A Headset That Could Change The Game For Football’s Brain Injury Crisis

Football is ingrained in campus and college culture, especially at Division I schools, but in recent years it’s become undeniable that the sport can have a major negative impact on brain health. Now, a new technological invention promises a potential safer solution for players on game day.

In the first study of its kind, researchers at the University of Utah have demonstrated that transcranial photobiomodulation (shining near-infrared light through the skull) can preserve brain tissue markers in active athletes exposed to repetitive head impacts. The findings, published in the Journal of Neurotrauma, bring hope for a sport grappling with an existential question: Can football ever be truly safe?

The brain scans told two different stories. On average, players in the placebo group showed clear increases in inflammation markers across wide swaths of the brain: a pattern researchers associate with a season’s worth of routine hits. The other group? Their scans tended to look more or less unchanged, as if they’d spent 16 weeks on a beach instead of a Division I football field.

The difference came down to 20 minutes, three times a week, under a device that looks like a gaming headset studded with LED lights.

It’s important to note this study tracked changes on brain scans over one season, not long-term outcomes like cognitive performance, mood, or dementia risk. But the preservation of brain tissue during active competition provides evidence that building neurological resilience before damage accumulates might actually be possible.

The Invisible Epidemic

Every diagnosed concussion in football comes with roughly 125 to 440 head impacts that never make headlines, never trigger protocols, and never send anyone to the sidelines. Some players take as many as 77 in a single season.

Studies have documented measurable cognitive decline, disrupted brain activity, and elevated inflammatory markers in players who never suffered a single diagnosed concussion. The long-term impact can be detrimental: increased risk for depression, early cognitive decline, and chronic traumatic encephalopathy, the degenerative brain disease that has become synonymous with football’s dark side.

The biological mechanism is deceptively simple. Minor inflammation after injury is the brain’s temporary repair system activating.

For years, the response has been reactive. Better helmets. Stricter protocols. Rule changes. All necessary, none sufficient. What football has lacked is a proactive intervention, something that builds neurological resilience before the damage compounds.

Enter light therapy, a treatment that sounds more like science fiction than sports medicine.

The Science of Resilience

The 26 Division I players who participated in the study were randomly assigned to receive either functional light therapy devices or identical-looking placebos. Neither the players nor the researchers knew who received what, which is called a double-blind protocol designed to eliminate bias.

The devices themselves are elegantly simple. Four LED panels positioned around the skull, targeting key brain networks, plus a thin intranasal attachment that reaches deeper structures. Together, they deliver 810-nanometer near-infrared light in 40-hertz pulses, a wavelength and frequency optimized for penetrating bone and tissue.

Researchers think the light may help in a few ways. At the cellular level, it may activate mitochondria, the microscopic power plants in every cell, boosting energy production. It may improve blood flow, helping deliver nutrients and clear metabolic waste more efficiently. Most critically for football players, the light may modulate inflammation, dampening the overactive immune response that causes lasting damage. Animal studies and previous human research support these mechanisms, though this particular study focused on measuring brain scan changes rather than testing how the therapy works.

When researchers compared brain scans taken before and after the season, the divergence was clear. Players using placebo devices showed widespread increases in two scan-based stress signals in the brain’s wiring, what researchers call RDI and QA. The first tracks a signal the researchers link to inflammation-related cell activity. The second reflects structural stress in white matter. Both rose in the placebo group. These scans don’t diagnose disease; they track subtle changes that can add up over time.

Players who received active treatment showed remarkable stability in these markers. In some regions, particularly outside the “cone of vulnerability,” (the brain structures most susceptible to impact forces), the scan signals actually moved in a healthier-looking direction.

“My first reaction was, ‘There’s no way this can be real,’” says Hannah Lindsey, PhD, research associate in neurology at University of Utah Health and first author on the study, in a statement. “That’s how striking it was.”

The changes showed up across many brain pathways, including ones that researchers often worry about in repetitive head trauma: the brainstem, the corpus callosum, the basal ganglia, and the thalamic radiations. These are structures where the mechanical forces of impact tend to concentrate, and where long-term consequences often manifest.

Position Matters, Protection Doesn’t Discriminate

Not all football positions carry equal risk. Offensive and defensive linemen collide on every snap, meaning collisions are high frequency but lower force. Skill position players experience fewer impacts but with greater magnitude. When researchers examined untreated players, linemen showed the most pronounced increases in inflammation markers.

The therapy, however, appeared position-agnostic. Whether players faced 70 hits a game or seven, the protective effect on brain scan markers held.

The Implementation Question

What makes this intervention worth watching isn’t just the preliminary science, it’s how straightforward implementation could be. Players in the study operated the devices themselves with basic supervision from athletic trainers. Sessions required less time than film study.

Initial device purchases carry costs, but there are no ongoing medication expenses or complicated medical protocols. Athletic trainers, not neurologists, supervised treatment in this study. Players used the devices before practice and immediately returned to training.

For athletic departments already investing heavily in player safety equipment, light therapy could be an appealing addition if larger studies confirm these early findings.

What We Don’t Know

The study was limited in certain areas. Twenty-six players constitute a preliminary sample, not a definitive answer. The findings demand replication in larger, more diverse cohorts.

An unexplained quirk in the data adds uncertainty: players randomly assigned to the placebo group showed slightly elevated inflammation before the season even began. Statistical adjustments accounted for this baseline difference, and the protective effect remained robust, but the anomaly invites questions.

The more consequential unknown is durability. One season of stable brain scans is encouraging. Five seasons would be convincing. Ten seasons would be definitive. Does the protective effect persist across multiple years of play? Does it translate to measurable reduction in long-term neurodegenerative risk? Does brain health on imaging correlate with actual cognitive performance, mood stability, and quality of life?

The study measured structure, not function. Future research must determine whether preserved brain tissue translates to preserved brain performance: better memory, stable mood, reduced concussion susceptibility, lower rates of degenerative disease decades later.

There’s also a dosing question. The protocol called for three weekly sessions based on manufacturer recommendations at the study’s outset. Updated guidelines now suggest five to six sessions might be optimal. More intensive treatment could potentially offer greater protection.

And while the therapy is described as well-tolerated based on broader photobiomodulation research, this particular study wasn’t designed as a comprehensive safety trial. Larger studies would need to monitor for any unexpected effects.

Beyond the Gridiron

Of course, the headset could be used well beyond football. Hockey players, rugby players, boxers, soccer players who routinely head the ball all face similar patterns of repetitive subconcussive trauma. Light therapy could provide protection wherever brain impacts are inherent to competition.

The intervention also raises questions about when protection should begin. Youth athletes often accumulate the longest exposure, starting in elementary school and continuing through high school, college, and occasionally professional careers. Early intervention might provide the greatest long-term benefit, but pediatric studies would need to establish safety and efficacy in developing brains.

From a public health perspective, the stakes are considerable. Traumatic brain injury is now recognized as a modifiable risk factor for dementia. An intervention that reduces cumulative neurotrauma could influence cognitive health trajectories decades later.

The Larger Reckoning

Football exists in a state of cognitive dissonance. The sport generates billions in revenue, commands passionate loyalty, and produces transcendent athletic achievement. It also causes brain damage. These truths coexist uneasily.

The sport has made meaningful progress: better baseline testing, stricter return-to-play protocols, rules penalizing helmet-to-helmet contact. But these measures address diagnosed injuries. The larger problem is the accumulated subconcussive load that never triggers protocols, never appears in injury reports, never receives treatment.

Light therapy offers something the sport a plausible path toward harm reduction that doesn’t require fundamentally altering the game. Eliminating all impacts would mean eliminating football. Strengthening neurological resilience to withstand impacts might actually be achievable.

The main finding of this work, that a simple, accessible intervention can measurably preserve brain tissue markers during active competition, represents a genuine shift in approach. For years, the conversation has focused on managing damage after it occurs. This research suggests the possibility of preventing the damage from accumulating in the first place.

For players weighing the risks of a sport they love, for parents deciding whether to allow their children to play, for organizations managing the tension between tradition and safety, this research offers a tested intervention that showed measurable effects in the intended direction.

The headset won’t solve football’s brain injury crisis, but it might be the first tool that addresses the hidden accumulation of damage rather than waiting to manage the aftermath.

---

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only. It summarizes early-stage research and is not medical advice. Players, parents, and coaches should consult qualified professionals when making health decisions.

---