The PlatinumLED Spectrum — Verified Output. Full-Zone Coverage.

R+ | NIR+ - The Science of
Perfected Spectrum

PlatinumLED's seven-band red and near-infrared spectrum — engineered to deliver verified irradiance across the entire range the photobiomodulation literature defines as biologically active, and confirmed by independent third-party testing at an accredited laboratory.

13-minute read · Updated May 2026

Science-Engineered Spectrum = Superior Results



Photobiomodulation has been studied for more than fifty years, and the literature is consistent on one point: red and near-infrared light act through the same cellular mechanism across a single, well-defined range — roughly 600 to 1100 nanometers, the band researchers call the therapeutic action zone. PlatinumLED has engineered to that evidence since 2010. R+|NIR+™ is our seven-band spectrum, built and independently verified to deliver measured irradiance across the full zone — the standard a clinical-grade device should be held to.

This article sets out the evidence behind R+|NIR+™: the mechanism that makes red and near-infrared light biologically active, why full-zone spectral coverage outperforms a narrow two-wavelength design, and why we had every panel independently measured rather than relying on supplier projections.

01/ The Therapeutic Action Zone

Michael Hamblin and Tatiana Demidova defined what the field calls the "optical window" — the band of light from 600 to 11001,2 nanometers. Within this window, light penetrates tissue efficiently, because the body's principal chromophores — hemoglobin in blood, melanin in skin, and water — absorb relatively little of it. That allows the light to reach the depth at which it is biologically active. Outside the window, it does not. Below 600 nm, hemoglobin and melanin absorb most of the light at the surface. Above 1100 nm, water absorbs it as heat rather than as a usable signal.

That window — 600 to 1100 nm — is the therapeutic action zone: the range across which photobiomodulation is biologically active. This is not a positioning claim. It is the range cited in nearly every major review of the field, including Hamblin's own work3, recent cross-disciplinary reviews4, and the literature in ophthalmology, dermatology, neurology, and sports medicine.2

There is one therapeutic action zone. A device either delivers measured output across it or contacts a fraction of it.

02/ One Process, Many Wavelengths

This is the point most often misstated in the category — including by manufacturers. The familiar claim that "660 nm is for skin, 850 nm is for muscle, 810 nm is for the brain" is a misreading of the research. Investigators isolate one wavelength per study for experimental control, not because each wavelength performs a single dedicated function.

The mechanism is straightforward. Across the entire action zone, light acts through a single cellular process. It is absorbed primarily by cytochrome c oxidase, an enzyme within the mitochondria — the organelles responsible for cellular energy production. Cytochrome c oxidase is the photoacceptor: the molecule that captures the light and initiates the response 5,6. Once absorption occurs, the same downstream sequence follows regardless of which wavelength delivered the light — mitochondrial energy output rises, ATP synthesis increases, nitric oxide is released as a signaling molecule, reactive oxygen species are modulated into a signaling role, and calcium-mediated pathways are activated5,7. Above roughly 800 nm, additional photoacceptors contribute — among them the light- and heat- sensitive TRP channels — but they converge on the same outcome2,5.

Tiina Karu mapped the wavelengths cytochrome c oxidase absorbs most efficiently, identifying a set of absorption peaks clustered near 620, 670, 820, and 830 nm8,7. A genuinely broad spectrum delivers output to all of these peaks. A narrow device reaches only one or two.

THE CORE PRINCIPLE
Wavelengths within the action zone are not separate tools for separate jobs. They are multiple entry points into one cellular process. A panel that covers the full zone engages that process more completely than one that contacts it at only one or two points.

03/ One Process, Many Wavelengths

There is exactly one meaningful difference between wavelengths in the action zone: penetration depth. Longer wavelengths — particularly those between 800 and 1100 nm — travel deeper than shorter ones. This is a function of how tissue scatters and absorbs light: physics, not biology.

The process itself does not change with depth. Cytochrome c oxidase behaves identically in a superficial skin cell and in a deep muscle cell. The only variable is which cells receive enough light to respond.

R+|NIR+™ Reaches Every Depth in the Therapeutic Action Zone

Same process, different reach — that's why broad coverage matters

Each arrow shows how far a wavelength travels before scattering drops irradiance below the threshold a cell needs to respond. The process is identical at every depth — only the population of cells reached changes.

In a single session, the same process is engaged everywhere the light reaches — from the skin surface through to deep tissue.

04/ Why Broad Coverage Beats a Narrow Beam

Recent research has begun to test this directly. A 2024 study by Zorzo and colleagues compared 810 nm light alone against 810 nm and 660 nm combined. Enzyme activity increased in both conditions, across several brain regions — supporting the central principle: wavelengths within the action zone act through the same process, and combining them performs at least as well, with evidence it can add up to more10.

This is consistent with what the review literature has held for years. Light across the action zone engages the same cellular machinery, and broader coverage raises the likelihood that light reaches and activates that machinery wherever it is needed — including tissue a single narrow wavelength would 5,11.

This is the engineering principle behind R+|NIR+™. Rather than selecting two narrow wavelengths and treating that as sufficient, we built a seven-band spectrum to cover the entire action zone — while concentrating output where the evidence shows the strongest response.

R+ | NIR+

PLATINUMLED'S VERIFIED SPECTRAL ARCHITECTURE

R+ denotes broad red coverage from 600 to 700 nm — the region of the action zone that serves the skin and the tissue immediately beneath it. NIR+ denotes broad near-infrared coverage from 780 to 1100 nm — the region that reaches deep tissue. Together, R+|NIR+™ delivers measured output across the full therapeutic action zone defined by Hamblin and Demidova. It is a seven-band spectrum, and its range is confirmed by independent third-party testing — verification no competing device can currently match. A small, deliberate trace of 480 nm complements the spectrum at the skin surface (see Section 05).

05/ The Trace 480 nm: A Deliberate Surface Complement

R+|NIR+™ also includes a small, deliberate amount of 480 nm blue light — under 1% of total panel output. This is not a marketing inclusion. It is an evidence-based complement that supports the primary red and near-infrared output at the skin surface, where certain effects respond best to shorter wavelengths.

Why 480 nm Specifically

The dermatology literature is clear on two points. First, blue light in the 400–470 nm range is bactericidal — including against Cutibacterium acnes (formerly Propionibacterium acnes), the organism associated with acne. The light excites endogenous compounds within the bacteria, which then generate substances that destroy the cell from within12,13. In controlled trials, blue and red light combined outperformed either alone, with the two wavelengths reported to act on the bacteria and on inflammation respectively14.

Second, and equally important: not all blue light is equivalent. The blue wavelengths associated with documented safety concerns — long-term skin aging and damage — are the shorter ones, principally 410–420 nm15. The research consistently places 480 nm safely above that range while remaining biologically useful. Recent studies show that longer-wave blue light, 449 nm and above, is bactericidal against acne-associated bacteria even at very low power16. We selected 480 nm to capture that effect while remaining clear of the wavelengths shown to damage skin.

A trace, not the main event
The 480 nm component of R+|NIR+™ is deliberately minimal — under 1% of total output. R+|NIR+™ is not a blue-light acne device. The spectrum is, and remains, a red and near-infrared platform. The trace of 480 nm exists to support that primary output at the skin surface, broadening the range of surface-level effects alongside the established role of red light.

06/ The Science Is in the Ratio

Most marketing in this category focuses on which wavelengths a panel contains. The harder and more consequential question is how much of each. This is what separates engineering from guesswork. The R+|NIR+™ ratios are not arbitrary. They resolve a problem governed by three constraints — three requirements the output must satisfy simultaneously — constraints that independent research groups have converged on over more than twenty years.

Why 660 nm and 850 nm carry the heaviest output

Four independent lines of evidence — not a single study — establish 660 nm and 850 nm as the two most important wavelengths.

  1. The enzyme absorbs across two ranges, not one. Cytochrome c oxidase contains multiple metal centers — copper and iron — that absorb light at different wavelengths. This produces two absorption bands: a red band centered near 660 nm (primarily the copper centers) and a near-infrared band spanning 800–850 nm (primarily the iron centers)8,9,19. A panel covering only one band uses only half of the enzyme's absorption capacity.
  2. The near-infrared band is verified in living tissue, not only in vitro . These absorption bands have been measured well beyond isolated enzymes and cell cultures. The enzyme's near-infrared absorption is distinct enough to be detected and quantified in the living body; researchers established reliable methods to isolate its signal in tissue, and that technique remains a standard research tool today20. The 800–850 nm peak is a genuine property of the enzyme in situ — not a figure on a datasheet.
  3. Independent research groups continue to reach the same conclusion. A 2022 in vivo study confirmed that red and near-infrared light measurably increase mitochondrial energy output, noting that the wavelengths most used across both lasers and LEDs — 660, 810, and 850 nm — are selected because the enzyme absorbs most efficiently at 660 nm and across 800–850 nm19. A major review of photobiomodulation in dermatology identified 660 nm as the single most-used wavelength for skin and surface applications21. Landmark research on muscle performance and recovery relied principally on 850 nm to reach deep tissue22. Two distinct fields — dermatology and sports performance — converge on the same two primary wavelengths.
  4. The two wavelengths reach different depths and together span the full body. Light penetrates efficiently between 600 and 900 nm: hemoglobin absorption falls sharply above 600 nm, water absorption stays low until roughly 970 nm, and melanin absorbs progressively less moving into the near-infrared. Within that range, 660 nm serves the skinand the layer immediately beneath it but attenuates quickly with depth, while 850 nm reaches muscle, joints, and connective tissue 23. Used together, the two wavelengths cover the full depth of human tissue — which is why nearly every credible device, clinical and consumer alike, pairs them.

Why the other wavelengths sit in the ratios they do

Every remaining wavelength on the panel earns its place — and its precise share — by addressing a requirement that 660 and 850 nm alone cannot fully meet.

630 nm works alongside 660 nm, widening red coverage across the full red range and reaching the collagen-producing cells and superficial vasculature near the skin surface. In controlled trials, red light in this range measurably improved collagen levels and skin texture325. We hold 630 nm at a smaller share than 660 nm: it sits at the edge rather than the center of the enzyme's red absorption band, and melanin absorbs more of it.

810 nm is the optimal wavelength for transcranial delivery. Modeling by Wang and Li showed that 810 nm transmits through skin, skull, and brain tissue more effectively than the near-infrared wavelengths immediately above or below 6,24 it. We include it at a smaller share than 850 nm: it is well suited to neurological applications but sits slightly below the enzyme's deepest absorption peak, so we allocate enough to support brain and nervous-system applications without drawing output from the wavelengths that perform across all targets.

830 nm sits within the same near-infrared band as 850 nm and is the wavelength most used in tissue-repair research. Paired with 660 nm, it contributes to effects on cell proliferation, collagen production, and angiogenesis526. We hold it at a smaller share than 850 nm: because 830 and 850 nm overlap, an excess of both would accumulate near-infrared dose and push it past the effective range in tissue near the surface.

1060 nm penetrates deeper than any other wavelength on the panel — and we deliberately hold it below 4% of total output. The enzyme absorbs less efficiently above 1000 nm; Wang and Li showed that cytochrome c oxidase takes up 810 nm more readily than 1070 nm even though 1070 nm physically travels deeper24. A small allocation of 1060 nm captures additional depth for the deepest targets. A large allocation would spend output on a wavelength the enzyme uses less effectively.

480 nm is a trace allocation — under 1% of total output — and sits outside the action zone. It contributes documented bactericidal activity at the skin12,15,16 surface and has an established role in circadian signaling, while remaining clear of the wavelengths shown to damage skin. Its share is set to support the surface without drawing output from the primary wavelengths.

The third rule — the dose "sweet spot"

Hamblin and colleagues have shown, across dozens of studies, that photobiomodulation follows a dose "sweet spot" — formally, a biphasic dose-response. Too little light produces no measurable effect. The correct dose produces a strong, positive response. Too much yields diminishing returns and can become counterproductive. Mitochondrial output and downstream effects follow this curve: there is an optimal dose, and exceeding it reduces effectiveness rather than increasing it.

CONCENTRATED OUTPUT OVERSHOOTS THE DOSE SWEET SPOT
A panel that concentrates all of its power into one or two narrow wavelengths can readily overshoot the sweet spot in the tissue those wavelengths reach — becoming counterproductive rather than effective. A spectrum distributed across the full action zone allocates dose across many wavelengths and depths, holding each within its effective range. The ratio is the dose-control mechanism.

The three rules, solved together

R+ accounts for 52–58% of total output. This reflects the central role of 660 nm — the most- cited absorption peak — its lead role for the skin and surface targets that define most protocols, and the sweet-spot ceiling for wavelengths that remain near the surface. NIR+ accounts for 35–43%, reflecting near-infrared's role in reaching deeper tissue, weighted toward the 820–850 nm peak that drives deep-tissue results and anchors the muscle and joint literature. Deep near-infrared near 1060 nm is held at 1–4% — sufficient to reach the deepest targets without disturbing the dose at the more active wavelengths. The 480 nm trace is held under 1%, supporting the skin surface while remaining well clear of any damage threshold.

The 25% Quad-Split Is a Multi-Chip LED Limitation, Not a Design Decision

One ratio pattern appears repeatedly on competing specification sheets: the even quad-split — four wavelengths divided into identical quarters, for example 25% 630 nm, 25% 660 nm, 25% 830 nm, and 25% 850 nm. Presented as precision, the even split is in fact a direct readout of the hardware that produced it. It is not the result of a dose calculation. It is the only power distribution the LED itself is capable of delivering.

Most panels in this category are built on multi-chip LED architecture — multiple emitter chips of differing wavelengths combined within a single LED package. With this construction, the ratio between those wavelengths cannot be freely modified to follow the dosing science established above: the proportional contribution of each chip is fixed by the LED package itself, not assigned by the engineer. It offers no facility for asymmetric power distribution and no mechanism to weight, for example, 27% of output to one wavelength and 9% to another. When four wavelengths are combined this way, the output is locked to the only split the component can mathematically resolve to — an exact 25% each. The even split is therefore not a selection among ratios. It is the absence of ratio control — a limitation of the LED type itself, transcribed onto a marketing document.

That limitation carries a measurable biological cost, and it follows directly from the biphasic dose-response established above. Dividing output evenly across 830 nm and 850 nm places half of total panel power into two heavily overlapping near-infrared bands. Because both wavelengths are absorbed by the same near-infrared region of cytochrome c oxidase, their doses do not act independently — they sum. The combined near-infrared dose in tissue near the surface is driven up the biphasic curve, through the sweet spot, and past the inhibitory threshold.7,17 Beyond that threshold the cellular response does not plateau; it reverses, and mitochondrial output is suppressed rather than stimulated. This is overlapping spectral saturation: a hardware-imposed even split converts two otherwise useful wavelengths into a combined dose that inhibits the cells it reaches.

The consequence is not a matter of design preference. A panel locked to a 25% quad-split cannot weight 850 nm above 830 nm, cannot hold 630 nm below 660 nm, and cannot restrict deep near-infrared to a small allocation — because the multi-chip LEDs it is built on cannot produce those distributions. A specification sheet listing four equal quarters is not documenting balanced engineering. It is documenting the locked output ratio of a multi-chip LED and an LED count, and it is reporting, in numeric form, a configuration that drives near- surface tissue into inhibition. R+|NIR+™ holds 830 nm below 850 nm, and every supporting wavelength below its primary, because asymmetric power distribution is an engineering precondition of correct dosing — a precondition multi-chip LED hardware cannot satisfy. An even four-way split is therefore not a neutral specification choice; it should be read as a clear signal that a panel was not engineered to the photobiomodulation evidence.

AN EVEN SPLIT IS A HARDWARE READOUT
A spectrum weighted to the 660 nm and 850 nm absorption peaks, with each supporting wavelength held to a smaller, separately assigned share, requires LED architecture capable of asymmetric power distribution. A spectrum divided into four equal quarters is simply what a multi-chip LED produces when it cannot do anything else. Two panels can list the identical four wavelengths and deliver materially different physiological results — because the specification sheet records the wavelength list, not the dose the LEDs are able to produce.
A 25% quad-split does not describe a dose. It describes a multi-chip LED.

07/ More Wavelengths Is Not More Performance

Some competing devices now advertise seven, ten, or more wavelengths, presenting the count itself as evidence of superiority. A wavelength count is a quantity of installed LED types. It is not a measure of delivered dose, and the two are independent quantities.

This does not contradict the case for broad coverage established earlier. Covering the enzyme's absorption peaks across the 600–1100 nm action zone — rather than contacting a single narrow point — is sound engineering (Section 04). Extending a wavelength list with light that falls outside the zone, or reducing the dose at every wavelength to accommodate more LEDs on a fixed panel, is not. The criterion for an effective panel is fixed: the correct wavelengths, positioned on the enzyme's absorption peaks, inside the action zone, delivered in shares that hold each within its effective range. A panel built to that standard outperforms a panel with a longer wavelength list. R+|NIR+™ is a seven-band spectrum because each of those seven bands meets that criterion — not because seven is a quantity worth advertising.

Amber Light: A Count Without a Therapeutic Target

The most instructive case is 590 nm — amber light, now added to several competing panels for the one measurable effect it reliably produces: a higher number on the wavelength count. 590 nm sits below 600 nm, outside the lower boundary of the therapeutic action zone1. Below that boundary, melanin and hemoglobin absorb almost all incident light within the most superficial layers of skin, and measured penetration depth falls accordingly2,25. The photons are absorbed at the surface; they do not reach the muscle, joint, and connective tissue where deep-tissue photobiomodulation operates. 590 nm also aligns with none of the absorption peaks of cytochrome c oxidase, so it does not engage the mitochondrial mechanism even at the surface where it does land8,9. The effects amber light produces are confined to surface-level cosmetic changes — moderating visible redness and pigmentation — through a pathway separate from the mitochondrial energy process26. Stated in engineering terms: amber light is an entry on a specification sheet with no corresponding deep-tissue mechanism. It raises the wavelength count and contributes no measurable therapeutic output below the skin surface — the clearest demonstration that a high wavelength count can mask the absence of therapeutic value. The full anatomical and optical analysis is set out in a companion article, The Amber Light Fallacy.

Why an ineffective wavelength actively subtracts

A wavelength outside the zone is not merely harmless filler — it actively works against the panel, and the reason is dose. Every panel has a finite power budget. What determines whether a measurable effect occurs is irradiance — the intensity of light reaching the tissue. Photobiomodulation is dose-dependent and follows the sweet-spot curve established earlier: below a threshold intensity, there is no measurable effect at all7,17.

Every LED a manufacturer allocates to an ineffective wavelength is output not allocated to an effective one. Distributing a fixed power budget across more wavelengths reduces the intensity of each. Add enough ineffective wavelengths and the useful ones can fall below the threshold required to work — and the panel delivers less, not more. A higher wavelength count, achieved by dividing the same power more thinly, can make a device measurably weaker.

COUNT AND DELIVERED DOSE ARE INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
A wavelength count states how many LED types a manufacturer installed. It says nothing about whether those wavelengths land on the enzyme's absorption peaks, whether they reach the depth at which the process operates, or whether each carries enough intensity to produce an effect. The correct wavelengths in the correct ratio is the entire science. The count is only a number.

This is also why R+|NIR+™ holds its 480 nm trace below 1% of total output (Section 05). A minimal surface complement — with a specific, documented role, openly disclosed, and deliberately kept too small to draw dose from the primary wavelengths — is a fundamentally different proposition from spending a meaningful share of output on an out-of-zone wavelength and marketing it as a headline feature. The test of any wavelength is not whether it appears on a specification sheet. It is whether it earns its share of the dose.

Wavelength count and delivered dose are independent quantities. Only one of them is measurable in tissue.

08/ Why Verification Changes Everything

Most manufacturers in this category derive their output figures from LED datasheets — the specification values for the individual chips they purchase from suppliers. Those figures are not measurements of the finished panel. They are predictions, and they are frequently optimistic once LED density, electrical efficiency, thermal management, and lens design are accounted for.

PlatinumLED took a different path. In April 2025, we commissioned LightLab International — a laboratory accredited by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology through its NVLAP program — to fully measure the output of every panel we manufacture. LightLab issued eight test reports, each signed by the laboratory's lead light-measurement scientist, using the industry-standard IES LM-79-19 method and calibrated, traceable instrumentation.

Why this matters
The red and near-infrared light category has no standard governing output claims. Any manufacturer can print any figure on a box. Accredited, independent testing is the difference between a company that states its device delivers a given output and a company that has paid an outside laboratory to verify it. That distinction is the foundation of a clinical-grade standard.

09/ The Verified R+|NIR+™ Spectrum

The following is the independently measured spectrum that defines R+|NIR+™ — and it is present in every BIOMAX and BIOMAX PRO panel:

WAVEBAND % OF TOTAL OUTPUT
R+ — Visible Red (600–700 nm) 52-58%
NIR+ — Near-Infrared (800–900 nm) 35-43%
NIR+ Deep (~1060 nm) 1-4%
Trace 480 nm — surface complement <1%
600-1100
nm therapeutic zone covered
1
unified cellular mechanism
100%
independently verified

The spectral science is identical regardless of which line you select. Every panel was independently measured. Every panel delivers verified R+|NIR+™ output across the full action zone.

10/ Selecting Your Panel

For practitioners new to red and near-infrared light, R+|NIR+™ means deploying a platform that performs across every tissue depth light can reach — without having to prioritize one depth or one application over another.

For those upgrading from a single-wavelength or narrow-spectrum device, R+|NIR+™ reaches regions of the action zone the previous device left uncovered — including the deeper wavelengths and the broad red and near-infrared coverage the research increasingly shows matter for full-body application.

BIOMAX vs. BIOMAX PRO

Both lines deliver the identical R+|NIR+™ spectrum verified above. BIOMAX is our flagship full-body line, available in several panel sizes and built for balanced, reliable performance across standard clinical and home use. BIOMAX PRO is the premium tier, engineered for structured, multi-practitioner deployment: 50% more light energy output in the same panel footprint, independent wavelength control, adjustable pulse frequency, and pre-set smart modes for protocol-level operation. BIOMAX PRO also introduces Zero Gap Architecture, which eliminates coverage gaps when panels are combined into multi-panel arrays. Greater output and protocol-level control translate directly into more energy delivered per session and shorter session times. The underlying science — R+|NIR+™ across the full action zone — is the same in either line.

A device that has been independently measured is fundamentally different from one that has only been marketed.

None of this rests on our word. That is the purpose of independent testing — the data resides outside our company. The reports were produced by LightLab International, signed by its lead light-measurement scientist, and carry the laboratory's NVLAP accreditation. We make them available on request. Combined with FDA Class II Registered Medical Device status and protocol-level control, verified output is what defines a clinical-grade device — and the standard PlatinumLED has built to since 2010.

REFERENCES

  1. Hamblin MR, Demidova TN. Mechanisms of low level light therapy. Proceedings of SPIE. 2006;6140:614001. (Foundational paper defining the 600–1100 nm "optical window" / therapeutic action zone.)
  2. Galor A, Lyons P, Cosgrove K, Hamblin MR, et al. Photobiomodulation use in ophthalmology – an overview of translational research from bench to bedside. Frontiers in Ophthalmology. 2024;4:1388602. PMC11358123
  3. Hamblin MR. Mechanisms and applications of the anti-inflammatory effects of photobiomodulation. AIMS Biophysics. 2017;4(3):337–361. PMC5523874
  4. From light to healing: photobiomodulation therapy in medical disciplines. BMC Medicine review. 2025. PMC12751248
  5. de Freitas LF, Hamblin MR. Proposed Mechanisms of Photobiomodulation or Low-Level Light Therapy. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics. 2016;22(3):7000417. PMC5215870
  6. Karu TI. Multiple roles of cytochrome c oxidase in mammalian cells under action of red and IR-A radiation. IUBMB Life. 2010;62(8):607–610.
  7. Huang YY, Sharma SK, Carroll J, Hamblin MR. Biphasic Dose Response in Low Level Light Therapy – an Update. Dose-Response. 2011;9(4):602–618. PMC3315174
  8. Karu TI, Pyatibrat LV, Kolyakov SF, Afanasyeva NI. Absorption measurements of a cell monolayer relevant to phototherapy: reduction of cytochrome c oxidase under near IR radiation. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology. 2005;81(2):98–106. PubMed 16125966
  9. Karu TI. Action spectra: their importance for low-level light therapy. photobiology.info/Karu.html
  10. Zorzo C, Rodríguez-Fernández L, Martínez JA, Arias JL. Photobiomodulation increases brain metabolic activity through a combination of 810 and 660 wavelengths: a comparative study in male and female rats. Lasers in Medical Science. 2024;39:36. PMC10786747
  11. Heiskanen V, Hamblin MR. Photobiomodulation: lasers vs. light emitting diodes? Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences. 2018;17(8):1003–1017.
  12. Scott MA, Magdum NB, Yin R, Hamblin MR, et al. Effect of Blue Light on Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review. Sensors. 2021;21(20):6943. MDPI
  13. Sadowska M, Narbutt J, Lesiak A. Blue Light in Dermatology. Life (Basel). 2021;11(7):670. PMC8307003
  14. Lee SY, You CE, Park MY. Blue and red light combination LED phototherapy for acne vulgaris in patients with skin phototype IV. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2007;39(2):180–188.
  15. Glaser J, Iliopoulos F, Tuffrey-Wijne L, et al. Illuminating microflora: shedding light on the potential of blue light to modulate the cutaneous microbiome. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2024;14:1307374. PMC11039841
  16. McKenzie K, Maclean M, Grant MH, et al. Propionibacterium acnes susceptibility to low-level 449 nm blue light photobiomodulation. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2019;51(8):727–734. PubMed 30919507
  17. Huang YY, Chen ACH, Carroll JD, Hamblin MR. Biphasic Dose Response in Low Level Light Therapy. Dose-Response. 2009;7(4):358–383. PMC2790317
  18. Hamblin MR. Photobiomodulation or low-level laser therapy. Journal of Biophotonics. 2016;9(11–12):1122–1124.
  19. Lima PLV, Pereira CV, Nissanka N, et al. Photobiomodulation at Different Wavelengths Boosts Mitochondrial Redox Metabolism and Hemoglobin Oxygenation: Lasers vs. Light-Emitting Diodes In Vivo. Metabolites. 2022;12(2):103. PMC8880116
  20. Delpy DT, Cope M. Quantification in tissue near-infrared spectroscopy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B. 1997;352(1354):649–659.
  21. Avci P, Gupta A, Sadasivam M, et al. Low-level laser (light) therapy (LLLT) in skin: stimulating, healing, restoring. Seminars in Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery. 2013;32(1):41–52. PMC4126803
  22. Ferraresi C, Hamblin MR, Parizotto NA. Low-level laser (light) therapy (LLLT) on muscle tissue: performance, fatigue and repair benefited by the power of light. Photonics & Lasers in Medicine. 2012;1(4):267–286. PMC3635110
  23. Bashkatov AN, Genina EA, Kochubey VI, Tuchin VV. Optical properties of human skin, subcutaneous and mucous tissues in the wavelength range from 400 to 2000 nm. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics. 2005;38(15):2543–2555.
  24. Wang P, Li T. Which wavelength is optimal for transcranial low-level laser stimulation? Journal of Biophotonics. 2019;12(2):e201800173. DOI:10.1002/jbio.201800173
  25. Finlayson L, Barnard IRM, McMillan L, Ibbotson SH, Brown CTA, Eadie E, Wood K. Depth Penetration of Light into Skin as a Function of Wavelength from 200 to 1000 nm. Photochemistry and Photobiology. 2022;98(4):974–981. DOI:10.1111/php.13550
  26. Dai X, Jin S, Xuan Y, et al. 590 nm LED Irradiation Improved Erythema through Inhibiting Angiogenesis of Human Microvascular Endothelial Cells and Ameliorated Pigmentation in Melasma. Cells. 2022;11(24):3949. PMC9776419

Explore the Full Line

Choose Your R+|NIR+™ Panel

Every PlatinumLED panel delivers a seven-band spectrum independently measured across the full therapeutic action zone — no out-of-zone wavelengths added to raise a count. BIOMAX PRO adds 50% more light energy output in the same panel footprint, independent wavelength control, adjustable pulse frequency, smart modes, and Zero Gap Architecture for multi-panel arrays.

The Proven Industry Leader

BIOMAX

The flagship line. Verified R+|NIR+ output. Multiple panel sizes for full-body coverage.

SHOP BIOMAX ORIGINAL
Meet The All New

BIOMAX Pro

The premium line. 50% higher light energy output in the same panel size, plus elevated build and additional features.

SHOP BIOMAX PRO