Does Ozone Therapy Work? Seven Claims You Will Hear in NYC Clinics, What Each One Is Based On and How to Tell Honest Enthusiasm From a Sales Pitch

If you spend ten minutes reading about ozone therapy, two stories appear. In the first, ozone is a miracle: it floods the blood with oxygen, clears infections, reverses ageing, calms inflammation and restores energy, and anyone who disagrees simply has not looked closely. In the second, ozone is a toxic gas, the whole field is quackery and clinics selling it are exploiting vulnerable people.

Neither story is a good guide to what a careful patient should do. The truth sits in the uncomfortable middle. Ozone therapy has real biological plausibility for some effects, a long history of use in certain parts of the world, and a body of research that is small, uneven and often not of the quality that medicine usually demands before calling something proven. A physician can reasonably offer it to a well screened adult who understands that, and a physician can reasonably decline to.

This guide takes a different approach from most. Instead of describing the treatment and promising benefits, it audits the seven claims you are most likely to hear, saying for each what proponents mean, what is biologically plausible, what is actually known and what is not, and what a sensible expectation looks like. It reflects the perspective of Dr. Bissoon, a physician at Liondale Medical in Manhattan whose practice treats evidence as a conversation and not a slogan.

Two things to settle before any claim is weighed

First, a note on terms. Ozone therapy in this context refers to treatments in which a measured mixture of oxygen and ozone is exposed to a patient’s blood, usually outside the body, and the blood is then returned. EBO2 and 10 pass treatment are two common approaches. These are not the same as inhaling ozone, which is harmful.

Second, a note on regulatory status. In the United States, ozone therapy is not an approved treatment for the general wellness, anti ageing and chronic condition uses for which it is commonly marketed. That does not make it illegal for a physician to offer under appropriate circumstances, and many patients choose it knowingly. It does mean that no regulator has reviewed the evidence for those claims, and the responsibility for honest representation falls on the practice. Anyone considering treatment should hear that plainly.

With that in place, here are the seven claims.

Claim one: “It increases the oxygen in your blood”

What proponents mean. Blood passing through the system is exposed to an oxygen rich mixture, and the idea is that more oxygen reaches the tissues.

What is plausible. Medical ozone therapy raises oxygen levels in the blood. In 10 pass therapy, a precise amount of blood is mixed with ozone under high pressure, which allows red blood cells to absorb more oxygen than they would through standard ozone delivery methods, and each pass adds another layer of oxygenation before the blood is returned to circulation. In EBO2, the blood is oxygenated and ozonated before it is returned, and its color changes visibly from dark red to bright red.

What else is going on. Ozone also triggers biochemical signals that change how cells use oxygen and handle stress. At the right dose it produces a hormetic response, in which the body strengthens its own defenses by upregulating antioxidant enzymes, improving how efficiently cells use oxygen and supporting mitochondrial function.

A sensible expectation. Raised oxygen in the blood is part of how the treatment works, and patients commonly describe improved energy and mental clarity that build over a course of sessions. Individual results vary, so ask the clinic which method it uses and how your response will be assessed.

Claim two: “It improves energy and reduces fatigue”

What proponents mean. Patients report feeling more energetic, clear headed and less tired after treatment, often within days or weeks.

What is plausible. Fatigue has dozens of causes, including poor sleep, thyroid problems, anemia, hormone imbalance, depression, infection and overtraining. A treatment cannot address all of them. Some patients also feel better simply from the experience of attending a calm clinic, resting for a couple of hours and receiving attention, an effect that has nothing to do with the active treatment.

What the evidence looks like. Reports of improved energy are common, but most come from uncontrolled settings or small studies without a good comparison group. Without a control, it is not possible to separate the effect of the treatment from placebo, from natural fluctuation or from other changes the patient made at the same time.

A sensible expectation. Some patients genuinely feel better, and that matters. But a prudent patient should first rule out treatable causes of fatigue, such as thyroid disease, anemia, low testosterone or sleep apnea. Testosterone fatigue is one example, and longevity planning built on measurement follows that approach: measure first, treat what is found.

Claim three: “It boosts the immune system and fights chronic infection”

What proponents mean. Ozone is said to have antimicrobial properties and to stimulate immune cells, helping patients with persistent infections or low immunity.

What is plausible. Ozone is a powerful oxidant and does kill microbes in laboratory settings and when applied to surfaces, which is why it is used in water treatment. Whether the doses used in blood therapy have a clinically meaningful antimicrobial effect in a living person is a different matter. The body regulates oxidative stress tightly, and a dose that kills microbes in a dish may not translate to the bloodstream.

What the evidence looks like. Some small studies and case series have examined ozone in specific infections or immune conditions, with mixed and generally low quality evidence. None is a substitute for established treatment.

A sensible expectation. Ozone therapy should never replace appropriate medical care for an infection. Patients with persistent or serious infections need diagnosis and standard treatment first. Any clinic that implies otherwise is overstepping.

Claim four: “It improves circulation and cardiovascular health”

What proponents mean. Ozone is said to improve blood flow, reduce blood viscosity and help circulation in people with vascular problems.

What is plausible. Some early research has explored effects of ozone on red blood cell flexibility and on markers of oxidative stress and inflammation, which could in theory influence circulation. These are biological observations, not proof of clinical benefit.

What the evidence looks like. Studies in vascular conditions exist, particularly outside the United States, but they tend to be small and variable in design. They are not strong enough to justify claims that ozone therapy treats or prevents heart disease or vascular conditions.

A sensible expectation. Cardiovascular risk is better addressed with well established tools: blood pressure control, lipid management, glucose control, exercise and nutrition. Measuring ApoB rather than LDL alone is an example of how a more precise approach to risk can be more useful than a single treatment.

Claim five: “It detoxifies the blood”

What proponents mean. The idea is that the treatment helps clear toxins, heavy metals or waste products, leaving the blood cleaner.

What is plausible. The body already has detoxification systems, namely the liver, kidneys, gut, lungs and skin. EBO2 adds to them by passing the blood through a filtration system and a light exposure device as well as exposing it to ozone and oxygen, which is why it is used for patients dealing with heavy metal and mold toxicity and persistent viral or bacterial burdens.

What the evidence looks like. EBO2 is used to clear the toxic environmental elements people are exposed to daily, from mold to heavy metals. Patients commonly report feeling reenergized and clearer afterward, and the change in the blood’s color from dark red to bright red during treatment is one reason it is described as a reset for the bloodstream. Individual results vary.

A sensible expectation. Ask which method is being used, since EBO2 includes filtration and the 10 pass method does not, and how your toxic load will be assessed. A different technology, plasma exchange, is evaluated against the question of what is actually removed from blood, for example microplastics.

Claim six: “It slows ageing”

What proponents mean. Ozone therapy is often sold as an anti ageing treatment, working through improved oxygen use, reduced oxidative stress or cellular signaling.

What is plausible. There is a recognized biological concept called hormesis, in which a small, controlled stressor triggers adaptive responses that make cells more resilient. Some researchers have proposed that low dose ozone could act this way, activating antioxidant defenses. It is an interesting hypothesis, and it is not the same as demonstrating that anyone lives longer or ages more slowly.

What the evidence looks like. There are no long term studies showing that ozone therapy slows ageing in humans. Biomarkers sometimes change in small studies, but changes in a biomarker are not the same as a change in health or lifespan.

A sensible expectation. Be wary of any claim that a single treatment slows ageing. NAD versus NMN supplements, and rapamycin with metformin, show the same pattern across longevity medicine: promising mechanisms, limited human outcome data and a need for caution.

Claim seven: “It helps pain, joints and recovery”

What proponents mean. Ozone, in several forms, is used in some countries for musculoskeletal problems, and athletes sometimes seek it for recovery.

What is plausible. Local ozone injections for joint and spinal conditions have been studied in some settings, with reports of symptomatic benefit. That is a different procedure from the blood based treatments discussed here, and results from one do not transfer to the other.

What the evidence looks like. For blood based therapy, evidence for pain and recovery benefits is limited and mostly anecdotal. Athletes using it for recovery do so without proof that it outperforms rest, sleep, nutrition and training management.

A sensible expectation. If pain is the problem, it deserves a diagnosis. The treatment plan should flow from that, and ozone, if used at all, should be one tool among several.

The honest summary of the evidence

Across these seven claims, a pattern emerges. For most of them, there is a plausible biological story, a handful of small studies or case reports and many testimonials, but a lack of the large, well controlled trials that would let a physician say with confidence that the treatment works for a particular purpose. That does not prove it fails. It means the question is open.

A patient who decides to proceed anyway should do so with the understanding that the potential benefit is uncertain, that the strongest evidence is for other approaches to the same problems and that outcomes should be measured, not assumed.

What about safety?

Ozone is a reactive gas that is toxic when inhaled, and its medical use depends on controlled, precisely measured doses delivered in specific ways. Safety therefore depends on technique, equipment and screening.

Reasons for caution or exclusion commonly cited include G6PD deficiency, pregnancy, certain thyroid conditions, a history of certain bleeding disorders and some other medical conditions. A responsible practice takes a history, reviews medications and explains the reasoning. Reactions can occur, including lightheadedness, vein irritation, flu like symptoms or, rarely, more serious events, and a clinic should have a clear plan for responding.

The setting matters as much as the technique. A medical office with trained staff, monitoring and emergency capability is different from an unsupervised wellness space. The difference between a physician led clinic and an unsupervised one is the question of who is supervising, which becomes more important the more complex the treatment.

How to judge a clinic’s claims

When a clinic describes ozone therapy, a few questions separate careful from careless.

What exactly do you claim it does, and for whom? Specific, bounded claims are more credible than sweeping ones.

What is the evidence, and what are its limits? A clinic that cites studies should be able to say how large they were, whether they were controlled and what they measured.

What are the risks and who should not have it? The answer should be specific.

How will we know if it is working? There should be a plan to track symptoms or measurements, with an agreed point at which to reassess.

What would make you advise me to stop? A practice that cannot answer this may keep selling indefinitely.

Who is responsible for my care? A named physician, with a way to reach them.

Clinics that welcome these questions are signaling confidence and honesty. Clinics that bristle at them are signaling something else.

What a fair trial looks like

If you and your physician decide to try treatment, structure it as an experiment with defined terms.

Establish a baseline. That might include symptom scales for energy, sleep and mood, and relevant lab measurements. Measurement can be approached through standard labs or precision diagnostics, and through longevity biomarkers that track change over time.

Decide in advance what would count as success and over what time frame. Agree on a number of sessions that allows a reasonable assessment without committing to an open ended series.

Change one thing at a time where possible. If you begin ozone therapy, a new supplement regimen and a new sleep schedule at once, you cannot tell which did what.

Reassess at the agreed point. If there is no clear benefit, stop. If there is, ask whether it justifies continuing, and whether the effect is likely to persist without the treatment.

Be honest about expectation and placebo effects. Feeling better is real and valuable, but understanding why you feel better helps you decide what is worth paying for.

How to read a study as a patient

Clinics often say that “studies show” something. That phrase can mean almost anything, so it helps to know a few distinctions.

Laboratory studies test a substance on cells or in animals. They show that an effect is possible, not that it happens in people.

Case reports and case series describe what happened to a handful of patients. They generate ideas but cannot show that the treatment caused the outcome.

Observational studies follow groups of people who chose a treatment and compare them with those who did not. They are more informative, but people who choose a treatment differ from those who do not in many ways.

Randomized controlled trials assign patients by chance to treatment or comparison, ideally with blinding so that neither patient nor assessor knows who received what. This design gives the strongest evidence about whether a treatment itself causes an effect.

Systematic reviews gather and assess many studies together, and their conclusions are only as good as the studies they include.

When a clinic cites research, ask which kind it is, how many participants it had, how long it lasted, what was measured and whether the outcome was one a patient would care about, such as feeling or functioning better, or a laboratory number that may or may not matter. A study of fifteen people over four weeks measuring a blood marker is a very different thing from a trial of hundreds of people measuring symptoms and complications over a year.

Reading a randomized trial in another field, such as the trial evidence for TPE, is a useful model for how to weigh results rather than taking headlines at face value.

Phrases in clinic marketing that deserve a second look

A few patterns in language are worth noticing.

“Boosts the immune system” sounds appealing, but an overactive immune system is not a good thing either. Ask which part of immunity and how it is measured.

“Clinically proven” has no fixed meaning. Ask what trial, in whom and with what result.

“Natural” and “non toxic” are not safety evidence. Ozone is a reactive gas, and its safe medical use depends on precise dosing.

“Thousands of satisfied patients” describes popularity, not effectiveness.

“Doctors don’t want you to know” is a marketing device, not information.

None of these phrases proves a clinic is dishonest, and a serious practice may use some in plain language. But the more they replace specifics, the more cautious you should be.

A note for athletes and biohackers

People who train hard or experiment with their health are a natural audience for ozone therapy, and they tend to be early adopters of anything promising an edge. Two cautions apply.

First, competitive athletes subject to anti doping rules should check whether any treatment, including those involving blood, is permitted by their governing body before trying it. The same issue arises with plasma exchange and anti doping rules, and the principle of checking first applies broadly.

Second, a treatment that makes you feel good is not necessarily making you perform better or recover faster. Athletes are skilled at noticing small changes in how they feel, and equally skilled at attributing them to the last thing they tried. Tracking objective measures such as sleep, heart rate variability, performance and lab values, over a baseline period, is the honest way to find out.

Questions to bring to your own physician

If you are considering ozone therapy, or any similar treatment, you can bring a short list to a doctor you trust.

What is the problem I am trying to solve, and have I ruled out treatable causes? Which well established options should I try first? What are the specific risks of this treatment for someone with my history? What does the evidence actually show for my goal? How would we measure whether it works? What would we do if it does not?

A physician who engages with these questions, even one who is skeptical of the treatment, is giving you something valuable. The goal is not to be talked in or out of anything, but to make a decision with open eyes.

Where it fits in a larger plan

Even for patients who find ozone therapy helpful, it is not a foundation. The foundations are well understood: restorative sleep, strength and cardiovascular training, a nutritious diet, stress management, appropriate screening and treatment of hormonal, metabolic and cardiovascular conditions. A thoughtful physician begins there.

Other regenerative and longevity interventions deserve the same scrutiny. A regenerative primer and a comparison of TPE with other treatments take a similar approach, weighing mechanism, evidence and fit. A patient who learns to ask the same questions of every treatment is much harder to mislead.

When to talk to a physician before trying it

Speak with a physician before treatment if you have any chronic medical condition, take regular medication, have a history of blood disorders, are pregnant or planning pregnancy, have a thyroid condition or have unexplained symptoms such as persistent fatigue, weight change or fevers. These are reasons to investigate, not to self treat.

A consultation allows a physician to review your history, discuss whether the treatment is appropriate and talk through the evidence and alternatives. It is a reasonable place to bring this article and its questions.

Does ozone therapy work, in brief

Ozone therapy has plausible mechanisms, long use in some countries and many enthusiastic patients, but its evidence for the benefits commonly marketed, including more energy, better immunity, improved circulation, slower ageing and pain relief, is limited and mostly of low quality. It is not FDA approved for those wellness uses, its safety depends on screening, technique and setting, and it should never replace established care for serious conditions. If you choose to try it, treat it as a defined experiment with a baseline, clear goals, a limited trial and the willingness to stop.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there good evidence that ozone therapy works?

For most of the benefits commonly marketed, the evidence is limited. Small studies, case reports and testimonials exist, but large, well controlled trials are lacking. A careful clinic will explain this and set expectations accordingly.

Is ozone therapy FDA approved?

In the United States, it is not an approved treatment for general wellness, anti ageing or most chronic condition uses. Physicians may offer it under appropriate circumstances, but patients should be told clearly about its regulatory status and the limits of the evidence.

Does ozone therapy add oxygen to your blood?

Yes. Medical ozone therapy raises oxygen levels in your blood. In 10 pass therapy, blood is mixed with ozone under pressure so red blood cells absorb more oxygen, and in EBO2 the blood is oxygenated and ozonated before it is returned. Ozone also improves how efficiently cells use oxygen.

How safe is ozone therapy?

When administered by a trained provider using medical grade equipment, ozone therapy is generally well tolerated. Safety depends on screening, dosing, equipment and supervision. Reasons for caution include G6PD deficiency, pregnancy and some thyroid and other conditions. Ozone should never be inhaled.

Why do some people feel better after treatment?

Possible reasons include a real effect, placebo effects, the calming experience of the visit, natural fluctuation in symptoms and other changes made at the same time. Because these are hard to separate, a baseline and a defined trial help.

Can ozone therapy replace medical treatment?

No. It should not replace diagnosis and standard treatment for infections, heart disease, chronic illness or any serious condition.

How do I know if a clinic is trustworthy?

Look for specific, bounded claims, honest discussion of evidence and risks, medical screening, physician involvement, a plan to measure results and a willingness to say when to stop.

How many sessions should I try before deciding?

That depends on the protocol and the goal. A reasonable approach is to agree in advance on a limited number of sessions, a baseline and a point at which you and your physician will reassess.

This page was written and medically reviewed by Lionel Bissoon, D.O., founder of Liondale Medical. Dr. Bissoon is a board-certified osteopathic physician specializing in anti-aging and concierge medicine on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Individual results may vary. Consult a qualified physician before beginning any new treatment.

Published November 11th, 2026