I Bought a $10,000 Red Light Therapy Testing Tool — Here’s Why It Matters

My red light therapy reviews have just got a massive upgrade because of this cool device. Now, for years I've been testing red light therapy devices with a spectrometer. I've measured wavelengths, I've measured irradiance, I've shown when companies claim a device has 850 nm when it actually has 830. I've shown why solar meters can seriously mislead people, and I've also shown why the number on a product page is often not the number your body is actually receiving in regards to therapeutic light. But today, I'm adding a new piece of equipment to my lab, and I'm super excited to share this with you guys because it's going to mean even better reviews and, more importantly, more reliable product recommendations to you guys. I'm affiliated with some of the companies mentioned in this video, and I will earn a commission if you buy through my links or discount codes. Products were provided to me free of charge, and all opinions are my own. This is not medical advice. Okay, so this is it, my new integrating sphere. My wife uh saw it, and she thought, "What are you doing? Are you setting up some nuclear reactor in your room? What is going on?" But no, this is a specially designed sphere that will allow me to know a lot more about the devices, the red light therapy devices, that I'm testing. It's going to reveal a lot more about the light, the exact wavelength, and also the total amount of power being emitted from a device. In the past, when I've used my spectrometer, which works great for measuring how much light is hitting an area at one particular point, but this new integrating sphere will show me how much light is the device actually producing in total. Not only that, it'll show me how much power is going to each particular wavelength, which I know is something you guys have been asking me to test for a long time. Now, speaking of a long time, there has been a big issue in the red light therapy space. I've made it well known. The issue is around testing and power output Now, a lot of companies provide numbers that sound really impressive. 100 mW over cm squared, it's got five wavelengths, clinical grade output, full body coverage. I'm sure you've seen it all. But, unless you actually test the device, you do not really know exactly what you're getting and if these claims are accurate. And this is not just my opinion. A scientific team presented third-party testing at the 2024 Military Health System Research Symposium. And these guys looked at seven commercial red light therapy devices, including beds, panels, and wearables. A lot of these devices I've tested as well. Now, I'll put a link to the full paper below, but let me explain the key findings. They used a spectroradiometer, which is what I call a spectrometer. Uh this measures wavelength and power irradiance. Now, what they did is when they tested the panels like I have here, they tested across a vertical and horizontal axis. And they did this at various distances. They also did measurements for 30 seconds over a 20-minute treatment session. To be honest, it's actually very similar to what I do when I test panels. Uh I take a bunch of readings across a set distance, 6 in, and then I run some math and get my averages and total power output figures. But anyway, the researchers' conclusion was very similar to what I've been saying for years, and that is that independent validation of these devices are key. It's a crucial. It's essential. Some devices were emitting power close to their marketed claims, which is great. Some were not. And some weren't even close. Some had wavelength discrepancies, meaning the light emitted didn't align with what the company said their device was emitting, which I think is quite bad, very bad. Some even had irradiance numbers far below that was advertised on the website. And there were some panels that had a a of energy in the center of their device, but as soon as you went beyond that, the power levels drop off immensely. And again, this is why proper testing matters. Because blindly following a number on a company's website could cost you dearly. You could buy a device that is severely underpowered or overpowered, emitting light in a very uneven way, and maybe not even producing the therapeutic red and near-infrared wavelengths that we're all after. Okay, so how does the integrating sphere fit into all of this? Well, firstly, let's talk about a testing mistake that still causes a lot of confusion, and this is with solar meters. Now, a solar meter, which can be purchased for a couple hundred dollars, is designed to measure sunlight, not narrow-band red and near-infrared LEDs. Sunlight is broad spectrum. Red light therapy devices concentrate their light in a particular wavelengths, say 660 in the red range and 850 in the near-infrared range. So, when you're using a solar meter on a red light therapy device, you can get a number, typically measured in milliwatts over a centimeter squared, but there's a lot of issues with accuracy. The meter may respond differently to, say, 660 red than it does to 850 nanometer near-infrared. It may not handle beam angle properly. It may overread or underrate depending on the spectral distribution of the LEDs. What happens is it tends to give a reading that's higher than what the more accurate devices measure. Of course, companies like this higher number because consumers think more is better, which is not the case in the red light therapy space. But anyway, bigger numbers sell, and um yeah, that's why companies keep doing this. And look, I understand why they do that. Um it's not that I'm misleading. I mean, if one company uses a solar meter and another one does, then there you should be able to compare those numbers. It's just that those numbers are not they're not that meaningful, if that makes sense. But anyway, I discovered this many years ago, and that's why I invested in a spectrometer, which cost me about two or three thousand dollars. Now, a spectrometer, or more technically a spectroradiometer, is measuring both wavelengths and irradiance. And it measures it in a much more meaningful way because it's These devices are designed and calibrated, so they measure power levels and wavelengths at every single nanometer, and in turn you're getting much more reliable and useful information. But, even a spectrometer has its limitations. It's only telling us what's happening at a particular measurement point. For instance, if I use this device 6 in from a panel here, it will tell me what wavelengths and how much energy is hitting the particular sensor at that 6-in mark in that particular point in time, or that particular spot, I should say. It's not telling me what's happening across the whole entire panel. This is why in my reviews I do the grid test, taking and snap some readings across the panel, running some math, and coming up with my average and total power output figures. It's still far from great, but it's a much more accurate and reliable way of testing compared to a solar meter. And that brings in the integrating sphere. So, integrating spheres cost $5,000 up to 10,000, $100,000. It depends how big you want to go and how accurate you want to get as well. Now, an integrating sphere is basically a highly reactive hollow sphere. Inside, it's coated with a special diffusing reflective material. When the light enters the sphere, it bounces around again and again until it becomes evenly distributed inside the chamber, inside the sphere. So, it may be hard to see, but this is all white and uh two halves of a sphere. So, what this does is it allows us to put a red light therapy device in here and measure total optical output of a light source much more effectively and simply than just pointing a sensor in front of the device and hoping for the best. Well, getting the accurate reading in one spot. This is capturing all of the light and taking a reading from that. So, think of it in simple terms, a spectrometer is measuring how much light is hitting a specific area at a set distance. An integrating sphere measures how much light is this device producing in total. Both metrics are actually quite useful and I will continue using the spectrometer as well, but knowing both figures gives us even more information, more accurate and reliable information. Hey, and on a side note, I'm developing a new testing metric that will incorporate all of these data points and help you as a consumer make even more of an informed buying decision. So, I'm actually working with a special laboratory on this. Um we're going to use the best testing methods in the industry and we're going to come up with a way that yeah, we'll present some figures to you and be like, "Hey, I can easily compare this panel with that panel and know a lot about this panel." So, definitely stay tuned for more on that. Head over to lighttherapyinsiders.com, jump on our newsletter as soon as I have more, I'll be sharing it with you guys. I I really think it's going to change the way people buy and shop around when it comes to red light therapy devices. Okay, so to give you an example of how powerful all of this is, let's imagine you have two small red light therapy devices. One has a very intense hotspot in front of it and the other one spreads that light out nice and evenly. Now, if we only take a measurement at one point in front of that device, the first device may look more powerful because it's capturing that hotspot, but if we use that device in an integrating sphere and we measure total power output, all of the sudden device B may actually be producing a lot more light overall. So, this is quite important for devices like masks, or wraps, or handheld devices, actually any red light therapy device to be honest, because as we saw earlier, even panels typically concentrate a lot of their light in the center. Okay, so what can I now measure with this integrating sphere? Well, with this new setup, I'll be able to test small red light therapy devices in a much more complete way. I'll be able to look at total radiant flux. This is the total amount of optical power emitted by the device. I'll be able to look at spectral power distribution. This is how much output is coming from each wavelength. Again, something you guys have been asking me to do for a long time. I'll be able to look for actual peak wavelength. So, whether the device really emits 660 or 850 or 1060. And I'll be able to look at the relative contribution of each wavelength. For example, whether a five wavelength device is generally producing meaningful output at all five wavelengths, or whether it's really just two wavelengths with a couple wavelengths down the bottom there just just for a box tick. Actually, another thing I'll be able to look at is output consistency, whether the device output stays stable during a treatment session. So, for instance, I can turn it on and take the reading in the first minute and then compare it to minute 10 or minute 20 to see if there's a drop off or change in intensity levels. So, I'm sure you're thinking this all sounds great, and it is. But, there is a flaw. Not with integrating spheres, but with my sphere setup yet. Because this is a very small sphere. It's only 50 cm in diameter. And uh yeah, I can fit a Rouge Nano in here easy peasy, or a mask, all of that works great. But, I'm not going to get a 2 m tall red light therapy panel in here. That would require a much larger setup, and that requires some serious money and serious space, because you need a 2 2 and 1/2 m sphere, and logistically getting that is tricky. Getting it into a room, you then need special hardware to run it. Unfortunately, I'm not quite at that level. This is This is all we got for now. But again, I am working with a laboratory and I think for upcoming reviews, I may actually have panels sent to them to do testing and then I can use that information in my reviews. So, stay tuned. But for devices like this and masks, I will be able to use this sphere and still use my spectrometer as well. And also I should mention with panels, even if I did have a large sphere, I'd still want to be using the spectrometer anyway because a large sphere is going to show all the power being emitted, but you're not capturing all of the light from the panel. You typically stand a certain distance from the panel and the body doesn't capture all of the light, of course, which is why a spectrometer with a grid measuring at a certain distance may actually be better suited. So, it really does depend, but hey, the good thing is I have another tool in my toolbox. Now, I just want to go back to that scientific paper I mentioned earlier. So, the researchers tested several commercial photobiomodulation devices, beds, panels, wearables. And I wanted to share some of the examples from their findings. They tested the Nova For Bed and it appeared to align pretty well with the stated wavelengths and had consistent output across the treatment zones. Although the measured irradiance was slightly below the reported value. LED Bed had higher measured irradiance than the other beds, but some of its near infrared wavelengths were roughly 30 nanometers away from what was advertised. Look, I I just don't understand how that can happen in such an expensive product. Uh typically, I allow a margin of error of say 5 nanometers in the devices I test. 30 nanometers, that that's huge. Um I I think it's unacceptable personally. Uh the Sphere Light Bed showed substantially lower measured irradiance than the reported value values. Now, the Kinion Move Plus was also in the test and the tested figures aligned well with the marketed figures, so that is good. As for panels, the Juve Mini and the BioMax 300 were in there, but their radiance figures were lower than the claimed advertised figures. Now, I do need to share an important context. This was a conference experiment paper, not a full peer-reviewed paper. So, just keep that in mind. But, it is still useful because it shows something very important. When independent testers use proper equipment, the results often look very different from the marketing claims. I should also mention there is no real gold standard in terms of how to test red light therapy devices. Even in the literature, there's different methods, there's different distances, there's different devices. So, look, if you get confused when you're buying a device, don't worry. It is very confusing out there, and this is why hopefully with the uh the little project that I'm working on, hopefully we can build some clarity into this space. Hopefully. Be honest, I'm I'm kind of doing it to improve my reviews and improve my scoring, but in turn, I'm sure it will have a flow-on effect. So, wrapping this all up, what does this all mean for you? It means that when you buy a red light therapy device, you should not only ask, "Look, how powerful is the device?" You should be asking, "How was it measured? What distance was it measured at? What device was used to take that measurement? Was it a solar meter or a spectrometer? Was it measured at the surface, 6 in, was it measured in the center or across the whole panel? I could go on and on, but yeah, just be careful. All right? Or definitely check out my reviews because I have tested a lot of products, and I do test for all of these things. So, look, red light therapy is no longer a tiny niche for biohackers. There are panels, masks, beds, caps, bells, torches, wraps, oral devices, recovery devices, cognitive devices, beauty devices, and a bunch of other devices I haven't even ex- uh explored yet. But, the market is growing, the claims are getting bigger, and obviously there's a lot more money involved, and that's why proper measurement matters, okay? Independent testing is important, especially if you're using these devices in a way that you're expecting big change or you're treating areas you know, such as your brain that I don't know. You you should treat carefully, right? So, look, I don't want you guys to be scammed. I know there's a lot of stuff on Tik Tok, Instagram for instance where people say, "Look, this device that I've had for 2 days is totally eliminated wrinkles or regrow my hair." I mean, I I'm in the red light therapy space. I have plenty of wrinkles and I don't have any of here. So, look, just be careful, okay? And the other thing is if you're trying to compare products, remember don't just blindly go off what the manufacturers or the companies are saying. And hopefully I can keep bringing some transparency to the space and now that I have this bring even more reliable and accurate figures. And like I said, if I can come up with this testing metric, we could apply that to all sorts of products on the market and um improve the industry even further. So, and I'll come in reviews especially for smaller devices. You'll start seeing more data from this sphere alongside my usual spectrometer testing. And I want your input. What do you think of all of this testing, the confusing numbers? What confuses you and what devices would you like me to start using in this first? Masks? Torches maybe? Actually, you know what? I think I might do another mask review at the end of 2026, especially now that I have this device. So, be sure to stay tuned for that. And next time you see a red light therapy company claim a huge radiance number, remember to ask them a question that actually matters. How did you measure it? Because in this space, the measurement method can change the entire story. Until next time, take care.