological channel
Cells communicate continuously via hormones, cytokines, neurotransmitters, ion channels and direct contacts. But one of the most interesting channels for PBMs is extracellular vesicles (EVs) – microscopic membrane packages that cells send out, loaded with biological information in the form of proteins, lipids and RNA.
In 2024, researchers at Taipei Medical University investigated what 830 nm near-infrared light did to human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells.
The response was clearly biphasic. Wood 5 J/cm² the researchers found the greatest improvement in cell viability and migration. But perhaps the most interesting observation was an average one 6.25-fold increase in the concentration of extracellular vesicles compared to untreated cells.
It does not mean that all the vesicles necessarily convey a positive effect in humans. But it shows that near-infrared light can affect a concrete and well-documented channel for intercellular communication.
This gives a completely different perspective on PBM:
A photon may not need to physically reach every cell that is subsequently affected. It may be sufficient to initiate a biological signal which the body then passes on.
Can light on the back affect the eye?
This brings us to one of the most startling human studies of recent years.
In July 2025, Glen Jeffery and colleagues at University College London published a study in Scientific Reports on deep penetration and systemic effects of longwave light.
The researchers first showed that long-wavelength light in sunlight could actually be measured after it had passed through human tissue. Transmission was greatest in the surrounding area 800–875 nm. At 850 nm, the amount of light coming through the chest was very small compared to incoming sunlight – but it was measurable.
The researchers then used a controlled 850 nm LED panel aimed at the participants' backs for 15 minutes, and measured visual function the following day.
The head was wrapped in aluminum
Because NIR light is reflected from walls and surfaces, the eyes could have indirectly received light. A separate group therefore had their heads physically shielded with aluminium.
The result:
· In normal body exposure, the tritan color contrast threshold was improved by around 16 percent
· Even when the head was shielded, the improvement was all around 7 percent and statistically significant for the tritan measurement
· For protan contrast, the improvement in the head shielded group was not statistically significant
The most startling thing is not the size of the effect. It is the location:
The light hit the body. The measured functional change occurred in the visual system.
Jeffery and colleagues point to possible changes in circulating cytokines after local light stimulation as one potential mechanism. It may also be due to combinations of direct photon penetration, altered local metabolism, NO-related effects, extracellular vesicles and neurohumoral mechanisms. Probably there is no single mechanism.
Another interesting study: Normal cells and cancer cells reacted differently
A study published in Journal of Biophotonics (Aviña et al., 2026) investigated how normal muscle cells and lung adenocarcinoma cells responded to PBM, with 660 nm red LED light and 830 nm near-infrared laser, doses between 0 and 20 J/cm².
Normal C2C12 muscle cells showed a clear biphasic response – at 5 J/cm² NIR the researchers found the greatest increase in cell viability and ATP.
A549 lung adenocarcinoma cells, on the other hand, showed stable or slightly reduced viability.
This again illustrates a central principle:
The same light and the same dose can produce different responses in different biological environments.
But the study does not document that PBM treats cancer, nor does it show that PBM always "spares healthy cells and attacks sick ones". What it shows is cell type-specific and condition-dependent response - an important but limited finding from cell culture.
Is cytochrome c oxidase the whole explanation?
No. CCO is one of the most important proposed photoacceptors and has been central to PBM research for decades. But modern models include far more mechanisms.
A large systematic review article in Journal of Translational Medicine (Shivappa et al., 2025) mapped the current picture: PBM affects a network of processes, including cytochrome c oxidase and electron transport, changes in ATP, controlled ROS signaling, nitric oxide, mitochondrial membrane potential, NF-kB, CREB, MAPK/ERK and cytokines.
The authors emphasize that the response is context dependent - results in biological systems with a low degree of stress may be weaker or more variable. It matches well with the biophoton study's findings on healthy versus stressed cells.
Depending on the wavelength, tissue and dose, light can also affect water structures, ion channels, calcium signaling, redox-sensitive proteins and the properties of cell membranes. In other words, the picture is one biological network, not one photoreceptor and one reaction.
Light as information – not just energy
The classic PBM model:
light → mitochondria → ATP → biological effect
The modern:
light → photoreceptors and mitochondria → changed bioenergetics and redox status → secondary signaling pathways → gene expression, cytokines, ion channels and extracellular signals → local and possible systemic response
It is this shift in perspective that makes the PBM research in 2025–2026 so interesting. The light initiates a biological cascade which the body itself continues – via vesicles, cytokines, NO and possibly biophotons. The response size depends on the state of the cell, not just on the energy of the photons.
Whole-body PBM: From focused treatment to systemic approach
If PBM worked solely through photons directly hitting a specific target tissue, there would logically be little reason to treat large body surfaces. If, on the other hand, large illuminated areas produce secondary biological signals that circulate further in the body, whole-body exposure becomes far more interesting.
A protocol study published in BMJ Open (Fitzmaurice et al., 2022) describes the first clinical trial of whole-body PBM for chronic widespread pain at an NHS hospital in Birmingham. The system used:
· 2400 LEDs, 50:50 red (660 nm) / near-infrared (850 nm)
· Fluence: 33.6 J/cm²
· Treatment time: 20 minutes
· Protocol: 18 treatments over 6 weeks
The patient group included chronic axial pain, polyarthralgia, myofascial pain and fibromyalgia. By the time of the protocol's publication in 2022, 1.6 million treatments had been given globally with no reported serious side effects.
The Fibromyalgia Study: The Actual Results
In 2023, Fitzmaurice and colleagues published the results of the subsequent feasibility study in people with fibromyalgia. 21 people started and 19 completed 18 full-body treatments over six weeks.
The researchers reported improvements in fibromyalgia-related quality of life, pain, tenderness, stiffness, fatigue, sleep, anxiety, depression, and subjective cognitive function. Several improvements were still present at follow-up after 24 weeks.
But: The study had no control group and few participants, and was primarily designed to investigate feasibility. It cannot alone prove a treatment effect. Good science communication must distinguish between interesting signals and definitive documentation.
The Norwegian fibromyalgia context
A Norwegian study from the Rheumatism Hospital in Lillehammer (Mengshoel et al., Scandinavian Journal of Pain, 2022) surveyed 130 fibromyalgia patients (84% women). Of these had 95% severe or very severe disease measured with FSQ. On average, the patients had seen multiple specialists, undergone MRI, CT, X-ray and ultrasound, and been treated by everything from GPs to chiropractors, psychologists and acupuncturists - with an average duration of illness of 11 years.
The clear picture: fibromyalgia patients are not undertreated – they are inadequately treated. That makes whole-body PBM an interesting addition for a group where existing options have not provided them with lasting relief.
A larger systematic review came in 2026
In June 2026, a systematic overview of PBM in fibromyalgia was published in Lasers in Medical Science. It included seven randomized controlled trials and a total of 495 participants. Six of the studies reported short-term reductions in pain, and short-term pain reductions of around 30–55 percent was reported in several studies.
An important caveat: The studies used very different wavelengths, energy doses, lasers and LED systems, treatment sites, protocol lengths and frequencies. The differences were so great that the researchers did not conduct an overall meta-analysis.
The conclusion was that PBM appears as one promising, well-tolerated adjunctive approach for short-term symptom support - not a cure - and that larger, standardized studies are needed.
What does the total documentation base say?
An umbrella review published in 2025 collectively 15 meta-analyses, 204 randomized trials and more than 9000 participants and analyzed 35 different clinical outcomes.
PBM showed statistically significant results for 12 of them. Moderate evidence was found for some results related to:
· Fatigue in fibromyalgia
· Function in knee osteoarthritis
· Hair density in androgenetic alopecia
· Some measures of cognitive function
· Pain in burning mouth syndrome
None of the 35 examined outcomes reached the criterion for high evidence certainty, due to small studies, heterogeneous protocols and risk of publication bias.
This is a good summary of the PBM field in 2026: Biology is real. There are clinical effects. But the results are highly dependent on indication, dose, wavelength and protocol.
PBM is already established in some medical areas
PBMs don't just exist in the biohacking or wellness market. Within some limited medical areas there are established clinical guidelines:
· Oral mucositis in cancer treatment: MASCC/ISOO has published evidence-based guidelines for PBM as prevention and treatment
· Neck pain: A classic Lancet- meta-analysis of 16 RCTs documented pain-relieving effects
· Osteoarthritis: FDA-approved for osteoarthritis pain in the US (2025)
The effect must always be assessed for every indication, protocol and dose - and that is precisely what makes the field academically demanding, but productive.
The most important technical parameters
When evaluating red light and NIR systems, one should look at:
Wavelengths: What actual wavelengths are produced? 660 nm (surface tissue, inflammation) and 850 nm (deeper tissue, nervous system, systemic) are the best documented.
Irradiance: How much optical power reaches a given skin area at the actual distance of use?
Fluence: Energy per area over time, typically J/cm². Lower dose (4–10 J/cm²) for sensitive tissues and new users; moderate (10–30 J/cm²) for chronic pain; higher (30–50 J/cm²) for whole body and deep tissue.
Distance: Irradiance from direct contact is not relevant if the product is used 20–50 cm from the body.
Treatment area: A small device and a whole-body panel can deliver the same local dose, but affect dramatically different total tissue volume – and thus the potential for systemic response.
Uniformity: A high peak number in front of one LED says little about consistent exposure.
More watts is not automatically better: Watt is power. Biological dose depends on irradiance, distance, exposure time, wavelength and tissue type. PBM has a biphasic dose response – "more light is better" is biologically misleading.
Red light therapy is not the same as an infrared sauna
The terms are often mixed up, but the mechanisms are fundamentally different:
· PBM with red and near-infrared light is one photobiological exposure – specific wavelengths activate biological processes in cells via known photoreceptors
· Infrared sauna is primarily one thermal exposure – infrared radiation is absorbed and produces heat in the tissue
Both can have interesting biological effects, but through different mechanisms. See our separate article on this distinction.
Uno Vita's approach: PBM as part of an integrated protocol
At the Clinic for Integrative Medicine (KIM) we see the body as an electrical and biophysical system where the cellular energy state is the foundation for everything else. PBM is a natural fit because it:
· Addresses mitochondrial dysfunction as a central common mechanism
· Is safe, non-invasive and well tolerated
· Potentiates the effect of other treatments
· Can be adapted individually based on functional measurements (HRV, bioimpedance, EIS)
Combined with other modalities
PBM + PEMF: Electromagnetic field (PEMF) modulates ion channels and membrane potential; PBM activates mitochondrial ATP production via COX. Various mechanisms that act complementary - particularly relevant for central sensitization and chronic pain.
PBM + Hydrogen: Molecular hydrogen is a selective antioxidant that neutralizes the most harmful free radicals. PBM increases ROS moderately as part of biological signaling; hydrogen prevents this from turning into harmful oxidative stress. Supports the mitochondria from two different angles.
PBM + Dietary supplements:
· Coenzyme Q10 – critical piece in the electron transport chain, complements COX activation
· Magnesium – cofactor for ATP synthase; The body needs magnesium to use ATP efficiently
· Omega-3 – anti-inflammatory, reduces NF-κB activation
· Vitamin D – modulates mitochondrial function via VDR receptors
Explore red light therapy and PBM equipment | PEMF systems | Hydrogen and antioxidants | Dietary Supplements for Mitochondrial Health
Safe use
PBM is generally well tolerated, but some principles apply:
· Follow the manufacturer's documented treatment distance and usage time
· Do not assume that double the treatment time gives double the benefit – biphasic dose-response is real
· Use eye protection when required by product instructions
· Consider photosensitizing drugs and skin conditions
· Pregnancy: consult a healthcare professional
· Active cancer: PBM should be used in accordance with medical assessment and treatment protocol – cell culture research does not provide a basis for self-treatment
· Pacemakers and active implants: examine specifications for current device
· In case of new or severe symptoms, medical examination must not be replaced by wellness technology
The Future: Towards Mitochondrial Medicine
The next 5–10 years are likely to witness a formalization of PBM as a standard adjuvant form of therapy in conventional medicine. Three trends point in that direction:
Personalized PBM - biomarker-based protocol optimization based on HRV, bioimpedance, oxidative stress markers and individual mitochondrial capacity is under development. At Uno Vita, we use precisely these tools today.
Combined mitochondrial therapy - future protocols may combine PBM, mitochondrial transfer (injection of healthy mitochondria - clinical trials ongoing), and senolytica to attack aging-related disease from multiple angles.
Systemic understanding - research on EVs, biophotons and remote effects will gradually clarify exactly how the body passes on the light signal, making it possible to design more precise treatment protocols.
Summary table: What we know as of 2026
|
Aspect |
Status as of 2026 |
|
Stress-dependent cell response |
Documented in cell culture (Hoh Kam et al., Scientific Reports 2025) |
|
EV increase at NIR |
6.25× increase at 5 J/cm² 830 nm (Chang et al. 2024) |
|
Systemic remote response in humans |
Documented in small human study (Jeffery et al., Scientific Reports 2025) |
|
Cell type-specific response (normal vs malignant) |
Documented in cell culture (Aviña et al., JBiophotonics 2026) |
|
Whole-body PBM in fibromyalgia |
Feasibility results: positive signal (Fitzmaurice et al. 2023) |
|
Systematic overview of fibromyalgia |
7 RCTs, 495 participants, 30–55% short-term pain reduction (2026) |
|
Umbrella review clinical evidence |
15 meta-analyses, 204 RCTs; significant for 12/35 outcomes (Son et al. 2025) |
|
Primary mechanism |
COX activation + multimodal signaling pathways |
|
Clinical safety |
1.6 million treatments, no serious side effects |
|
NICE status |
PBM identified as promising therapy |
|
Level of evidence |
Moderate for selected indications; high evidence not achieved for any |
What is infrared light therapy?In the context of PBM, the term is usually used for near-infrared light (NIR), typically 780–1100 nm, at relatively low energy levels to influence biological processes rather than primarily to heat the body.
Is near-infrared light the same as red light?No. Red light is visible (620–700 nm). NIR lies just outside the visible spectrum and can generally penetrate deeper into biological tissue. They are often used together in PBM systems.
Does red light affect stressed cells more than healthy ones?A study from 2025 showed that 660/850 nm had little effect on biophoton emission from healthy cells at rest, while the response was more evident in chemically stressed cells. This is cell culture data and cannot be generalized as a universal rule.
Can red light normalize cells?In the 2025 study, strongly altered ATP and ROS levels moved closer to baseline after PBM. It can be described as a homeostatic tendency in that particular laboratory model, but cannot be generalized to PBM "normalizing diseased cells" in humans.
Can PBM affect areas that are not illuminated?There are animal data and a small human study (Jeffery et al. 2025) that point towards systemic remote effects. Exact mechanisms have not been mapped, and the findings need replication.
What are biophotons?Extremely weak photon emissions from living biological systems, measurable with specialized equipment. The possibility that they play a role in cell communication is interesting, but not yet proven.
Is more watts better?No. Biological dose depends on irradiance, distance, exposure time, wavelength and tissue type. PBM has a biphasic dose-response where too high a dose can produce a weaker response.
Can PBM be used in cancer?PBM is already used medically in some oncological contexts (oral mucositis). In the case of active malignancy, use should always take place in accordance with the relevant medical assessment and protocol. Cell culture findings do not provide a basis for self-treatment.
Conclusion: Light appears to do more than add energy
The new research makes the old "more light = more ATP" model less and less satisfactory.
Red and near-infrared light appears to affect mitochondrial bioenergetics, ATP and redox balance, nitric oxide, ion channels, extracellular vesicles, ultra-weak photon emission, and possibly systemic responses.
The most important new perspective is that the cell's initial state appears to influence the response to light. Healthy resting cells responded weakly. Stressed cells responded more strongly, and ATP and ROS moved back towards the initial level in several cases.
We are moving towards a broader understanding of photobiomodulation:
Light is not just energy. In biological systems, light can also be a signal.
And perhaps the most interesting question going forward is not how much energy we can squeeze into the cell - but how does the cell interpret the light, and how does the body pass this signal on?
Do you want to know more, or do you want to include PBM in your treatment plan?
Book consultation | Contact us | sales@unovita.com | Tel: +47 22 091 880
These articles cover the topics that are only briefly mentioned here:
· Red light therapy and PBM – basic introduction to mechanisms, skin, pulsation and dosage
· Photobiomodulation: pulsed red and near-infrared light – physics, frequencies and dosing principles
· Red light therapy vs infrared sauna - the difference between photobiological light treatment and infrared heat
· Photobiomodulation for skin, collagen and glow - skin-oriented use
Scientific references
1. Hoh Kam J, Clément R, Cantat-Moltrecht T, Billères M, Mitrofanis J. Red and near-infrared light treatment can change the intensity of biophoton emissions in cell culture. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:38541. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-22344-0
2. Jeffery G, Fosbury R, Barrett E, Hogg C, Rodriguez Carmona M, Powner MB, et al. Longer wavelengths in sunlight pass through the human body and have a systemic impact which improves vision. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:24435. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-09785-3
3. Chang CY, Aviña AE, Chang CJ, et al. Exploring the biphasic dose-response effects of photobiomodulation on the viability, migration, and extracellular vesicle secretion of human adipose mesenchymal stem cells. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B. 2024;256:112940. DOI: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2024.112940
4. Aviña AE, Chen EYH, Chuang KMY, et al. Safe Mitochondrial Activation Through Photobiomodulation: Distinct Red and Near-Infrared Responses in Normal and Malignant Cells. Journal of Biophotonics. 2026;19:e202500555. DOI: 10.1002/jbio.202500555
5. Shivappa P, Basha S, Biswas S, et al. From light to healing: photobiomodulation therapy in medical disciplines. Journal of Translational Medicine. 2025;23:1430. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-025-07466-3
6. Fitzmaurice B, Heneghan NR, Rayen A, Soundy A. Whole-body photobiomodulation therapy for chronic pain: a protocol for a feasibility trial. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e060058. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060058
7. Fitzmaurice BC, Heneghan NR, Rayen ATA, Grenfell RL, Soundy AA. Whole-Body Photobiomodulation Therapy for Fibromyalgia: A Feasibility Trial. Behavioral Sciences. 2023;13:717. DOI: 10.3390/bs13090717
8. G A S, Maiya GA, Shetty S, et al. Effect of photobiomodulation on pain and quality of life in fibromyalgia syndrome: a systematic review. Lasers in Medical Science. 2026;41:125. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-026-04930-4
9. Son Y, Lee H, Yu S, et al. Effects of photobiomodulation on multiple health outcomes: an umbrella review of randomized clinical trials. Systematic Reviews. 2025;14:160. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-025-02902-3
10. Mengshoel AM, Brandsar NL, Natvig B, Fors EA. Concordance between clinician- and 2016 criteria-based diagnoses of fibromyalgia. Scand J Pain. 2022;22(1):59–66. DOI: 10.1515/sjpain-2021-0087
11. Hamblin MR. Mechanisms and applications of the anti-inflammatory effects of photobiomodulation. AIMS Biophysics. 2017;4(3):337–361.
12. Hamblin MR. Biphasic dose response in low level light therapy. Dose-Response. 2009;7(4):358–383.
13. Chow RT, Johnson MI, Lopes-Martins RAB, Bjordal JM. Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the management of neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. 2009;374:1897–1908.
14. Zadik Y, et al. Systematic review of photobiomodulation for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2019;27:3969–3983.
This article has been prepared for general dissemination of knowledge about photobiomodulation, red light and near-infrared light. Research conducted on cell cultures cannot automatically be transferred to humans, and findings from small pilot studies must be confirmed in larger controlled studies. Uno Vita AS's products for wellness use are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease unless the device in question is expressly approved for such a medical purpose. In the case of illness, drug use or medical treatment decisions, an assessment by a qualified healthcare professional is recommended.
© Uno Vita AS | Clinic for Integrated Medicine | unovita.no
