Red Light Therapy for Fertility - Research Review
Let's talk about the real scoop on photobiomodulation (PBM) and fertility. When you are navigating red light therapy for your reproductive journey, it is so important to clear away the noise, cut through the marketing hype, and look at what the clinical evidence actually suggests. There are about 25 human studies and combined with animal studies and whether the study was just done with cells (in a lab) or real life - the total global body of research is about 166 papers so far (more are in the works).
Whether you are trying to conceive naturally or preparing for an upcoming IVF cycle, understanding how laser photobiomodulation works at the cellular level is a complete game-changer. Let me walk you through the top research studies, look at clinic series with a smart lens, and show you how we personalize these tools - including my clinical-grade Solasta laser.
You’ve likely heard of the Gigalaser data and Ohshiro but let’s look at the most methodologically sound data available today.
The Morin Trial: Improving Implantation and Live Birth Trends
When evaluating laser acupuncture at the time of embryo transfer, we want to separate uncontrolled clinic rumors from rigorous, double-blind clinical trials. The landmark dataset supporting laser during IVF comes straight from the Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey research team.
First presented as a 1,000-patient randomized controlled trial (Frattarelli et al., 2008) and later published in full by Morin et al. (2017), this protocol remains one of the few sham-controlled studies in female PBM literature. It focuses on a quick, targeted laser acupuncture session applied right before and shortly after embryo transfer. (This is part of my IVF protocol that comes with your laser).
Key Implantation Findings: The Morin protocol demonstrated a statistically significant jump in implantation rates - 33.7% in the laser group compared to 26.8% in the sham group and 24.9% in the control group
Live Birth Trends: Secondary endpoints like ongoing pregnancy and delivery rates trended in a strong, positive direction. While the study focused primarily on implantation, those upward trends give us fantastic support for timing PBM directly around IVF transfers.
The Iranian Implantation Study: Promise and Limitations for Recurrent Implantation Failure (RIF)
While the Morin protocol focuses on the day of embryo transfer, recent clinical data shows us how pre-treating the uterine lining during the preceding cycle can support women facing Recurrent Implantation Failure (RIF).
A randomized single-blinded clinical trial conducted in Iran investigated transabdominal near-infrared (NIR) laser therapy applied during the cycle before a frozen embryo transfer (FET) in women with a history of 3 to 7 failed transfers.
Elevated Early Outcomes: The laser pre-treatment group achieved a 46.7% biochemical pregnancy rate (vs. 33.3% in controls) and a 33.3% clinical pregnancy rate (vs. 20.0% in controls).
While these results are super promising, as smart consumers of research, we have to look at the study's design limitations:
Small Sample Size: The trial evaluated a relatively small group of just 60 total women (30 in the laser group, 30 in the control group), which limits how broadly we can apply these findings without larger replication.
Sub-Optimal Study Design: It was only a single-blind study (patients were blinded, but practitioners were not), leaving room for potential operator bias.
No Live Birth Rate (LBR) Data: The researchers only tracked early surrogates of success - biochemical and clinical pregnancy - and did not follow participants through to full-term live birth or delivery data (this is so frustrating).
The "Gigastudy": Accessibility, Dosimetry, and Individualized Care
Promising Results, With Important Context
You may have heard about the high pregnancy figures reported in the GigaLaser clinic series - sometimes casually called the “Gigastudy.” The numbers are genuinely exciting, and they deserve attention. But they also deserve the same thoughtful, evidence-informed lens we should apply to any fertility intervention before we decide what the results actually mean.
Before I go any further, I want to say this clearly: Anne Marie Jensen is wonderful. I had the pleasure of having Anne Marie on my podcast, and I have enormous respect for the depth of care, curiosity, and commitment she brings to fertility support. She is not simply someone operating a laser.
Anne Marie is a fertility-focused physiotherapist, the clinician behind Havnestadsklinikkens Fysioterapi/Sund Fertilitet in Copenhagen, and the author of Fertility & Physical Therapy: A Guide to Therapy and Self-Treatment. Her work includes pelvic and manual therapy, self-care education, exercise guidance, scar-tissue work, and a deeply individualized approach to supporting people on their fertility journeys.
That matters because her patients may be receiving far more than light therapy alone.
A combined-care approach
Anne Marie’s approach combines laser treatment with fertility-focused physical therapy and education. Her published materials describe manual therapy, home exercises, self-treatment approaches for scar tissue, pelvic-floor work, and daily movement guidance alongside laser therapy.
In other words, when someone becomes pregnant after working with her clinic, it would be inaccurate to assume the GigaLaser was the sole reason.
They may also have benefited from:
Skilled pelvic and manual physical therapy.
Attention to pelvic-floor tone, mobility, pain, adhesions, and scar tissue.
Exercise, body-awareness, and self-care practices.
Education, encouragement, and ongoing therapeutic support.
Conventional fertility care such as timed intercourse, ovulation induction, IUI, or IVF.
The passage of time and the natural month-to-month possibility of conception.
That is not a criticism of her work. It is actually a recognition that good fertility care is often multifactorial. The issue is simply that a positive outcome after a multi-layered program cannot tell us which component - or combination of components - made the difference.
No control group means no proof
The GigaLaser clinic figures are observational outcomes from clinical practice, not randomized controlled trials. That means there is no similar group of women receiving the same fertility care, physical therapy, support, and follow-up - but without the laser.
Without that comparison, we cannot confidently say:
“The laser alone improved pregnancy rates.”
What the data can reasonably say is:
“Among patients receiving this particular clinic’s combined fertility-care approach, a certain proportion became pregnant.”
That is an important distinction. A clinic series can generate a valuable hypothesis and can absolutely justify more formal research. But it cannot establish that the laser caused the pregnancies, or tell us how much of the observed outcome came from laser therapy versus the other care women received.
The motivated-patient effect
There is another important factor: the women who seek out specialized fertility programs are rarely a random sample of all people trying to conceive.
Many are exceptionally proactive. They are often willing to invest significant time, money, energy, travel, and emotional effort into improving their fertility. They may be simultaneously changing nutrition, prioritizing sleep, exercising, taking supplements, reducing alcohol or smoking, seeking medical evaluation, receiving IVF or IUI, attending pelvic therapy, and carefully timing intercourse.
This is called selection bias or self-selection. It does not mean these women are “to blame” for their fertility outcomes, nor does it mean motivation itself causes pregnancy. Fertility is complex, and conception is never a simple reward for working harder.
But it does mean that a highly motivated, self-selected group may have different outcomes than the broader population of people experiencing infertility. If that group receives a sophisticated, supportive, multi-pronged program and later has a high pregnancy rate, we cannot know how much of that rate is attributable specifically to the GigaLaser.
The dosing question
Dosimetry - the amount of light energy delivered - is another reason to be cautious about translating clinic outcomes into broad claims about “red light therapy for fertility.”
A large fixed-panel laser system may deliver a very different treatment than a smaller, targeted, contact-based device. The actual dose reaching a deep pelvic structure can vary considerably based on body size, tissue depth, abdominal tissue composition, positioning, treatment distance, wavelength, treatment time, and the anatomy of the individual person.
Photobiomodulation also follows a biphasic dose-response pattern: too little may have no meaningful biological effect, while too much may be ineffective or potentially counterproductive. This is one reason “more power” or “more joules” should never automatically be equated with a better fertility protocol.
The GigaLaser reports are therefore best understood as evidence about a particular clinical environment and protocol - not proof that every high-powered panel, home red-light device, or generic fertility-light routine will produce the same outcome.
Anne Marie Jensen’s work is inspiring because it reflects something I value deeply: fertility care that sees the whole person, not just a diagnosis or a lab value. Her clinical experience, her commitment to pelvic health, and her willingness to explore photobiomodulation have helped open an important conversation.
At the same time, the high pregnancy rates reported by her clinic should be interpreted as encouraging clinical observations.
The next step is not to dismiss those outcomes. It is to study them properly: with clearly defined patient populations, transparent reporting of concurrent treatments, individualized dose information, and a comparable group receiving the same quality of care without the laser. That is how we move from a promising signal to a conclusion we can truly trust.
While the figures sound amazing on the surface, we need to apply that same smart lens:
No Control Groups: These large observational series lack randomized control arms, making it impossible to separate the laser's impact from natural fertility baselines or standard IVF protocols.
The "One-Size-Fits-All" Trap: Fixed panels like the Gigalaser deliver the exact same blast of energy to every single body. But your body is unique! A static device ignores individual BMI, tissue depth, and ovarian placement.
Accessibility Hurdles: These proprietary devices are super expensive and locked away in select high-volume clinics, making them completely out of reach for most women.
The Biphasic Risk: Laser therapy operates on a delicate dose-response curve (the Arndt-Schulz law) - too little energy does nothing, but excessive energy can slow down cell progress or induce oxidative stress. Whole-abdomen panels carry a higher risk of over-dosing pelvic tissue compared to gentle, targeted contact applications.
A New York City GigaLaser fertility study is currently recruiting (offering free sessions), which is a welcome step toward gathering more systematic clinical data.
Solasta Targeted Clinical Protocol: Personalization, Morin, and Ohshiro
Because static panels skip over individual biological needs, every protocol I build is customized to the health history of the women (partner).
Uterine Receptivity Prep (Iranian Protocol Adaptations): For patients preparing for transfer - especially those with thin lining or past failed transfers - I utilize transabdominal near-infrared sessions during the follicular phase of the prep cycle to encourage blood flow and endometrial signaling.
Morin Protocol for Embryo Transfer Day: On the day of transfer, you’ll include a gentle, focused session right before and after embryo transfer to optimize pelvic blood flow and cellular energy at the exact window of transfer.
The Ohshiro Technique Integration: I also weave in the specialized Ohshiro technique (developed by Dr. Toshio Ohshiro in Japan). This uses targeted near-infrared laser light on key proximal areas. By calming autonomic sympathetic tone while encouraging local blood circulation, it supports endometrial lining receptivity and overall hormonal balance.
Home Fertility Treatments with Solasta: Using the handheld Solasta laser allows women to access continuous, targeted follicular-phase protocols at home leading up to ovulation, retrieval or transfer.
As a midwife and university-trained photobiomodulation (PBM) consultant, I bring together evidence-informed fertility support with the kind of individualized care that can be hard to find in a conventional, appointment system.
My approach is not about handing every woman the same dose, or the same generic “fertility protocol.” It is about understanding the whole picture: your cycle, your symptoms, your fertility history, your investigations, your treatment plan, your stress load, and the practical realities of trying to conceive.
By pairing the thoughtful cycle timing described in the Morin work, the structured preparation used in the Iranian recurrent-implantation-failure protocol, the whole-body autonomic focus explored by Ohshiro, and the targeted, contact-based precision of the Solasta laser, I create a treatment plan designed around you - not around a one-size-fits-all machine.
As a NeoFertility restorative practitioner, I also look beyond the question of, “When are you ovulating?” I review the wider fertility picture and often help clients recognize gaps worth discussing with their medical team: missing or incomplete investigations, cycle patterns that deserve closer attention, possible sperm-factor questions, thyroid or metabolic considerations, luteal-phase concerns, recurrent-loss history, and other clues that may otherwise be overlooked.
And because trying to conceive does not happen in a single appointment, you are not left to figure it out alone between visits. You receive unlimited check-ins while TTC, so you have consistent guidance as cycles change, test results come in, treatment plans evolve, or you simply need someone to help you make sense of what is happening.
This is fertility support that is practical, personal, and grounded in both clinical experience and careful attention to the evidence. My goal is not to promise outcomes or sell a miracle. It is to help you feel informed, supported, and confident that your plan is safe, accessible, and tailored to your individual fertility journey.
Tracy
Additional Resources:
Morin SJ, et al. Laser acupuncture before and after embryo transfer improves in vitro fertilization outcomes: A four-armed randomized controlled trial. Medical Acupuncture. 2017;29(2):56–65. doi:10.1089/acu.2017.1218.
Jafarabadi M, Farbod Y, Shariat M. Low-level laser therapy for improvement of in vitro fertilization outcomes in patients with recurrent implantation failure: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences. 2024;15:e15. doi:10.34172/jlms.2024.15.
Ohshiro T. Personal overview of the application of LLLT in severely infertile Japanese females. International Society for Laser Surgery and Medicine. 2012;21(2):97–103.
Phypers R, Berisha-Muharremi V, Hanna R. The efficacy of multiwavelength red and near-infrared transdermal photobiomodulation light therapy in enhancing female fertility outcomes and improving reproductive health: A prospective case series with 9-month follow-up. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024;13(23):7101. doi:10.3390/jcm13237101.
