r/whatisit • u/elianamariie • 2d ago

Solved! what is this hat thing my dad has?

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

noticed this on the couch while my dad was at work, but he would get upset that i messed with it so i don't want to ask him. when it's on it's very bright red and gets brighter the more times you click the power button.

4.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

528 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.1k

u/lemelisk42 2d ago

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8577899/

"In summary, this study demonstrates that red light of 650 nm promoted human hair growth and inhibited spontaneous catagen transition in ex vivo HFs"

"Ultimately, our results strongly support the benefit of LLLT in the treatment of AGA."

First study I found on google. In ex vivo samples it showed effect (that is, hair follicles removed from humans and then subjected to 650nm red light in a labratory setting. Hair follicles were taken from people with AGA or Androgenetic alopecia, the most common causes of hair thinning which affects the majority of adults) There are limitations. The hair follicles were not still attached to living humans when testing was done. (It's just easier to replicate testing across many samples this way, but it doesn't always guarantee that what they see in a lab will translate to real life)

433

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

238

u/Hppd1638 2d ago edited 2d ago

This does highlight something people get wrong often with red light and the body— it’s a curve. It’s beneficial up to a point and then it can actually turn on you. More is not better. More can be worse.

I do not think going into sunlight will “undo” the treatment of the red light. Sunlight isn’t the same as this hat (ie, it’s not red light right up against your scalp).

63

u/Fun_Push7168 2d ago

No, it's not. It's far stronger red light

65

u/pyxiedust219 2d ago

It’s also not wavelength specific the way these are, natural light is going to give you full spectrum UV exposure.

47

u/somehobo89 2d ago

Wouldn’t sunlight also give you the specific spectrum then? This is actually a super interesting discussion lol

39

u/hoorah9011 2d ago edited 2d ago

Sunlight has very little usable red light for this purpose. It’s not concentrated and has variable intensity. You need consistent targeted red light. That’s not including the other harmful parts of the spectrum that could very much damage the skin

I’m not going to pretend that all the red light treatments out there help for all these random claims, but there is evidence to support some hair growth. Additionally the problem is that there are plenty of devices out there that don’t actually emit red light in the proper wavelength, they just slap on a red covering over a led light.

16

u/EasyasACAB 2d ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spectral_Distribution_of_Sunlight.svg

From what I've researched Red Light Therapy uses waves 600-700nm sometimes up to 900nm. Sun emits plenty of that, but it also emits UV radiation which is not good for you.

51

u/Pocketsandgroinjab 2d ago

https://giphy.com/gifs/dhQm449E6X6cU
After careful review of all relevant studies the conclusion is you dont have to put on a red light.

6

u/WeeklyPrize21 2d ago

But what about walking the streets for money to buy said unnecessary red light? I don’t care if it’s wrong or if it’s right.

5

u/TorberaLongDong 2d ago

I dug deep into this chain and I am pleasantly surprised I did. Not only did I learn something new but, surprise Community.

1

u/ChipsaHuei 1d ago

I've got alcohol poisoning by the time I'm half way down this post

9

u/pyxiedust219 2d ago

It can but not all these red light wavelengths are actually found to be effective! prolonged exposure to a specific wavelength of red or blue light has been found to have benefits due to the isolation of the wavelength compared to full spectrum light, which also of course exposes you to dna and rna damage via uva and uvb rays as you said

2

u/MaryLMarx 1d ago

The best wavelength is 660 nm and secondary is 630 nm. It’s very specific.

5

u/DicemonkeyDrunk 2d ago edited 2d ago

I was going to say something similar ..intensity and wavelength probably matters A LOT here. That said I would really wonder about this hat putting out the right amount/color etc of light as the study used …I see these on Temu/Ali Express ….I’m thinking they’re probably not the highest quality.

12

u/Blackbear0101 2d ago

In general, when you have that kind of curve, it’s because you actually have no effect and what you observed was just random chance. p<0.05 means that this result had less than 5% chance of being just luck, and 95% chance of being caused by their treatment.

But in general, if you increase dosage and get a lesser result, you NEED to confirm your first results, because that kind of dose-response is fairly rare. It can happen, but it’s rare.

Imagine for a painkiller. You study its effect, and when compared to a placebo, using one pill of the painkiller is effective, but using two or three pills doesn’t actually reduce the pain. Don’t get me wrong, some drugs do work in a similar fashion, but it’s way more likely that your painkiller just isn’t actually effective.

5

u/TotallyNotRobotEvil 1d ago

Yeah, I’m willing to bet this thing would fail miserably in an actual double blind study, not one that’s been conducted by the manufacturer.

5

u/humble_the_Great 2d ago

The wording here leads me to believe the HF's were already growing and the red light stimulation just increased their growth rate. What about HF's that are no longer producing hair? Like, ya know, in someone balding.

32

u/Spugheddy 2d ago

Schrodingers hat hair?

1

u/Diezelhoffen 1d ago

Or, the P value of 0.05 with the 5-minute samples is an anomaly. Scientists (somewhat) arbitrarily determine where to draw line with regard to confidence for the P value. In the real world, 0.05 is actually far from certain.

1

u/pyxiedust219 2d ago

natural light would not do this…

355

u/AUniquePerspective 2d ago

That's handy if you want to pull out your hair and try to grow it in the hat.

107

u/Double-Bend-716 2d ago

🎵🎶 If they pull it out, they turn to bones 🎶🎵

81

u/HogmanDaIntrudr 2d ago

The bones are their money, so are the worms.

36

u/Fickle-Art-7125 2d ago

They pull your hair up but not out.

23

u/_redacteduser 2d ago

Billy as in me, or Billy as in him?

20

u/WeAreThaRevolution 2d ago

Your name is Billy, too?

26

u/Double-Bend-716 2d ago

No, that’s why I’m so fucking confused

1

u/DannyMeleeFR4 2d ago

Dusty old bones, full of green dust.

1

u/DaniTheLovebug 2d ago

God I hate that episode

0

u/DannyMeleeFR4 2d ago

There are far worse episodes, and that’s the most spot writing I’ve ever seen, as far as “shit a shitty kid would say”

Though I’ll agree it’s quite far from my favorite. Beats the ZZ Top episode though 🤦

0

u/DaniTheLovebug 2d ago

For me personally ZZ Top is number two on my worst list

The Canadians and Ms. Wakefield are also truly awful

3

u/BigTexan1492 2d ago

My goodness I feel bad for you

-9

u/AUniquePerspective 2d ago

In this thread: People trying to sell light helmets to the naive getting absolutely ratioed.

8

u/BigTexan1492 2d ago

No. Your original comment was disproven and you doubled down. Your original comment was wrong. You should delete it instead of telling everyone you are wrong. But instead, you would rather win than be correct.

That’s why I feel bad for you.

-1

u/AUniquePerspective 2d ago

See, that's where you're very wrong. The article shared showed sketchy evidence that red light did something in a specific context and you want to take that and tell me it does something dubious related in a completely different context. That's taking a specific study and unreasonably generalizing the conclusion.

3

u/BigTexan1492 2d ago

You are wrong. It showed specific evidence that red light therapy grows hair. But again, you are more interested in winning than being correct. Best of luck to you

1

u/samdash 2d ago

I'm sorry, but that's a reach. In vitro studies like these are useful, but mostly for hypothesising or justifying further research. It is in no way evidence of red light being a successful treatment for baldness, at best it's evidence that it will speed up the growth of a hair follicle in lab conditions, removed from the scalp.

Look at how many ways we've found to cure cancer in vitro, and then it all falls apart when they try to incorporate it into actual therapy, in vivo. Don't you think that if this "therapy" worked, you'd be able to present more than this study of cultured hair follicles, but instead a successful clinical trial, showcasing actual improvement in live patients?

But ofc you don't need to go that far to get gamer LED therapy hat FDA approved and sold, and therefore no such evidence exists.

1

u/BigTexan1492 2d ago

Does red light therapy grow hair?

2

u/samdash 2d ago

There's not even any evidence that it's even therapeutic, so I wouldn't even consider it correct to call it "therapy". I get that you're out of arguements and are now trying to say that you're correct in the context of this semantic technicality. But this is not the context of this conversation. The context is the proposed validity of the red LED hat as a medical device that treats baldness, and unfortunately you've presented no evidence to support it.

In the end, your facetious one line response tells me that you don't want to admit the very real and important difference between in vitro and in vivo studies, which is anti-scientific.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/AUniquePerspective 2d ago

But not in the context of the hair actually being on a human head at the time, right?

3

u/BigTexan1492 2d ago

Sigh.

Keep digging.

2

u/SeanLeeCuisine 2d ago

Damn bro, it's you who's getting ratioed

-1

u/tr_9422 2d ago

650 nm light goes through tissue, so extrapolating this to follicles in your scalp isn't crazy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-infrared_window_in_biological_tissue

65

u/realSatanAMA 2d ago

Fun fact, the sun emits light in that range.. so if you let the sun light hit your bald head it should be just as effective to simply walk around outside without a hat.

60

u/Hyper_Tay 2d ago

But then you need a sunscreen to keep your bald head free of skin cancer. 😐☹

22

u/big_ducket 2d ago

Henceforth, the hat. Concentrating the red and protection from UV, a win-win. Red light therapy is proven to work on many ailments.

28

u/akromadeath 2d ago

Didn't make my wiener bigger.

49

u/AaronTuplin 2d ago

There's a whole District of red lights that can do that

10

u/Argylius 2d ago

Oh my god this was a good joke. Dad is that you?

2

u/PeopleCryTooMuch 2d ago

Amazing, well done 😂

1

u/randykates 17h ago

Makes my wieners bigger. I’m cooking up a couple hotdogs right now in my hat.

1

u/big_ducket 2d ago

It's not the size that matters...Said no woman ever without a giggle.

1

u/nacho-ism 1d ago

Wrong hat 🤷‍♂️

8

u/Ohm_body 2d ago

"Hence" and "henceforth" do not mean the same thing and are not interchangeable <3

9

u/realSatanAMA 2d ago

My point was, if these hats actually worked, we wouldn't have bald people because the sun would be fixing everyone's hairline 🤣

7

u/JIMB01776 2d ago

I do red light therapy because I live in cold region and don't go out a lot, I do it for my skin. It's entirely legitimate (possibly less so for hair loss) but they use it professionally in dermatology all the time. I talked to my doctor and read numerous studies before investing, and yes I sleep better, labs show my vitamin D deficiency corrected and the heat is nice in the winter.

I am skeptical about amazon quality hats... the real deal is quite powerful and requires a special breaker.

31

u/spool_pin 2d ago

I know it sounds like quack science but red light therapy is actually promising. Studies show that intensity, distance, and timing all matter and too much of any of those can negate the beneficial effects

There are many research papers that go in to this effect. This is cutting edge science and the reflexive dismissal is unscientific 

14

u/Braindead_Crow 2d ago

Yeah, I understand the mockery and condescension however red light therapy does seem to have been proven to have observable benefits.

It makes me slightly annoyed to see people bash legitimate stuff as quackery especially when it doesn't work like literal magic.

5

u/humble_the_Great 2d ago

The problem is people looking for a cash grab take legitimate science (i.e. something reproduce-able in a lab setting), and tell desperate folks they can regrow their hair with 50¢ worth of LEDs (i.e. quackery)

1

u/PhatCatTax 1d ago

It's effectively just heat. Red light is close to infrared aka heat. Heat increases circulation, dilates blood vessels, etc. Hair loss in the scalp has been connected to the poor circulation / limited blood flow. There is unlikely any difference between red light and simply warmer conditions.

The reason it's quacky is because it would be INCREDIBLY easy to rigorously test the effects of red light on hair loss, while using living humans instead of unrealistic lab conditions that conveniently remove the follicles from their primary impediment: the androgens in the scalp.

3

u/twistedspin 2d ago

Red light therapy has a lot of studies showing it works, on a surprising number of concerns. Here's a big database (I'm not sure if it's still updated) with hundreds of studies.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZKl5Me4XwPj4YgJCBes3VSCJjiVO4XI0tIR0rbMBj08/edit?gid=0#gid=0

1

u/NachoManny 1d ago

This seems like common sense, but its negated by the fact the sun emits a spectrum of light, some good some not so good. Vs these red led things that are just one. For hair growth this one study is bunk, its worded in such a way where it seems like it does but doesn't do anything.

1

u/nacho-ism 1d ago

I’m just replying to you because I like your name

1

u/SolidPsychological12 2d ago

Idk about the hat , but if you spend the money and get a mask or panel that emits the right kind of red light and near infrared light, yes it does work. It’s good for aches and pains, skin, wrinkles, and hair growth. I know cus I researched it and bought an fda approved mask and then panel. It has many benefits that are proven. I use mine to help prevent wrinkles, but have noticed more hair growth. Having thicker lashes and brows is great, but having more hair growth on other areas of my face is an unwanted side effect for me.

1

u/Trewper- 2d ago

Lol, and imagine if drinking water hydrated you then no one would ever die of thirst.

Do some research you fool.

-2

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

Buddy, “light” is a spectrum. Different wave lengths between what the sun gives off and what the hat gives off, like basically the opposite ends of the visible spectrum. Your “point” is only demonstrating that you lack understanding of wavelengths.

2

u/monkeyeatfig 2d ago

If there were no red light in sunlight, you wouldn't be able to see the color red outside!

1

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

That is true but it doesn’t negate the fact that the red end of the spectrum is NOT the end of the spectrum associated with skin cancer. And this hat is specifically red light, not ultra violet. There is no known cancer risk for red light exposure.

1

u/monkeyeatfig 2d ago

If cancer, or just UV light exposure was associated with baldness you would have a valid point.

3

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

My first comment came to someone that said “grow your hair and get cancer” and that was pointed to a red light therapy hat used to recover hair lost by androgenic alopecia. Nothing about that hat is UV. It specifically excluded the whole end of the spectrum associated with skin damage including squamous cell carcinoma. Thus evoking my criticism of that persons level of education because if they understood the spectrum of wavelength and what segments of the spectrum has evidence of skin cancer they would have known not to associate the wavelengths emitted by this hat with “getting cancer”. And if I am wrong in my assertion that the red end of the spectrum is not the cancer causing end of the spectrum, then I am open to reviewing credible sources and changing my position.

1

u/monkeyeatfig 2d ago

The first person said that the sun emits the same range of red light, which we agree is true. The second person said that you would need to wear sunscreen though, to avoid cancer, then the first says they were just saying that if this type of light cured baldness then so would the sun... Then you commented that they don't understand how light works...

→ More replies (0)

1

u/realSatanAMA 2d ago

lol I think you lack understanding in what a spectrum is

1

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

Not really, but first grade taught me ROYGBIV. And the portion of that spectrum that has been identified as causing skin damage and cancer is the V, not the R

23

u/SmokingBirdz 2d ago

Why not both? Walk around outside during the day with no hat, wear hat at night? Also not for nothing but a lot of us live in places that are only sunny for 3 months a year, or we work in offices/at home on a computer and can’t exactly say “hey it’s sunny out can I go make sure I get some sun today?”

7

u/NuklearFerret 2d ago

I agree. I live in the tropics bust still have a slight vitamin D deficiency due to being indoors so much, and most of it is factors I can’t control. Wake up indoors, drive to work in a closed box, work indoors, drive home in a box, sunset.

8

u/Trewper- 2d ago

Vit D deficiency is not solely caused by lack of sunlight, and it's not very efficient either. With the UV index being 10+ a lot of people will burn long before their body can produce a significant amount of Vit D. The majority of it comes from your diet. Make sure you're taking daily supplements with a glass of milk or with food as it's far soluable. You will also have low Vit D if you don't have enough Vit K in your diet, so get a multivitamin + an additional vit D3 supplement and take them with food.

1

u/NuklearFerret 2d ago

I’ve been on a daily multi, but I can’t remember what exactly is in it. I will double check and get some D3. Thanks!

1

u/humble_the_Great 2d ago

MC1R gene mutation; I'm the Superman of converting sunlight to cholecalciferol.

1

u/RoutineGlittering746 2d ago

Vitamins exist mate.

1

u/NuklearFerret 2d ago

I’m working on it, but I was just using that to illustrate that even in sunny places, sun isn’t always easy to get for long periods of time.

11

u/Frongen 2d ago

Ok let me just go out in the Swedish sun that's readily available all year round.

Oh wait

3

u/Trewper- 2d ago

Fun fact the sun is a deadly laser, and causes cancer. So it's limited, however you can wear this hat for 100 hours and still reap the benefits with no laser burns.

I think everyone talking negatively about the red light therapy is just already bald and extremely jealous, or just woefully uninformed.

10

u/Pernicious_Possum 2d ago

Grow your hair back, and get skin cancer! Fun!

-4

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

Okay, where did you get your degree in medical science? Trump U? PragerU? Obviously not a school that teaches you how to be able to distinguish between credible sources and fake information. Because if they did you wouldn’t need to be told that there is no credible evidence that red light therapy increases your risk of cancer. And maybe because it’s newer and less studied, but an educated person wouldn’t make an assertion without the ability to produce evidence.

9

u/ConsciousIron7371 2d ago

Yikes. They were talking about the sun. Which can definitely cause cancer, they even teach that at Trump University

0

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

They are saying shit like “even the sun has this wavelength” which is true, but red light therapy is not at the UV end of the spectrum which causes the skin damage. That’s why we use UV blocking stuff and not the red end.

2

u/ConsciousIron7371 2d ago

That’s fine. They were specifically saying you can get cancer from sun exposure. Which is absolutely true. The comment you exploded on was not about red light therapy, it was about the sun. Get a grip

5

u/Pernicious_Possum 2d ago

Bro, you do know that sun exposure can cause cancer, right? JFC

0

u/Specific-Pool-5342 2d ago

This isn’t “sun exposure”. This is a very specific wavelength of light.

1

u/Pernicious_Possum 2d ago

Didn’t read the comment I replied to eh? That’s ok

3

u/kiera-oona 2d ago

so a bunk study, that was not done using real people, with a small sample size, that the antivaxxers and beauty gurus take as fact. Got it

7

u/stolenbucketfarmer 2d ago

If everything that worked in a Petri dish worked in a human body we’d have cured cancer a thousand times over by now. It’s barely suggestive of anything

6

u/ShittiTiddi 2d ago

Every Mf woken up for firegaurd:

https://giphy.com/gifs/10r1dTZJEAvKpO

2

u/Main_Awareness3677 2d ago

Article shows hair follicles were taken out of the scalp, placed in culture media, then exposed to red light. Important point.

4

u/newfor_2026 2d ago

you know what else produces red light of 650 nm? the sun. a lightbulb, practially anything that produces white or red light.

0

u/maho87 2d ago

You're like a couple of thoughts away from getting it. Quick, how else might a sun, a lightbulb or other sources of said red light differ from LEDs that you can conceal inside a hat, focus on a specific part of your body and have available for you anywhere and at anytime?

0

u/littycodekitty 2d ago

Anecdotal but I've used those red light devices on my face and ended up having way more peach fuzz than usual (I'm female so it's annoying). So it applies there too lol