Microcurrent Before and After Photos, How to Read Them
Medically reviewed by
4 independent reviewers
Andrew Conrad Barile, PT, DPT
Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) | Licensed Physical Therapist (PT) | CEO and Founder, Xtreem Pulse LLC
Read bio
Dr. Andrew Conrad Barile is a Doctor of Physical Therapy and the CEO and Founder of Xtreem Pulse LLC, the engineering company behind PureLift. He earned his Doctorate in Physical Therapy from Daemen College and is a licensed physical therapist.
He brings over two decades of clinical and entrepreneurial experience across physical therapy, craniosacral therapy and medical device innovation, built on a working knowledge of human anatomy and muscle physiology.
For PureLift LAB he reviews how current is delivered across all ten levels, from sub-sensory nanocurrent and skin-level microcurrent to motor-level EMS, and how the Infuse pass fits into the same ten-minute routine.
Bertica M. Rubio, M.D.
Board-Certified Physician, Dartmouth Medical School | Medical Director, Antiaging Regenerative Medicine Clinic
Read bio
Dr. Bertica M. Rubio is a board-certified physician and Medical Director of the Antiaging Regenerative Medicine Clinic in Redlands, California. She earned her Doctor of Medicine from Dartmouth Medical School and completed her pediatrics residency at UC Irvine Medical Center.
With decades of clinical experience, she specialises in age management medicine, regenerative medicine, wound healing and growth factor therapies, and her practice integrates evidence-based medical science with advanced aesthetic treatment.
For PureLift LAB she reviews articles for medical accuracy across the whole dial, from the gentle nanocurrent and microcurrent settings through to muscle-level EMS and the Infuse pass.
Daniel Grinberg, MD, FACS
Board-Certified Otolaryngologist | Head and Neck Surgeon | Fellow, American College of Surgeons | Mount Sinai
Read bio
Daniel Grinberg, MD, FACS is a board-certified otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeon at ENT and Allergy Associates in West Nyack, New York. He earned his medical degree from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
He completed his otolaryngology residency at New York University Medical Center, serves as Assistant Clinical Professor at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and is a Fellow of both the American College of Surgeons and the American Academy of Otolaryngology.
For PureLift LAB he brings a wider clinical lens, connecting at-home facial stimulation from microcurrent to EMS to the anatomy underneath, with the same rigour we apply to every device specification.
Prof. Dr. med. Ivo Buschmann
Chair of Angiology, Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg | Clinic Director, University Clinic for Angiology
Read bio
Prof. Dr. med. Ivo Buschmann is Chair of Angiology at the Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane and Clinic Director of the University Clinic for Angiology at the Brandenburg University Hospital.
He trained at the University of Hamburg, was a Max Planck Society Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, and held senior consultant posts at the Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin before his appointment as Chair in 2016.
One of Europe's leading authorities on arteriogenesis, with over 150 peer-reviewed publications and US and EU patents, he reviews for PureLift LAB how the evidence on electrical stimulation is read and where its limits lie.
Share
Most before and after photographs show a real effect that will be gone tomorrow, and the tell is almost always the time interval between the two shots.
This article covers what actually decides the answer, such as:
- why a minutes-apart photograph proves almost nothing
- the four variables that change a face more than any device
- what an honest twelve-week comparison looks like
- how researchers avoid the problem, and what they measure instead
- how to photograph your own progress properly
and many more!
None of this means the photographs are faked; it means they are answering a different question from the one you are asking.
Key Points:
A photograph taken minutes after a session shows fluid movement, which is real and lasts about a day.
Lighting direction, head angle, time of day, salt intake and how recently you slept all change a face more visibly than twelve weeks of device use.
An honest comparison uses the same light, the same angle, the same time of day and an interval of at least eight weeks.
Researchers avoid the problem entirely by measuring tissue rather than photographing it, using ultrasound or imaging.
Photograph yourself on day one, week four, week eight and week twelve, in the same spot at the same hour.
What a minutes-apart photograph actually shows
When a before and after is taken in the same session, the difference you are looking at is fluid. Current plus the movement of the probe shifts fluid that has pooled in the face, circulation increases, and the face looks tighter and more defined within minutes.
That effect is genuine and it is also temporary, redistributing over the following day as you eat, sleep and move about. Photographing it is not dishonest, but presenting it as evidence of what a device does over months is.
When you see a dramatic same-day image, the right question is not whether it is real; it is how the same face looked the next morning.
The four variables that beat any device
Lighting direction is the largest. A light source above and in front of a face flattens shadow under the jaw and sharpens the cheekbone; the same face under flat overhead light looks heavier. Nothing a device does in twelve weeks competes with moving a lamp.
Head angle is second. Tilting the chin down by a few degrees creates a jawline; tilting it up erases one. Compare the ear position between two photographs and you will often find the angle changed.
Time of day is third, because faces are puffiest within an hour or two of waking and settle through the day. A morning before and an evening after is not a comparison.
Fourth is everything ordinary: salt the night before, alcohol, sleep, where you are in a menstrual cycle, and recent weight change. Any one of those moves a face more than a fortnight of sessions.
What an honest comparison looks like
Same light, same angle, same distance, same time of day, no makeup in either shot, and an interval of at least eight weeks.
A neutral expression in both, because a barely-smiling after photograph lifts the mid-face by itself.
Ideally a third photograph in the middle, since two points can be chosen and three start to show a trend.
When a brand publishes photographs that meet those conditions, it is worth paying attention. Very few do, ours included, which is why we have built our evidence case on published figures rather than on our own photographs.
How researchers sidestep the problem
Serious work in this field does not rely on photographs at all, because photographs cannot separate fluid from tissue.
Kavanagh and colleagues in the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology used ultrasound to measure cheek muscle thickness directly across 108 women over twelve weeks, reporting an 18.6 percent increase, and ultrasound does not care about your lighting.
Chang and colleagues in 2020 went further on method by running a double-blind sham-controlled design, where neither the participant nor the assessor knew who had received the real treatment, which removes the expectation effect that photographs are wide open to.
Okuda and colleagues used CT imaging to measure change in the orbital muscle, which is the kind of evidence this category very rarely produces.
Reading a photograph in thirty seconds
Check the interval first. If it is not stated, assume it is short.
Check the ears and the hairline for a change in head angle, since those move when the angle does and the jaw does not.
Check the shadow under the jaw and the highlight on the cheekbone for a change in lighting.
Check whether the expression is identical, and whether makeup has appeared.
If all four survive scrutiny and the interval is months rather than minutes, you are looking at something real.
Photographing your own progress
Pick a spot by a window, note the time of day, and use it every time.
Take four angles on day one: straight on, both three-quarter views and one from slightly below the chin, which is the least flattering and therefore the most useful.
Repeat at week four, week eight and week twelve. Do not photograph immediately after a session, or you will record the fluid effect rather than the change you are building.
Expect your own judgement to be unreliable, which is exactly why the photographs are worth taking. The week by week timeline sets out what should be visible at each of those points.
This article sits inside our full map of the category, where we set out all 33 devices we track, what each one carries and what each brand publishes: Nine Technologies on One Dial, What the Rest of the Market Actually Carries.