Red Light Therapy for Athletes vs. Everyday Users

About the author

Evelyn Reed, M.S.

Health Science EducatorCertified Wellness Coach

Evelyn Reed, M.S., is a Health Science Educator and Certified Wellness Coach specializing in evidence-based, at-home wellness solutions. With a Master's degree in Health Science, she focuses on translating complex scientific research on cellular health and light therapy into practical, accessible protocols. Evelyn is dedicated to empowering individuals to manage pain, improve sleep, and enhance skin vitality. Her science-first, empathetic approach makes her a trusted advocate for achieving long-term health goals.

When someone first brings home a red light therapy device, one of the first questions I hear is, “How often should I use this?” The second question, especially from runners, lifters, and weekend warriors, is, “Do I need a different schedule because I train harder than most people?”

As a red light therapy wellness specialist who works with both competitive athletes and people dealing with everyday pain, skin, and sleep issues, I see this confusion all the time. Marketing often suggests that more light and more sessions are always better, especially if you are an athlete. The science tells a more nuanced story.

In this article, we will look at what high‑quality research and major medical centers say about red light therapy for performance, recovery, and general wellness, and we will answer the key question: should athletes and non‑athletes really be using red light therapy at the same frequency?

What Exactly Is Red Light Therapy?

Red light therapy is a form of photobiomodulation. You may also see it described as low‑level laser therapy or LED light therapy. It uses low‑intensity red and near‑infrared light, usually in the range of about 630–660 nanometers for red and roughly 810–850 nanometers for near‑infrared, to influence how cells function.

Several research groups and medical centers, including Harvard‑affiliated and Stanford‑affiliated teams, describe a similar core mechanism. Photons from the light are absorbed by an enzyme in the mitochondria called cytochrome c oxidase. This process can increase the cell’s energy production (ATP), support better oxygen use, and modulate nitric oxide and reactive oxygen species, which in turn may:

Improve blood flow and oxygen delivery
Reduce some inflammatory signals
Support tissue repair and collagen formation

Unlike ablative lasers or UV light, therapeutic red and near‑infrared wavelengths are non‑burning and non‑UV. When used correctly, they aim to stimulate repair rather than destroy tissue.

Clinically and in wellness settings, red light therapy is used for several goals:

Musculoskeletal pain and stiffness, including arthritis, tendon problems, and general muscle pain, as noted by hospital systems such as Main Line Health, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and University Hospitals
Skin rejuvenation and acne, where dermatology researchers and WebMD summaries report improved wrinkles and collagen, and reduced inflammation
Hair thinning, where multiple studies have found increased hair density and thickness with consistent use
Support for wound healing and certain treatment‑related side effects, such as oral mucositis in cancer care

For athletes, the promise is usually framed around faster recovery, less soreness, and better strength or endurance. That is where the evidence becomes more mixed.

What Does The Science Say For Athletes?

Performance And Strength: Promising But Inconsistent

A 2016 narrative review in the journal J Biophotonics pulled together 46 human studies on photobiomodulation in muscle. These studies involved healthy volunteers and athletes and examined outcomes like repetitions to fatigue, maximal voluntary contraction, sprint performance, running time, and blood markers of muscle damage.

When red or near‑infrared light was used as muscular “pre‑conditioning” shortly before exercise, many trials reported short‑term improvements. People could sometimes do more repetitions, produce more torque, or resist fatigue a bit longer. Some protocols also showed lower post‑exercise markers like creatine kinase or lactate dehydrogenase, which are associated with muscle damage.

However, not every study was positive. Certain trials using similar wavelengths found no meaningful difference in repetitions, fatigue, or blood markers at all. The review authors emphasized that results depend heavily on details like wavelength, total energy delivered, and how the light is distributed over the muscle.

Independent evidence reviews echo that caution. Examine, an evidence‑focused site, notes that several studies in young male athletes have shown small improvements in strength endurance or muscle size when red light therapy is combined with resistance training. Yet those positive results are clustered in narrow populations, often from one research group, and are not consistently reproduced elsewhere. A TrainingPeaks article aimed at coaches came to a similar conclusion, describing the performance benefits as modest at best and not robust.

For long‑term outcomes, at least one trial in young men found that adding red light therapy around strength sessions led to greater gains in muscle size and strength compared with training alone. In contrast, studies in older men and older women did not see added benefits in strength or muscle mass when red light therapy was applied as part of training. Overall, the picture is that performance gains are possible in specific contexts, but not guaranteed, and they appear smaller or absent in older adults.

Endurance And Anaerobic Efforts

In the J Biophotonics review, some treadmill and cycling studies reported that red light therapy given before exercise improved time to exhaustion and measures like maximal oxygen uptake. Field studies in team sports found that pre‑conditioning with light sometimes improved average sprint performance and fatigue index.

Again, results were inconsistent. In some protocols, performance improved three times faster in the light group than in the control group when both were doing endurance training, as summarized by Athletic Lab. Other protocols, especially certain Wingate test designs, did not show meaningful changes.

The overall theme is that endurance benefits are plausible but not reliable for every athlete, every protocol, or every device.

Soreness And Recovery: Not A Magic DOMS Solution

A common marketing claim is that red light therapy dramatically reduces delayed‑onset muscle soreness, or DOMS. The research is more cautious.

Randomized trials on DOMS in elbow flexors have shown mixed results. Several studies found no difference between light and placebo on soreness, tenderness, or range of motion, while others found reduced soreness and smaller drops in isometric force up to about four days after exercise. A meta‑analysis summarized in the Athletic Lab review concluded that solid evidence for a clinically meaningful reduction in DOMS is still lacking.

Examine likewise notes that red light therapy does not reliably reduce muscle soreness in the days after a workout. Some studies report less soreness, but many do not, and the overall effect is modest.

So while some athletes will feel better after a session, it is not a guaranteed soreness eraser.

Sleep, Recovery, And Systemic Effects

Sleep might be one of the most important “recovery tools” for any athlete. A trial in female basketball players reported by Athletic Lab found that evening red light exposure improved subjective sleep quality and increased nighttime melatonin compared with placebo. Other work suggests that red light used shortly after waking may reduce sleep inertia and improve alertness, which is relevant for early‑morning training.

At the same time, Stanford Medicine experts point out that claims about red light therapy dramatically improving athletic performance or sleep still lack strong, large‑scale data. So these findings are encouraging but early.

What Does The Science Say For Everyday Users?

Pain, Joints, And Everyday Function

When we shift from peak performance to everyday pain, the evidence for red light therapy is somewhat stronger.

Main Line Health describes red light therapy as a noninvasive way to relax muscles, relieve spasms, decrease stiffness, improve joint mobility, and ease ongoing joint and muscle pain. Common targets include arthritis pain, tendon issues such as Achilles tendinitis, and post‑exercise soreness.

MD Anderson Cancer Center notes that low‑level red light can help with muscle pain by reducing inflammation in the treated tissues and may provide broader pain relief in cancer care settings. University Hospitals report that red light therapy can support faster recovery from workouts or strain, help reduce injury risk, and may be helpful for acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain and fibromyalgia, although it does not reverse structural problems like advanced osteoarthritis.

Across these sources, a consistent theme emerges: red light therapy is best used as an adjunct to other treatment strategies such as exercise therapy, load management, and medication when needed, rather than a standalone cure.

Skin, Hair, And Cosmetic Concerns

In dermatology, red light therapy has some of its strongest support. Stanford‑affiliated experts describe how certain red wavelengths can increase collagen, plump skin, and reduce wrinkles. Controlled trials have reported notable reductions in skin roughness and improved wrinkles in a majority of users.

For hair thinning, both animal and human studies show that shallow‑penetrating red light can stimulate hair follicles, likely through improved blood flow and nutrient delivery. WebMD’s review notes that red light therapy can improve hair density and thickness in androgenic alopecia when used consistently over months.

These applications usually rely on repeated exposures over weeks to months, with benefits fading if treatment stops.

Safety: Generally Favorable, With Sensible Precautions

Large hospital systems and consumer health sites tend to agree that, when used properly, red light therapy is generally safe and low‑risk.

MD Anderson and WebMD both emphasize protective eyewear to prevent discomfort or retinal injury from intense light, especially with clinic‑grade lasers or panels. Some literature reports occasional skin redness or burns at very high intensities, so providers carefully control the dose in medical settings.

Main Line Health and University Hospitals advise caution or individualized guidance in people with very sensitive skin, photosensitive conditions, certain medications, or pregnancy. Over‑the‑counter devices are usually less intense, which lowers risk but may also reduce therapeutic impact.

The biggest “downside” mentioned by University Hospitals is often financial rather than medical: handheld home devices can be under one hundred dollars, while more powerful consumer or clinical systems may cost hundreds to thousands, and insurance typically does not cover them.

Dose And Frequency Basics: Why More Is Not Always Better

Before comparing athletes and non‑athletes, it helps to understand an important concept in photobiomodulation: the biphasic dose‑response. The J Biophotonics review on muscle performance found that there appears to be a window where red light therapy helps, and going far above that window can actually reduce benefits.

For example, in studies on the elbow flexors, total energies around 20–80 joules per muscle tended to improve repetitions and contraction time and reduce soreness. When the energy delivered per site exceeded that range, the benefits often disappeared. For quadriceps, total energies between roughly 56 and 315 joules across the muscle group were generally associated with improved fatigue resistance and muscle force, while certain higher per‑site doses showed little effect.

Animal work suggests there may also be an optimal timing window between light exposure and exercise, with some data pointing toward several hours between treatment and exertion as more effective than only a few minutes. Human studies show that benefits can persist from about one hour up to several days after irradiation.

In practical terms, most consumer devices do not show joules per muscle, but this dose‑response pattern tells us something important: more power, longer sessions, or more frequent use do not automatically mean better results. At some point, the curve flattens or even reverses.

Several applied sources converge around moderate session lengths.

Athletic Lab reports that, for their device, sessions beyond about twenty minutes show diminishing returns, and that closer proximity to the light allows shorter sessions for similar effects. A sports physical therapy clinic article describing athlete protocols suggests typical sessions of about ten to twenty minutes per body area, with pre‑exercise use to target performance and treatments within two to four hours after exercise to support recovery.

A wellness article on exercise recovery describes home protocols where users apply red light for about twenty to thirty minutes per targeted area, up to three times per day during active healing, or two to three times per week for maintenance. A recovery studio that uses professional panels recommends about two to three sessions per week of ten to twenty minutes for most people, with quicker relief of soreness often after just a few sessions, and deeper changes over several months of consistent use.

The key message is that biologically effective doses are moderate and repeat exposures over time matter more than chasing extreme intensity or marathon‑length sessions.

Athletes vs Everyday People: How Do Usage Patterns Compare?

Looking at the research and real‑world protocols side by side, athletes and non‑athletes often use similar individual session durations but organize them differently around their goals.

Here is a high‑level comparison based on the studies and clinical or wellness reports in the research notes:

Group	Typical goals with red light therapy	Evidence for performance or function	Common timing pattern (from reports)	How often it is commonly used
Competitive or serious recreational athletes	Short‑term performance boost, reduced fatigue, faster recovery between hard sessions, support for tissue repair and chronic overuse issues	Human trials show modest, inconsistent improvements in strength, endurance, and fatigue; stronger in small studies of young male athletes, weaker or absent in older adults; DOMS reduction is mixed	Light often used before strength or endurance sessions as muscular pre‑conditioning, and sometimes again within a few hours after training for recovery	Research training programs typically applied light around each workout over several weeks. Clinical guides suggest about ten to twenty minutes per target area. Some sources recommend keeping sessions around twenty minutes or less, several days per week during focused training blocks
Recreationally active adults	Help with post‑exercise soreness, support for joint comfort and everyday function, potentially modest performance support	Less direct research than in athletes; hospital‑based articles focus more on pain relief and function than on performance metrics	Often used after exercise or at the end of the day on sore joints or muscles, in combination with stretching, strength work, and good sleep	Wellness protocols commonly suggest ten to twenty or twenty to thirty minutes per area, two to three times per week for maintenance, with the option of more frequent use for short periods during flare‑ups
People focused mainly on pain, skin, or hair (limited training load)	Reduce chronic pain and inflammation, improve skin texture and wrinkles, support hair regrowth or wound healing	Clinical and consumer‑level evidence is relatively stronger for certain skin and hair indications and for some pain conditions than for sports performance	Used according to the target condition: regular sessions over weeks to months for hair and skin, and consistent adjunctive use for chronic pain	Recovery studios often recommend two to three sessions per week of about ten to twenty minutes. A home‑based exercise recovery article notes that for healing, some individuals use twenty to thirty minutes up to three times per day on a specific area for limited periods, then taper to two to three sessions per week

This table reflects patterns reported in the sources rather than rigid rules. Actual prescriptions in medical settings are individualized, and home use should be tailored with a clinician whenever possible.

So, Should Athletes Use Red Light Therapy More Often Than Non‑Athletes?

The honest, evidence‑based answer is that there is no single “correct” frequency for either group. Under the skin, the muscles and joints of an Olympic sprinter and an office worker respond to light through the same biological pathways. What differs is the load placed on those tissues and the goals of treatment.

A few key points emerge from the research:

First, in strength and endurance studies on athletes, red light therapy is typically tied to training sessions. In multi‑week programs, light is applied around each resistance or treadmill session, several times per week. The idea is to either pre‑condition the muscles or support recovery shortly after exercise. That does mean a higher treatment frequency during training blocks than most non‑athletic clinical protocols for chronic pain or skin.

Second, for people whose main goals are pain relief, skin quality, or hair density rather than performance, hospital and wellness protocols often revolve around consistency over weeks and months, not daily pre‑ and post‑workout timing. Two or three sessions per week of ten to twenty minutes, sometimes more often for a limited period during acute flares or healing, is a common pattern in the sources reviewed.

Third, the biphasic dose‑response suggests that chasing “more” is not necessarily better for athletes. J Biophotonics authors specifically warn that exceeding certain dose ranges can blunt benefits. Athletic Lab notes diminishing returns past about twenty minutes per session. Examine and TrainingPeaks both emphasize that even when RLT is used regularly in sports studies, performance effects are modest and inconsistent, especially in older adults.

In practical terms, this means:

The per‑session dose and exposure per muscle group should stay within reasonable limits, whether you are an athlete or not.
Athletes may choose to cluster sessions around key training days, but there is no strong evidence that using red light therapy multiple times every single day grows performance benefits without limit.
Everyday users do not need to “match” an athlete’s schedule to see potential benefits in pain, skin, or hair. Well‑designed protocols with a few sessions per week and good overall lifestyle habits can be very reasonable.

In other words, athletes are more likely to use red light therapy more often simply because they train more often, not because their tissues inherently need a higher biological dose of light.

Practical, Evidence‑Aligned Frequency Guidance

Within the limits of current evidence, here is a practical way to think about frequency, whether you are a competitive athlete or someone using red light therapy at home for pain or skin.

If you are an athlete or train hard several days per week, focus on timing first. The most common research and clinical patterns apply light shortly before sessions to prime the muscles, or within about two to four hours afterward to aid recovery. Sessions per area tend to last ten to twenty minutes, sometimes up to thirty minutes in home protocols. It is reasonable to start with light on the muscles or joints involved in two or three of your heaviest weekly sessions, rather than trying to treat everything every day. Monitor how you feel for at least two to four weeks, which is the timeframe several athlete‑oriented clinics mention for noticing clearer changes.

If you are an everyday exerciser or primarily seeking pain relief, skin, or hair benefits, think in terms of regular, moderate use. Many wellness studios and home protocols suggest treatment two to three times per week, ten to twenty or twenty to thirty minutes per area, over a period of weeks or months. For acute flares or injuries, some practitioners and consumer resources describe using a device more frequently on a short‑term basis, even up to three times per day for a specific area, before returning to a maintenance frequency.

In both cases, keep three safety and effectiveness checks in mind that are supported by the evidence:

First, watch for signs of overdoing it. Persistent redness, irritation, or increased discomfort after sessions can be a signal to shorten duration, increase distance from the device, or reduce how often you treat the same area.

Second, integrate red light therapy into a bigger recovery plan. For athletes, sleep, sensible training progression, nutrition, and proven tools such as strength and mobility work have a far larger evidence base than light alone. For pain and chronic conditions, medical evaluation, exercise‑based rehabilitation, and appropriate medications remain core.

Third, be realistic about what the science supports. Examine concludes that red light therapy is not a dependable way to enhance performance or recovery for most people, particularly older adults. TrainingPeaks advises that, as of now, it is more of an interesting technology than a must‑have. Medical centers emphasize its role as an adjunct for pain and function, not a magic fix.

When expectations are grounded, it becomes easier to see red light therapy as a potentially helpful layer on top of good habits rather than a substitute for them.

Brief FAQ

Do I need a different device or frequency because I am an athlete? Most performance and recovery studies in athletes use similar wavelengths and power ranges to those used in general clinical settings: red light around 630–660 nanometers and near‑infrared around 800–850 nanometers. What changes most is timing relative to training, not the basic physics of the light. If you are an athlete using an at‑home panel or pad, organizing sessions around key workouts and staying within reasonable session lengths, as described above, is more important than chasing a special “athlete‑only” device or dramatically higher frequency.

Is it safe to use red light therapy every day? Large institutions such as MD Anderson, University Hospitals, and WebMD describe red light therapy as generally safe and noninvasive when used as directed, with the main cautions being eye protection, skin sensitivity, and certain medical conditions or medications that increase light sensitivity. Some home protocols do involve daily or multiple daily sessions for short periods, especially during active healing. However, because of the biphasic dose‑response, there is no evidence that increasing frequency without limit improves outcomes. If you plan to use a device daily for more than a short period, it is wise to discuss that plan with a healthcare professional, especially if you have underlying health issues.

How long before I notice any difference? Sports‑oriented clinics that integrate red light therapy with training often report subtle early changes in stiffness and recovery sensations within the first few sessions, with more measurable shifts in training capacity over two to four weeks of consistent use. For cosmetic goals like wrinkles or hair thinning, a recovery studio article notes that joint pain and soreness can improve after a handful of sessions, while clearer skin and deeper collagen changes tend to appear over one to three months, and hair density changes may take three to six months or more. These timeframes are averages from the sources, not guarantees for every individual.

As research continues to evolve, my guidance to both athletes and everyday users stays the same: let the science set your expectations, aim for moderate, consistent use rather than extremes, and make red light therapy a supportive tool alongside the fundamentals of training, movement, nutrition, and rest. When you do that, whether you are chasing a personal record or simply trying to walk up the stairs without pain, your red light sessions can be aligned with both your goals and the best evidence we have so far.