Search for red light and recovery and you will find claims ranging from cautious to absurd. Worth separating the two.
What has actually been studied
Photobiomodulation has been examined in sports science around post-exercise soreness, perceived fatigue and markers of muscle damage. Several trials report modest effects. Others report none at all.
Sample sizes are frequently small and protocols differ enormously between studies, which makes them genuinely hard to compare. The fair summary: a real research area with mixed results. Not a proven intervention, and not snake oil either.
Why the literature looks so inconsistent
Four variables move independently: wavelength, irradiance, distance and duration. Two studies can both say “red light therapy” and deliver doses an order of magnitude apart.
Much of the apparent contradiction in the field is not disagreement about whether light does anything. It is disagreement about how much light was given.
Before or after training
Both have been trialled. Most consumer guidance points to afterwards, as part of a wind-down — which happens to be the version people actually stick to. Whatever your device manual specifies takes precedence over anything you read online, including this.
Light is not a treatment for injury. It never has been.
A tear, a sprain that will not settle, pain that is getting worse — that is a physiotherapist, not a lamp.
The setup that goes wrong most often
Distance. People position a device by eye, at whatever gap feels reasonable, and deliver a fraction of the dose they think they are getting. Anything held in contact with the target sidesteps the problem entirely; anything at a distance needs you to respect the number in the manual.
PHŌRMA devices are wellness products, not medical devices. Nothing here is medical advice.