NuFace is a skincare brand owned by a company called Carol Cole Company Inc., that sells microcurrent devices that stimulate muscles beneath the skin. The brand claims their devices can "reduce fine lines and wrinkles," "firm and tighten skin" and more.
But is microcurrent technology actually proven to reduce wrinkles? Why does the brand's website have a cancer warning? Why was the brand sued in 2024? And is NuFace better or worse than other popular anti-aging devices like Dermawand?
In this article we'll answer all of these questions and more, as we analyze clinical research on microcurrent technology to give our take on whether or not NuFace devices are likely to be effective for anti-aging.
We'll also document a class action lawsuit filed against the brand, analyze the ingredients in NuFace's gel primer, and compare NuFace to other popular anti-aging devices to pick our winners (and losers).
Key takeaways:
- Microcurrent technology has emerging anti-aging clinical research
- Active class action lawsuit alleges NuFace devices can't deliver advertised benefits
- We do not currently recommend NuFace
Do Microcurrents Reduce Wrinkles?
Microcurrent devices like NuFace are applied to the face and deliver electrical currents to the facial skin and muscles beneath:
image source: https://www.mynuface.com/
This type of device has been studied in clinical research and is considered generally safe, as microcurrent devices are cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which indicates a lack of significant health risks associated with their use.
Microcurrent devices have been clinically shown to accelerate wound healing, and the broader category has emerging evidence for anti-aging benefits.
A 2025 clinical trial published in the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology reported that home microcurrent beauty devices produced measurable improvements in skin wrinkles, texture, radiance, and laxity over four weeks compared to a control group.
An earlier 2021 medical review published on the effects of electrical stimulation on the skin surface noted potential benefits for suppressing pain and promoting blood circulation.
While microcurrent technology as a category has accumulating evidence, we can't find any clinical studies on NuFace devices.
NuFace's resource page on microcurrents cites a single 1982 study on ATP generation, and we cannot identify any peer-reviewed clinical trial validating the brand's specific products for wrinkle reduction.
NuFace Gel Primer Analysis
The ingredients in NuFace Aqua Gel Activator, which is used as a skin primer before use of a NuFace device, are shown below:
image source: https://www.mynuface.com/
The brand claims that this product is "FDA-approved" but later claims it's "FDA-cleared" on the product page, which are two entirely different things.
This formulation contains some research-backed active ingredients for skin health.
Sea silt extract was shown to have anti-inflammatory effects on skin in a 2011 clinical trial.
Hyaluronic acid is an effective anti-aging skincare ingredient. As we referenced in our review of cosmetics brand Meaningful Beauty, hyaluronic acid has has been proven in multiple clinical trials to reduce the appearance of wrinkles.
Tremella fuciformis sporocarp extract was analyzed in a 2023 medical review that concluded the following:
"Studies have demonstrated the role this extract may play in skin antiaging, photoprotection, wound healing, and barrier protection."
NuFace Aqua Gel Activator also contains an active ingredient we’ve never seen before in a skincare formulation and find highly questionable: olivine extract.
Olivine is a magnesium iron silicate, meaning it’s a crystal. Below is an image of olivine from Wikipedia:
image source: https://wikipedia.org/
We have no clue what NuFace is referring to when they state “olivine extract,” because the process of extraction for a cosmetic product typically refers to concentrating the active ingredients from a plant (like turmeric) through the use of solvents (like alcohol).
Earth minerals are not “extracted” to make skincare ingredients, and our search for “olivine extract” returned zero results in PubMed, one of the largest medical databases in the US.
We urge NuFace to clarify what ingredient they're referring to, because this is the strangest ingredient listing in any cosmetic product we've reviewed to date on Illuminate Health.
While this gel contains some research-backed ingredients, it also contains two inactive ingredients we recommend avoiding when used in combination.
Phenoxyethanol is a synthetic preservative shown to be toxic to human cells in a clinical trial published in the Experimental Eye Research journal.
Ethylhexylglycerin is a synthetic preservative shown to potentiate the toxic effects of phenoxyethanol in a 2016 medical review.
Overall, we consider NuFace Aqua Gel Activator somewhat likely to have anti-aging effects given its active ingredients.
We don't currently recommend this product due to the two synthetic preservatives discussed above, and the inclusion of olivine extract.
NuFace vs. Popular Anti-Aging Devices
Here's how NuFace compares to other popular anti-aging device brands in terms of potential efficacy and safety, in our opinion:
Dermawand
Dermawand is a consumer device that uses radiofrequency waves applied near the skin, with the brand claiming this can reduce wrinkles.
We cannot identify any peer-reviewed clinical evidence supporting the use of this type of device.
Dermawand's only published clinical trial was sponsored by the manufacturer, while NuFace's underlying microcurrent technology category has more recent independent research support.
NuFace is the winner from a potential efficacy perspective.
Winner: NuFace
My Derma Dream
My Derma Dream sells anti-aging hardware devices, including microcurrent and red-light therapy products.
As we documented in our My Derma Dream reviews article, neither brand's specific microcurrent device appears to have been validated in peer-reviewed clinical trials.
However, My Derma Dream's product line also includes red-light therapy devices using effective wavelengths, exposing consumers to a technology category with stronger independent clinical evidence.
My Derma Dream is the winner from a potential efficacy perspective.
Winner: My Derma Dream
Solawave
Solawave is a handheld wand that combines red-light therapy, facial massage, microcurrent, and therapeutic warmth.
Solawave's red-light component uses a wavelength within the clinically validated range for skin rejuvenation, and the wand pairs that technology with microcurrent in a single device. NuFace's microcurrent-only design lacks an equivalent broader technology mix.
Solawave is the winner from a potential efficacy perspective.
Winner: Solawave
Why Was NuFace Sued?
In October 2024, a proposed class action lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of California against Carol Cole Company, Inc. (the parent company of NuFace).
The case is captioned Chambers v. Carol Cole Company, Inc.
The class action complaint alleges that the NuFace Trinity+ and Trinity Classic devices, along with the brand's red-light therapy attachments, cannot deliver the microcurrent and red-light benefits advertised by the brand.
According to a summary of the case, NuFace markets these devices as capable of reducing wrinkles in "just 3 minutes" and being "lab-tested and FDA-Cleared" to boost collagen production, fix discoloration, and reduce inflammation.
The plaintiffs allege these claims are false because the devices "cannot possibly deliver the advertised microcurrent benefits," and because the red-light attachments do not produce sufficient radiant exposure to provide the advertised collagen, wrinkle, and inflammation effects.
We cannot independently verify the technical claims in the complaint, but the lawsuit is consistent with our broader concern that NuFace markets specific clinical benefits without published peer-reviewed evidence on its own devices.
The case is in active litigation as of the time of updating this article, and we'll update this section if a settlement or judgment is reached.
NuFace Cancer Warning
At the time of initially publishing this article, NuFace had a strange warning in the FAQ section of their site.
As shown below, the brand stated that their devices should not be used in consumers with “active cancer.” They did not differentiate between skin cancer and other types:
image source: https://www.mynuface.com/
While we would understand a recommendation to avoid use for patients with skin cancer, due to the potential to aggravate the cancerous lesions, we don't understand why the brand claimed the use of their products to be contraindicated against cancer generally.
Ironically, there is actually medical research suggesting that microcurrent therapy can improve physical rehabilitation outcomes in patients with cancer who have undergone chemotherapy.
At the time of updating this article, NuFace appears to have removed this cancer warning, but we cannot identify what changed in regard to the potential cancer-aggravating effect(s) of the device(s).
Our Clean Skincare Pick
MindBodyGreen Best Skin+ is our top anti-aging skin supplement.
It contains orange extract which is clinically shown to increase skin moisturization, skin elasticity and skin radiance.
This supplement also contains astaxanthin which is clinically shown to cause "wrinkle formation reduction."
This supplement is free of ingredients that we consider to be unhealthy.
NuFace Pros and Cons
Pros:
- FDA-cleared for safety
- Microcurrent category has emerging anti-aging research
- Gel primer contains some research-backed active ingredients
- Non-invasive
- Unlikely to cause side effects
Cons:
- Active class action lawsuit alleges devices can't deliver advertised benefits
- We can't find peer-reviewed evidence validating NuFace's specific devices
- Gel primer contains phenoxyethanol and ethylhexylglycerin we recommend avoiding
- Brand makes clinical claims without linking to peer-reviewed studies
- Confusing cancer warning on brand's website
- Brand uses an unidentifiable "olivine extract" in the gel primer
- Worse option than some competitors
