full body
PRO Red Light Panel
the panel the protocols above are written for, with eight wavelengths spanning both research windows.
720 dual-chip LEDs, 1,200W ±10%
≥1,400 W/m² measured at 6 inches
630 to 670 nm red, 810 to 850 nm NIR, 1060 nm
the red light protocol
the panel is rarely the problem. the session usually is.
with heat and cold you can feel whether you are doing it right. with light you cannot. the variable that decides whether you are running the studied dose or a fraction of it is invisible, which is why this page is mostly about numbers rather than benefits.
6 inthe distance that defines dose
10 to 12 minper area, per session
30 sessionsbefore the trial measured 1
the dose
four numbers decide everything. only one is on most boxes.
a red light session is defined by wavelength, irradiance, distance and time. change any one and you have changed the dose, whether or not the session felt different. this is the section to read before you compare two panels or judge whether yours is working.
01
wavelength
the research clusters in two windows: roughly 630 to 670 nm in visible red, which is absorbed close to the surface, and 810 to 850 nm in near-infrared, which penetrates further. a panel quoting only "red light" without wavelengths is not telling you which body of research it maps to.
02
irradiance, at a stated distance
irradiance is measured in W/m² and it falls off sharply as you move back. a figure quoted at 3 inches is not comparable to one quoted at 6. if a brand publishes power but not irradiance, or irradiance but not the distance it was measured at, you cannot calculate your dose. ask for both.
03
time
dose is irradiance multiplied by exposure time. that is the whole equation. it also means sitting further back does not make a session gentler, it makes it a smaller dose that needs longer to reach the same total.
04
bare skin
fabric absorbs light. a session through a t-shirt is not a reduced dose to that area, it is close to no dose at all. this is the most common way a correctly specified panel delivers nothing.
05
consistency, measured in months
the controlled trials run for weeks before they measure anything. the skin trial below ran 30 sessions across roughly 15 weeks. if you are judging a panel after ten days, you are judging it before any study would have looked.
01
skin appearance
the best-documented use, and the slowest
this is where the evidence is strongest, because the outcomes were imaged rather than self-reported. it is also where the timeline is longest, and knowing that up front is what stops people quitting at week three.
6in
distance
about 15 cm, held steady. this is the distance our irradiance is measured at.
10 to 12min
per area
front and back are two doses, not one.
2x
per week
the trial schedule. more often was not tested.1
what the research found
a controlled trial enrolled 136 volunteers, of whom 113 were randomised into four treatment groups and treated twice a week for 30 sessions with polychromatic red light at 611 to 650 nm, or red plus near-infrared at 570 to 850 nm. against untreated controls, the treated groups showed statistically significant improvements in skin complexion, in profilometrically measured roughness and wrinkle depth, and in ultrasonographically measured intradermal collagen density.1
two things carry the weight there. the outcomes were measured by instruments rather than by asking people how they felt about their skin. and the schedule ran across roughly 15 weeks, which is the honest answer to how long before anything is measurable.
what 30 sessions actually looks like
one dot is one session. at twice a week that is roughly 15 weeks before the trial measured anything.1 plan in months, not sessions.
what this is and is not
these were cosmetic appearance outcomes in healthy volunteers: complexion, roughness, wrinkle depth, collagen density. that is what was measured and that is all it supports. red light is not a treatment for any skin condition, and nothing on this page should be read as one. if you have a diagnosed condition, that is a conversation with a dermatologist, not with a panel.
02
training
before the session, not after
this is the protocol most people run backwards. the meta-analysis that found the clearest effects applied light before exercise, not as a recovery treatment afterwards.
6in
distance
same as every other protocol. distance is the dose.
5 to 10min
per muscle group
on the muscles you are about to train.
before
timing
the pre-exercise application is where the signal was clearest.2
what the research found
a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials in healthy people examined photobiomodulation for muscular performance and exercise-related fatigue. across the pooled trials, application before exercise was where the effects on repetitions and time to exhaustion were most consistent, largely independent of which wavelength was used.2,3
the proposed mechanism is mitochondrial. light in these wavelengths is absorbed by cytochrome c oxidase in the respiratory chain, which is associated with increased ATP availability. that is a mechanism, not a promise, and it is worth holding loosely.
the field is genuinely split
this is not settled the way the skin research is. a 2022 review in Sports Medicine set out to deconstruct these ergogenic claims and found the effects were mode-specific rather than general, and several well-run trials found no effect at all on cycling performance or muscular fatigue.4 the reviewers repeatedly flag the same problem: the light parameters vary so widely between trials that pooling them is difficult.
the honest position is that pre-exercise light has a plausible mechanism and a real but inconsistent evidence base. treat it as worth trying if you already own a panel, not as a reason to buy one.
03
the dose curve
more light is not more effect. past a point it is less.
this is the single most useful thing to understand about red light, and it is the opposite of how almost every panel is marketed. longer sessions and higher power are sold as better. the literature has said otherwise since the 1980s.
the biphasic dose response
idealised from the published curve. in the reviewed literature, fluences as low as 3 to 5 J/cm² were beneficial, while large doses in the region of 50 to 100 J/cm² lost the benefit entirely.5 shape is illustrative, not a lookup table for your panel.
what the research found
two reviews of the low-level light literature describe a consistent pattern: light delivered at low doses tends to work better than the same wavelength delivered at high levels.5,6 the follow-up review reported an experiment in which increasing irradiance tenfold lost all of the benefit seen at the lower setting, and a second in which repeating an otherwise beneficial daily treatment for two weeks lost the effect after about five days.
what this means for your sessions
three practical consequences. doubling your session length is not a stronger dose, it is a different point on the curve. standing closer than the stated measurement distance is not a bonus. and daily is not automatically better than every other day, which is why the skin trial ran twice a week rather than seven.
much of this literature is cell and animal work, so the exact numbers do not transfer directly to a panel in your bedroom. the shape of the curve is the transferable part. set a timer, hold the distance, and resist the urge to add more.
new to light
four weeks to a routine, then months to judge it
there is no tolerance to build here the way there is with heat or cold. what you are building is a habit and a fixed set-up, because the entire protocol depends on repeating the same distance and the same duration.
week 1
set the stage
pick the spot, mark 6 inches on the floor, pick the time of day. 5 to 10 minutes, one area, 2 sessions. the goal is a repeatable set-up, not a dose.
week 2
full session length
10 to 12 minutes per area, 2 sessions. bare skin, timer running, same distance. you are now at the trial dose.
week 3
add the second area
front and back, or two muscle groups. 10 to 12 minutes each, 2 to 3 sessions. attach it to something you already do daily so it stops being a decision.
week 4
hold, and stop watching
2 to 3 sessions a week, unchanged, for the next three months. take a photo now and do not take another until week 15. this is the part almost everyone gets wrong.
the failure modes
6 mistakes that quietly ruin it
01
sessions through clothing
fabric absorbs the light. this is the most common way a correctly specified panel delivers nothing at all to the area you were aiming at.
02
drifting on distance
irradiance falls off sharply with distance, so a session at 18 inches is a fraction of the dose of one at 6. if the distance changes session to session, so does everything else.
03
longer is better
the dose response is biphasic. past the useful window, more light stops adding benefit and can subtract it.5,6
04
judging it in a fortnight
the skin trial measured after 30 sessions across roughly 15 weeks.1 two weeks is not a short version of that, it is before the experiment started reading.
05
treating front and back as one session
light only reaches what it lands on. turning around is a second dose, with its own timer, not a continuation of the first.
06
comparing panels on wattage
wattage is what the panel draws. irradiance at a stated distance is what reaches you. a brand quoting one and not the other has told you almost nothing.
where Coldture fits
panels that publish the number that matters
every dose on this page depends on irradiance at a stated distance. we publish ours at 6 inches, which is the distance the protocol is written around, so you can work out what you are actually running rather than guessing. all engineered in-house in Canada and backed by a nationwide service network.
targeted
FOCUS Red Light Panel
one area at a time, same working distance, same published measurement standard.
≥1,300 W/m² measured at 6 inches
red and near-infrared wavelengths
sized for a single muscle group
face, cordless
FACE Mask
contact-fit, which removes distance from the equation entirely. the simplest way to hold a twice-weekly schedule.
665 nm red and 850 nm near-infrared
10-minute cordless sessions
fixed distance, no set-up drift
or run all three
light, heat and cold in one order
light is the easiest of the three to keep up and the slowest to show anything, which makes it a good companion habit rather than a standalone one.
engineered in-house in Canada in-house support financing available trusted by 40,000+
the other protocols
heat and cold have their own doses too
light is one of three. the other two are documented the same way, with the temperature, the duration, and the study behind each number.
the routine
the recovery routine
how heat, cold and light stack into one week, and the contrast protocol that pairs them.
heat
the sauna protocol
exact temperature, duration and frequency for your heart, brain, sleep, recovery and endurance.
cold
the cold plunge protocol
the researched temperature window, and the dose behind recovery, mood, immunity and adaptation.
next step
not sure which panel size your space and goal call for?
tell us the room, the area you want to cover, and how often you realistically expect to use it. we will tell you what fits, including when the honest answer is a smaller panel or a mask rather than a full-body system. no pressure either way.
the research
every number on this page, sourced
we cite the primary literature rather than summaries of it, and we say plainly where the evidence is mixed or where the underlying work was done in cells rather than people. if a claim is not on this list, we did not make it.
- 1Wunsch A, Matuschka K. A controlled trial to determine the efficacy of red and near-infrared light treatment in patient satisfaction, reduction of fine lines, wrinkles, skin roughness, and intradermal collagen density increase. Photomedicine and Laser Surgery. 2014;32(2).
- 2Vanin AA, Verhagen E, Barboza SD, Costa LOP, Leal-Junior ECP. Photobiomodulation therapy for the improvement of muscular performance and reduction of muscular fatigue associated with exercise in healthy people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lasers in Medical Science. 2018;33(1):181-214.
- 3Leal-Junior ECP, Vanin AA, Miranda EF, et al. Effect of phototherapy (low-level laser therapy and light-emitting diode therapy) on exercise performance and markers of exercise recovery: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Lasers in Medical Science. 2015;30(2):925-939.
- 4Dutra YM, Malta ES, Elias AS, Broatch JR, Zagatto AM. Deconstructing the ergogenic effects of photobiomodulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of its efficacy in improving mode-specific exercise performance in humans. Sports Medicine. 2022;52:2733-2757.
- 5Huang YY, Chen ACH, Carroll JD, Hamblin MR. Biphasic dose response in low level light therapy. Dose-Response. 2009;7(4):358-383.
- 6Huang YY, Sharma SK, Carroll J, Hamblin MR. Biphasic dose response in low level light therapy: an update. Dose-Response. 2011;9(4):602-618.
- 7Li BM, Qiu DY, Ni PS, et al. Can pre-exercise photobiomodulation improve muscle endurance and promote recovery from muscle strength and injuries in people with different activity levels? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Lasers in Medical Science. 2024;39:132.
this protocol is a general wellness guide, not medical advice. nothing on this page is intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition, and no claim of any medical or therapeutic outcome is made or implied. the studies cited measured cosmetic appearance outcomes in healthy volunteers and exercise performance in healthy adults. do not look directly into the LEDs, and use eye protection if the panel will be near your face. if you are pregnant, have a photosensitive condition, a history of skin cancer, or take medication that increases light sensitivity, speak with your physician before starting. if you have a diagnosed skin or medical condition, speak with a qualified clinician rather than treating it yourself.