Friday Favorites Do Low Level Laser Therapy Devices Work for Hair Loss

Duration: 4:08 540 transcript words EN summary

Video summary

In the search for non-invasive solutions for age-related hair loss, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has emerged as a prominent alternative to drugs and surgery. The concept originated in the 1960s when a Hungarian physician discovered that low-powered ruby lasers could stimulate hair growth in mice, likely by increasing blood flow to the scalp. This discovery gained significant traction after the FDA cleared the first LLLT device for pattern hair loss in 2007, leading to a surge in clinics offering laser treatments for various conditions. Today, there are at least ten randomized controlled trials suggesting that these devices can be as effective or even superior to pharmaceutical options, with benefits including being non-invasive and relatively safe, though mild side effects like itching and scalp tenderness may occur temporarily. Despite the promising statistical data showing improvements in hair density and thickness, significant skepticism remains within the dermatology community regarding the clinical significance of these results. A major concern is that many trials have been funded by the manufacturers themselves, which has led to a lack of independent verification and visual evidence. Furthermore, when independent studies were conducted with blinded evaluations, they failed to detect meaningful differences in hair growth compared to placebo devices. From the patient's perspective, subjective satisfaction surveys also showed no significant difference between using real laser devices and sham placebos, suggesting that while the technology works on a statistical level, it may not provide the tangible results patients expect. For those still considering trying this treatment, there are currently at least 29 FDA-cleared devices available on the market, though direct comparisons between different models have not been conducted. Evidence suggests that comb-style and hat-style devices perform similarly, but units relying exclusively on laser diodes might offer a slight advantage over those mixing diodes with LEDs. Safety is generally considered high for most users, provided they avoid prolonged direct eye exposure to the light, although many modern cap designs include built-in safety shut-offs to prevent accidental retinal damage. However, these devices are contraindicated for individuals with scalp cancer due to the potential for stimulating tumor growth, and standard precautions regarding electrical devices near water should always be observed.

Read the full video transcript

[music] >> In my book how not to age, I discuss all the drugs, foods, supplements, and surgeries that can treat age-related hair loss. But what about non-dietary, non-drug, non-surgical interventions? Autologous platelet-rich plasma, where concentrated portions of your own blood is repeatedly injected into your scalp, appears to have an efficacy similar to the available drugs, though the available evidence is considered insufficient to recommend it, and so remains unapproved in the US or Europe for hair restoration purposes. Scalp Botox is also not recommended. The thought was that relaxing scalp muscles might improve blood flow, but when actually put to the test, actually caused hair loss in some pilot study participants. Then there are lasers. In the 1960s, a Hungarian physician published a paper, The Effect of Laser Beams on the Growth of Hair in Mice, detailing a serendipitous discovery that a low-powered ruby laser increased the hair growth on the shaved backs of mice. The mechanism appears to be increased blood flow. The floodgates opened when the FDA cleared the first low-level laser therapy device for age-related pattern hair loss in 2007. And now there are clinics advertising lasers for everything from tennis elbow to scrotal rejuvenation. There have been at least 10 randomized controlled trials of low-level laser therapy devices for hair loss, and the efficacy has been found comparable or even superior to the drugs. They're non-invasive and appear to be relatively safe. Mild side effects include itching, acting, and scalp tenderness that usually resolves within 2 weeks. Reviews typically conclude that laser therapy may be a promising alternative to drugs and scalpels, but there remains considerable skepticism within the dermatology community and for good reason. Most of the laser therapy trials were funded by the manufacturers of the tested products themselves. This is true of hair loss treatments across the board, but laser studies appear particularly reticent to provide visual evidence or inquire about perhaps the most important outcome of all, patient satisfaction. When the first independent study was performed, blinded evaluations of before and after photographs could not detect a difference in hair density or caliber. In two studies that compared subjective satisfaction between laser and sham placebo devices, no significant difference could be found either. In other words, from the patient's perspective, they just plain don't work. So, while there are statistically significant improvements in hair density and thickness, there may be little clinically significant improvement. If you want to give them a try anyway, there are at least 29 FDA-cleared devices currently on the market. There've been no head-to-head studies between them, but based on measured outcomes, there appear to be no difference between the comb style and hat style devices. Though those containing laser diodes exclusively may have an edge over devices that include a mix of both laser diodes and LED. Do not look into the light as prolonged retinal exposure could be damaging. Thankfully, [snorts] at least most cap designs have a built-in safety shutoff to avoid accidental eye exposure. Otherwise, besides general safety caveats about using electrical contraptions in or around water, such devices are considered safe, though they are contraindicated for those with cancer of the scalp due to the potential for stimulatory effects. >> Woo.