HBOT vs Ozone Therapy: Which Is Better for Pain Relief?
Should I book HBOT or ozone therapy?
HBOT scores 6.2 and ozone 5.1, but ozone wins several use cases outright. Pick HBOT for wounds, cognition and neuro recovery, at $3,000 to $6,000 a month. Pick ozone for acute disc pain, dental work and inflammation, at $520 to $2,600. Neither is a general wellness purchase.
- HBOT 6.2 against ozone 5.1, and the lower-scoring one still takes acute pain 8.0 against 4.4, dental 6.5 against 5.8, and inflammation 7.0 against 5.9.
- HBOT's cost is the story: $3,000 to $6,000 a month at 5 sessions a week, because the protocols that produced the evidence run 40 to 60 sessions.
- Ozone is not one therapy. Intradiscal injection, dental gel, rectal insufflation and blood autohemotherapy share a gas and nothing else, including their evidence and their risk.
- Ozone's best evidence is narrow and good: Chang 2024 beat steroid injection at 6 months for herniated lumbar disc pain and matched microdiscectomy at 18 months.
- The FDA states in 21 CFR 801.415 that ozone is a toxic gas with no known useful medical application. Gas embolism deaths from blood routes are documented.
- Soft home chambers at 1.3 to 1.5 ATA do not reproduce the 2.0 ATA hard-chamber protocols behind the cognition and neuro evidence. Buying one buys a different intervention.
At a Glance
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
- Efficacy 4.4
- Breadth 4.5
- Evidence 4.4
- Speed 3.4
- Durability 3.8
- Bioindividuality 4.0
- Safety Risk 3.6
- Side Effects 2.8
- Cost 4.7
- Effort 4.6
- Opportunity Cost 3.4
- Dependency 1.5
- Reversibility 1.6
- Wound Healing
- Hearing Auditory
- Injury Recovery
- Bone Joint
Pressurized 100% oxygen in a hard chamber, usually 2.0 ATA for 90 minutes. BioHarmony 6.2, worth trying.
Ozone Therapy
- Efficacy 3.9
- Breadth 3.9
- Evidence 3.6
- Speed 4.0
- Durability 2.7
- Bioindividuality 3.6
- Safety Risk 4.0
- Side Effects 3.4
- Cost 3.9
- Effort 3.8
- Opportunity Cost 2.0
- Dependency 1.3
- Reversibility 2.3
- Acute Pain
- Wound Healing
- Anti Inflammatory
- Immune Function
Route-dependent medical ozone, from intradiscal injection to dental gel to blood autohemotherapy. BioHarmony 5.1, neutral.
Head-to-Head Verdict
| Use Case | Winner | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Acute Pain | Ozone Therapy | Ozone 8.0 against HBOT 4.4, the widest gap here, and it holds up. Chang 2024 pooled trials of fluoroscopy-guided intradiscal ozone for herniated lumbar disc pain and found higher treatment success than steroid injection at 6 months, with outcomes similar to microdiscectomy at 18 months. This is a single specialist procedure, not a wellness drip. |
| Wound Healing | Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy | HBOT 7.8 against ozone 7.2, with the authority behind it. Problem wounds and delayed radiation injury are UHMS-accepted indications, with Cochrane support for late radiation injury. Yang 2024 found negative-pressure wound therapy plus HBOT healed better than the therapy alone across 15 studies. Ozone's ulcer signal is real, but Cochrane drew no firm conclusion from three small trials. |
| Dental Oral | Ozone Therapy | Ozone 6.5 against HBOT 5.8, and this is where ozone's evidence grew most recently. Liu 2025 pooled 13 RCTs finding small improvements in probing depth and gingival index as a periodontitis adjunct. Maglia 2024 found oral ulcers smaller and less painful than placebo across 12 studies. It is an add-on to mechanical dental care, never a replacement for it. |
| Anti Inflammatory | Ozone Therapy | Ozone 7.0 against HBOT 5.9. The mechanism is deliberate: a controlled oxidative hit that upregulates Nrf2 antioxidant enzymes and modulates NF-kB, described in Sagai and Bocci 2011. HBOT shifts cytokines too, but its inflammatory data is scattered across indications. This row rests on mechanism plus small trials, not an inflammation outcome trial. |
| Cognition Focus | Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy | HBOT 6.4 against ozone 4.5. Hadanny 2020 randomized healthy older adults to a hard-chamber 2.0 ATA, 60-session protocol and reported cognitive gains. Ozone has no equivalent cognitive trial in its citation set. Two caveats: the population was older adults with cognitive complaints, and soft 1.3 ATA chambers do not reproduce that pressure tier. |
| Neuroprotection | Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy | Ozone's subrating is higher, 5.8 against 5.3, and every neurological trial here belongs to HBOT. Efrati 2013 found late neuroplasticity in chronic post-stroke patients, and Shahid 2025 reported neurocognitive improvement after brain injury across 4 studies. Li 2024 found no support in acute ischemic stroke, so the win is chronic-phase only. |
| Injury Recovery | Tie | Both score exactly 6.5, and neither has an injury-recovery trial to break the tie. HBOT's case is angiogenesis and stem-cell mobilization from the hyperoxic-hypoxic swing. Ozone's case is prolozone for joints, where Lino 2024 reviewed 15 RCTs in 3,685 knee osteoarthritis patients and rated every included review critically low confidence. Cost decides this row, and ozone is cheaper. |
| Chronic Pain | Ozone Therapy | Ozone 6.0 against HBOT 5.7, carried almost entirely by the disc evidence in Chang 2024 rather than by chronic pain in general. HBOT's fibromyalgia data in Efrati 2015 is directionally favorable but small. Pick ozone here only when the pain has a specific structural target a specialist can inject. Diffuse chronic pain has no good answer on either side. |
| Healthspan | Tie | HBOT 5.2 against ozone 5.0, which is a tie in everything but decimals. HBOT's longevity story leans on Hachmo 2020, a telomere length and immunosenescence signal the source report itself treats as under-replicated and methodologically contested. Ozone has no longevity trial at all. Neither belongs in a healthspan budget ahead of sleep, training and cardiometabolic basics. |
Cost Comparison
| Intervention | Monthly Cost | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| HBOT | $3,000 to $6,000 | Extracted from the report, priced 2026-09-07, clinic session channel. Hard chamber sessions run $150 to $300 each. The cognitive aging protocol runs 5 sessions a week, about 20 a month, so $3,000 to $6,000 before diagnostics or travel.A full 60-session course lands around $9,000 to $18,000, and premium clinic packages can exceed $50,000. Soft home chambers cost $4,000 to $20,000 but run at 1.3 to 1.5 ATA, which is not the studied pressure. |
| Ozone therapy | $520 to $2,600 | Extracted from the report, priced 2026-09-07, clinic session channel. Major autohemotherapy runs $130 to $325 a session, and the conservative series is 1 to 2 sessions weekly, so 4 sessions at the low end to 8 at the high end.Routes price very differently. Ten-pass autohemotherapy runs $400 to $900, EBOO $400 to $1,200, intradiscal procedures $1,500 to $4,000 as a one-time cost, and a home rectal setup roughly $900 to $2,000 plus oxygen consumables. |
| The difference | HBOT costs roughly 2 to 6 times more per month | Per session the two are closer than the monthly figures suggest, $150 to $300 for HBOT against $130 to $325 for ozone. Session frequency is what separates them, because HBOT's evidence comes from 40 to 60 session courses at 5 a week.That makes the comparison lopsided in a specific way. Ozone's best use is often a single fluoroscopy-guided procedure. HBOT's best off-label use is a three-month, five-day-a-week commitment. Compare the course price, not the session price. |
When to Switch
These are booked courses rather than daily habits, so switching means ending one series and starting another instead of tapering. Both give a first noticeable change around week 4. Ozone's window closes sooner: full effect at 60 days with an 8-week assessment window, extracted from the report, against HBOT's 12-week window and 12-week full effect, which the report marks as an estimate. Judge ozone at 8 weeks and HBOT at 12, and understand that the HBOT number is a softer figure.
Move from HBOT to ozone when the target has narrowed to something local and structural: a herniated lumbar disc a specialist can inject under fluoroscopy, a periodontal or oral-ulcer problem your dentist can treat, or a wound where the antimicrobial contact matters more than tissue oxygen. Cost pushes the same direction, since an ozone course can be one procedure against sixty HBOT sessions. Move from ozone to HBOT when the target is a UHMS-accepted indication, chronic post-stroke or brain injury recovery, or cognitive complaints in an older adult, and only if you can commit to 2.0 ATA hard-chamber sessions five days a week for three months.
Do not run both at once: they are both redox interventions and no trial has tested the combination, so you would be stacking two oxidative stimuli with no dosing guidance.
Screening stops either one before cost does. HBOT is out with an untreated pneumothorax, COPD with bullae, or bleomycin, cisplatin or doxorubicin exposure. Ozone is out with G6PD deficiency, pregnancy, bleeding problems or therapeutic anticoagulation.
Who Should Pick What?
Herniated lumbar disc pain that has not responded to conservative care
Ozone Therapy
This is the single best evidence-to-claim fit in either report. Chang 2024 found intradiscal ozone beat steroid injection at 6 months and matched microdiscectomy at 18. It is one fluoroscopy-guided procedure at $1,500 to $4,000, done by a specialist. Acute-pain subrating 8.0 against 4.4.
Diabetic foot ulcer or delayed radiation injury under medical care
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
These are UHMS-accepted indications with Cochrane support for late radiation tissue injury, and Yang 2024 found HBOT added to negative pressure wound therapy healed hard-to-heal wounds better than the therapy alone. Insurance is more likely to engage here than anywhere else in this comparison.
Older adult with documented cognitive complaints and the budget for it
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
Cognition subrating 6.4 against 4.5, on Hadanny 2020's hard-chamber 2.0 ATA, 60-session protocol in older adults. Budget for it honestly: 60 sessions is $9,000 to $18,000 and 12 weeks of five-day-a-week clinic visits. A soft home chamber does not substitute.
Periodontitis or a stubborn oral ulcer your dentist is already treating
Ozone Therapy
Dental subrating 6.5 against 5.8 and the newest evidence in either report. Liu 2025 across 13 RCTs found small improvements in probing depth and gingival index as an adjunct to scaling and root planing. Maglia 2024 found ulcers smaller and less painful than placebo. Adjunct only.
Chronic post-stroke or traumatic brain injury recovery
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
Efrati 2013 found late neuroplasticity in chronic post-stroke patients and Shahid 2025 reported neurocognitive gains after brain injury. Read the limits before booking: Li 2024 found no benefit in acute ischemic stroke, so timing matters, and two large trials are still pending.
Long COVID or post-viral fatigue
Tie
Neither, on current evidence. Kjellberg 2025 randomized 80 patients and found 10 HBOT sessions no better than sham at 13 weeks, which contests the earlier positive cluster. Ozone's post-COVID data is a pilot trial in Yang 2024 and a small adjunct RCT in Shah 2020. Spending five figures here is buying a coin flip.
Drug-tested athlete looking for a recovery edge
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
WADA does not treat inhaled oxygen as prohibited blood manipulation, so HBOT is the safer side of that line. Ozone's blood routes are the problem: major autohemotherapy and EBOO can plausibly fall under the 2026 prohibited list's intravascular blood manipulation methods. Injury-recovery subratings are tied at 6.5, so there is no performance reason to take the risk.
Chronic Lyme, MCAS or a general detox program
Tie
Neither, and this is the row where marketing runs furthest ahead of data. The ozone report found no verified clinical trials for chronic Lyme or MCAS as primary indications and no RCT evidence for EBOO at all. HBOT's own report calls the anti-aging narrative ahead of authority support. Using either as a sole protocol here is a listed contraindication.
Research Highlights
-
Mechanism Difference
These two mechanisms are complementary, and they overlap more than the marketing suggests. HBOT's defining action is physical: pressurized 100% oxygen dissolves far more oxygen in plasma than hemoglobin can carry, and the repeated hyperoxia-then-normoxia swing triggers HIF-1a, VEGF-driven angiogenesis and CD34+ stem cell mobilization.Ozone's defining action is chemical: a controlled oxidative stimulus that upregulates Nrf2 antioxidant enzymes, shifts erythrocyte 2,3-DPG oxygen offloading, and modulates NF-kB. The overlap is real, since both work partly through reactive oxygen species and both touch NF-kB. The difference is that only HBOT raises dissolved plasma oxygen, and only ozone oxidizes microbes on direct contact.
-
Safety Comparison
Ozone carries the heavier safety load. Its downside safety score is 4.0 against HBOT's 3.6, and the worst-case events are documented rather than theoretical: Marchetti and La Monaca 2000 reported a death from gas embolism during oxygen-ozone autohemotransfusion, and Khosravi 2024 reported cerebral gas embolism with multifocal ischemic stroke.HBOT's serious risks are real but concentrated in accredited settings that screen for them: chamber fire, oxygen toxicity seizure, and untreated pneumothorax converting to a tension pneumothorax. Ear and sinus barotrauma is the common complaint. Ozone requires G6PD testing and PFO screening before any blood route.
-
Cost Comparison
Per session these are close: $150 to $300 for a hard-chamber HBOT session against $130 to $325 for ozone autohemotherapy, both extracted from the source reports on 2026-09-07 rather than estimated. Frequency separates them. HBOT's off-label protocols run five sessions a week, so $3,000 to $6,000 a month.Ozone's conservative series runs one to two sessions a week, so $520 to $2,600 a month, and its strongest use is often a single intradiscal procedure at $1,500 to $4,000. Compare full course prices: roughly $9,000 to $18,000 for 60 HBOT sessions against one ozone procedure.
-
Editorial Verdict
HBOT scores 6.2 and ozone 5.1, and the score gap understates how often ozone wins. Ozone takes acute pain 8.0 against 4.4, dental 6.5 against 5.8, inflammation 7.0 against 5.9 and chronic pain 6.0 against 5.7. HBOT takes wound healing, cognition and neurological recovery, and it takes them with better authority backing.Buy ozone for a specific local target a specialist can reach. Buy HBOT for an accepted medical indication or chronic neuro recovery, if you can afford 60 sessions. No trial has ever compared the two directly, so every row here infers from separate evidence.
-
Route Dependence
Ozone therapy is not one intervention, and treating it as one is the most common mistake buyers make. Intradiscal injection, dental gel, topical wound bagging, rectal insufflation, major autohemotherapy, EBOO and direct IV gas share an oxidant gas and share almost nothing else.Their evidence and their risk diverge completely. Intradiscal has a supportive meta-analysis in Chang 2024. EBOO has no RCT evidence in the audit set and drew a 2025 FDA warning letter. Direct IV gas is where embolism risk concentrates and the source report says to avoid it. Asking the price of ozone therapy is asking the wrong question.
-
Pressure Tier
Soft chambers and hard chambers are not the same purchase. The off-label HBOT evidence people cite for cognition, fibromyalgia and post-stroke recovery comes from hard chambers at 2.0 to 2.4 ATA: Hadanny 2020 used 2.0 ATA for 90 minutes, 60 times.Soft home chambers reach 1.3 to 1.5 ATA and are cleared for acute mountain sickness transport, not as a proven substitute for those protocols. The source report's own divergence warning says not to collapse the two tiers into one evidence bucket, because the pressure changes both what to expect and the side-effect profile.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Is HBOT or ozone therapy better?
- HBOT scores 6.2 and ozone 5.1, but the use case decides. Ozone wins acute pain 8.0 against 4.4, dental 6.5 against 5.8, inflammation 7.0 against 5.9 and chronic pain 6.0 against 5.7. HBOT wins wound healing, cognition and chronic neurological recovery, and has far stronger authority backing. No study has compared them directly.
- Why is HBOT so much more expensive?
- Session prices are similar, $150 to $300 for HBOT against $130 to $325 for ozone autohemotherapy. Frequency is the difference. HBOT's off-label evidence comes from 40 to 60 session courses at five a week, so a month runs $3,000 to $6,000 and a full course $9,000 to $18,000. Ozone's best use is often one procedure.
- Can I do HBOT at home with a soft chamber?
- You can buy one for $4,000 to $20,000, but it is a different intervention. Soft chambers reach 1.3 to 1.5 ATA and are cleared for acute mountain sickness transport.The cognition, fibromyalgia and post-stroke evidence comes from hard chambers at 2.0 to 2.4 ATA. Hadanny 2020 used 2.0 ATA for 90 minutes, 60 times. The source report warns explicitly against collapsing the two pressure tiers into one evidence bucket.
- Is ozone therapy safe?
- It depends entirely on the route, and the worst outcomes are documented. Marchetti and La Monaca 2000 reported a death from gas embolism during autohemotransfusion, and Khosravi 2024 reported a cerebral gas embolism stroke.Blood routes need G6PD testing and PFO bubble-echo screening first. Ozone is ruled out entirely in pregnancy, bleeding disorders, therapeutic anticoagulation, recent thrombocytopenia and uncontrolled hyperthyroidism. Direct IV gas is the route the source report says to avoid outright.
- Does either one help long COVID?
- The honest answer is that the HBOT evidence went the wrong way. Kjellberg 2025 randomized 80 patients and found 10 sessions no better than sham at 13 weeks. Hadanny 2024's longer-term follow-up of an earlier positive protocol still stands, so the field is contested. Ozone has a pilot trial in Yang 2024 and a small adjunct RCT in Shah 2020, which is not enough.
- How long before I know if either is working?
- Both give a first noticeable change around week 4. Ozone's assessment window is 8 weeks with full effect at 60 days, extracted from the report. HBOT's is a 12-week window with full effect at 12 weeks, and the report flags that figure as an estimate rather than an extracted number. Judge ozone at 8 weeks and HBOT at 12.
- Who should not do either one?
- HBOT is out with an untreated pneumothorax, COPD with bullae, an uncontrolled seizure disorder, an inability to equalize ears, recent ear or sinus surgery, uncontrolled fever, or concurrent bleomycin, cisplatin or doxorubicin chemotherapy.Ozone is out with G6PD deficiency, pregnancy, uncontrolled hyperthyroidism, bleeding diathesis, therapeutic anticoagulation, recent thrombocytopenia or an unscreened patent foramen ovale before any blood route. Pregnancy rules out both without specialist oversight.
- Will either one help me if I am basically healthy?
- Probably not enough to justify the money. The HBOT report says the anti-aging narrative is ahead of authority support and that FDA and UHMS status covers specified medical indications, not general cognition or wellness. The ozone report calls broad wellness claims marketing spillover from narrow evidence. Healthspan subratings are 5.2 and 5.0, which is a tie at mediocre.
- Are these a problem for drug-tested athletes?
- HBOT is the safer side. WADA does not treat inhaled oxygen like prohibited blood manipulation. Ozone's blood routes are the risk: the 2026 Prohibited List bans intravascular manipulation of blood components, and major autohemotherapy and EBOO can plausibly fall under it. Ozone itself is not a named substance, which is not the same as being cleared.
Evidence Sources
- Meta-analysis Effectiveness of intradiscal ozone injections for treating pain following herniated lumbar disc (2024) Higher treatment success than steroid injection at 6 months and outcomes similar to microdiscectomy at 18 months. The strongest evidence in either report.
- RCT Cognitive enhancement of healthy older adults using hyperbaric oxygen: a randomized controlled trial (2020) Older-adult cognitive gains using a hard-chamber 2.0 ATA, 60-session protocol. The source of the cognition subrating gap.
- RCT Ten sessions of hyperbaric oxygen versus sham treatment in patients with long covid (HOT-LoCO) (2025) 80 randomized: 10 sessions were not superior to sham at 13 weeks on RAND-36 physical functioning or role-physical. Harms broadly similar.
- RCT Hyperbaric Oxygen Induces Late Neuroplasticity in Post Stroke Patients (2013) Chronic post-stroke trial with favorable neurological function and quality-of-life direction after HBOT.
- Meta-analysis Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in acute ischaemic stroke (2024) 8 RCTs, 493 patients: did not support routine HBOT for acute ischemic stroke clinical outcomes. The chronic-phase win does not transfer.
- Meta-analysis Effects of ozone therapy as an adjuvant in the treatment of periodontitis (2025) 13 RCTs: small significant improvements in probing depth and gingival index, with no significant difference for bleeding on probing.
- Meta-analysis Efficacy of ozone therapy for oral mucosa wound healing (2024) 12 clinical studies: oral ulcer size and pain reduced versus placebo, with limited evidence quality.
- Meta-analysis Adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen therapy and negative pressure wound therapy for hard-to-heal wounds (2024) 15 studies: negative pressure wound therapy plus HBOT was associated with a better wound-healing rate than the therapy alone.
- Systematic review Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury, Cochrane review (2023) Indication-specific Cochrane support for late radiation tissue injury. Not a broad wellness endorsement.
- Meta-analysis Ozone therapy as a treatment for diabetic foot ulcers (2024) Six clinical trials with positive diabetic foot ulcer signals and considerable risk-of-bias caveats.
- Systematic review Ozone therapy for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes, Cochrane review (2015) Three small RCTs, 212 participants, low-quality evidence and no firm conclusions.
- Case report An Unexpected Death During Oxygen-Ozone Therapy (2000) Death from gas embolism during oxygen-ozone autohemotransfusion. The documented worst case for ozone blood routes.
- Case report Cerebral gas embolism and multifocal ischemic stroke during oxygen-ozone therapy (2024) Cerebral gas embolism and multifocal ischemic stroke during oxygen-ozone therapy. A recent, not historical, event.
- Systematic review Efficacy and safety of ozone therapy for knee osteoarthritis: umbrella review (2024) Eight systematic reviews, 15 RCTs, 3,685 patients: every included review rated critically low confidence by AMSTAR2.
- Meta-analysis Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for neurocognitive deficits following traumatic brain injury (2025) 4 studies, 250 patients: reported neurocognitive improvements, with larger standardized trials still needed.
- Observational Hyperbaric oxygen therapy increases telomere length and decreases immunosenescence in isolated blood cells (2020) Telomere and senescent-cell signal, treated by the source report as under-replicated and methodologically contested.
- Review Mechanisms of Action Involved in Ozone Therapy: Is healing induced via a mild oxidative stress? (2011) Mechanism review covering Nrf2 activation, NF-kB modulation, lipid oxidation products and the dose-toxicity tension.
- Regulation 21 CFR 801.415, maximum acceptable level of ozone (2026) States that ozone is a toxic gas with no known useful medical application in specific, adjunctive or preventive therapy.
- Guideline Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society indications and practice standards (2026) Authority source for accepted clinical HBOT indications and facility practice standards.
- Guideline WADA 2026 Prohibited List (2026) Prohibits intravascular manipulation of blood components, which is the anti-doping risk for ozone blood routes.
Glossary
Quick reference for the medical and technical terms used in this comparison.
- ATA Atmospheres Absolute
- The pressure unit for hyperbaric chambers. Hard-chamber clinical protocols run 2.0 to 2.4 ATA. Soft home chambers reach 1.3 to 1.5 ATA, which is a different evidence tier.
- HBOT Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
- Breathing 100% oxygen at raised pressure so far more oxygen dissolves in plasma than hemoglobin alone can carry.
- MAH Major Autohemotherapy
- Drawing 100 to 200 mL of blood, ozonating it outside the body, then reinfusing it. The systemic ozone route with the heaviest screening burden.
- EBOO Extracorporeal Blood Oxygenation and Ozonation
- A high-volume blood circuit with ozone and ultraviolet exposure. No RCT evidence in the source report's audit set, and the subject of a 2025 FDA warning letter.
- PFO Patent Foramen Ovale
- A hole between the heart's upper chambers that never closed. It lets gas bubbles cross to the arterial side, which is why bubble-echo screening comes before any ozone blood route.
- G6PD Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase
- An enzyme red blood cells need to handle oxidative stress. A deficiency is a hard contraindication for systemic ozone.
- Nrf2 Nuclear Factor Erythroid 2-Related Factor 2
- The switch that turns on the cell's own antioxidant enzymes. Ozone's systemic case rests on triggering it with a controlled oxidative hit.
- HIF-1a Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1-Alpha
- A signal that normally fires when oxygen is low. HBOT's repeated hyperoxia-then-normoxia swing triggers it anyway, which drives new blood vessel growth.
- UHMS Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society
- The body that defines which conditions HBOT is accepted for. If a use is not on its list, the evidence for it is off-label.
- 2,3-DPG 2,3-Diphosphoglycerate
- A molecule in red blood cells that loosens hemoglobin's grip on oxygen so more reaches tissue. Ozone shifting it is part of the systemic mechanism claim.
