Those Red Light Tanning Beds? Yeah, They're A Scam
'They are much safer as the red light has the opposite effect of [UV], it protects your skin.'
I wince as I read this. I'm exchanging emails with 19-year-old Crisiant, who uses a red light tanning bed roughly every six weeks. Last year, she discovered that a tanning salon in her area had two of these beds, and she assumed they would be better for her skin.
These machines‚ also known as collagen-boosting tanning beds, combine ultraviolet (UV) light — which tans the skin — with tubes that emit red light. Even if you've never stepped inside one, you've probably seen red light before. From LED face masks to full-body treatments that immerse the skin in red light, these devices have become skincare staples, promising to boost collagen, reduce acne, and heal skin.
'
Collagen [tanning beds] make no logical sense at all. [Beds] that deliver UV radiation are harmful and cause skin cancers, full stop. Cloaking them as something good for your skin health is totally disingenuous.
Dr. Clare Kiely, consultant dermatologist
'
Later, on the phone, it sounds like Crisiant is well aware of the dangers of regular tanning beds. She first tried one aged 18, but learning more about the risks put her off: 'If you [use] one now and then, I didn't think it'd be too bad, but I didn't want to do it consistently because I knew how dangerous they were,' she tells me.
To Crisiant, red light tanning beds felt different — a little safer: 'It still gives you a tan while doing your skin good,' she says. 'I went on it once and noticed [a difference] within the same day. I had a really bad breakout on my face, and it sort of soothed and cleared my skin. It was really strange as [tanning beds] have never done that for me before.' It also made her feel more confident.
It's not hard to see why Crisiant thinks these machines are a safer, even beneficial alternative to regular tanning beds — and she's not the only one. But it highlights worrying misconceptions around red light tanning beds and their damage. Head to TikTok or Instagram, and you'll find countless videos posted by people who are convinced these beds can be used safely and that the risk of burning is lower.
But that's not true. Combining red light with UV in a tanning bed counteracts any of the potential benefits. Consultant dermatologist Dr. Clare Kiely, cofounder of The Skin Diary, puts it plainly: 'Collagen [tanning beds] make no logical sense at all.'
It is important to point out the differences between a red light-only bed and a tanning bed that emits both UV and red light. 'Red light therapy without UV is a very different proposition,' confirms consultant dermatologist Dr. Derrick Phillips. 'It is generally considered safe and may help with things like inflammation, wound healing and improving overall skin tone. However, the results do tend to be subtle, and I always remind patients that it's not a quick fix.' Dr. Beibei Du-Harpur, scientific engagement lead at The Skin Diary, agrees: 'More clinical evidence is needed to confirm the effectiveness [of red light] as a treatment for the skin, but there have been promising small studies from a skin aging perspective.'
The bottom line? On its own, red light is low-risk. But its popularity in skincare has made some see red light tanning beds as a good thing.
'
Not only does UV increase your risk of skin cancer, it breaks down collagen — the very thing red light is supposed to help boost — and speeds up the skin's aging process. In other words, any benefits of red light are immediately cancelled out by the UV.
'
Are red light tanning beds 'safer' to use than regular tanning beds?
The World Health Organisation has classed UV-emitting tanning devices as carcinogenic to humans since 2009. It doesn't matter if UV comes from a tanning bed that also emits red light; it still causes damage to our DNA. Not only does UV increase your risk of skin cancer, it breaks down collagen — the very thing red light is supposed to help boost — and speeds up the skin's aging process. In other words, any benefits of red light are immediately cancelled out by the UV.
Dr. Kiely says that those who market machines combining UV with collagen-boosting red lights can't have a good understanding of how light affects our skin. Why? It just doesn't make sense: '[Tanning beds] that deliver UV radiation are harmful and cause skin cancers, full stop,' she says. 'Cloaking them as something good for your skin health is totally disingenuous.'
Dr. Phillips agrees and sees no evidence that combining red light with UV neutralizes the harm. 'If anything, it gives a misleading impression of safety,' he says. 'These are still [tanning beds] emitting UV radiation, and they carry all the same risks as traditional tanning beds. From a dermatological perspective, they're just as concerning.'
Why do people still use tanning beds despite the dangers?
It's difficult to say how many of these red light and UV machines exist, but IBISWorld, a global industry research platform, reports that there were more than 28,000 tanning salons in the United States in 2024. A quick Google reveals that plenty offer combined UV-red light beds.
The reasons why people use beds like these are complex. Bronzed skin remains a beauty ideal, and among younger people, tanning beds are still seen as trendy. Crisiant hints that this is partly why she first tried one: 'You see all the girls getting these [tanning beds] and a nice tan from it,' she says. 'I feel like they are that phase that doesn't end for a lot of people.'
Some credit tanning beds for boosting their mood. Others believe they help them get enough vitamin D — a proven myth. Another misconception is that they can help improve skin conditions like acne or eczema, but prolonged use of tanning beds can actually worsen these conditions and weaken the skin over time, making it more susceptible to infection.
Then there's the theory that using tanning beds occasionally or for short bursts makes it 'safer' — something I thought was true as a teenager. Because sun damage isn't always visible right away, it's easy to underestimate the harm. Even those who understand their risks struggle to stop using them, with some describing themselves as feeling 'addicted'.
If tanning beds are so dangerous, why aren't they banned?
While tanning beds remain so widely available, often without clearly displayed warnings, there is always a risk that people may assume that they are somewhat safe, otherwise they'd be banned. Refinery29's stance is clear: tanning beds should be banned, as they are in Iran, Brazil, and Australia. Just one session before age 35 more than doubles your lifetime risk of melanoma, a skin cancer that can spread to other parts of the body. Red light doesn't change that.
That's why many experts support a tanning bed ban and agree that the growing trend for red light beds is another reason it's needed: 'The messaging of these collagen-boosting [tanning beds] confuses those who may not understand the detrimental effects that [tanning beds] have on our skin,' says Dr. Du-Harpur. She adds this is particularly dangerous given beauty standards around having a 'healthy' tan — a phrase that doesn't make any sense when a tan is our skin's damage response to UV. Marketing red light tanning beds as collagen-boosting, she adds, 'will encourage people to risk their health in the name of beauty and present an illusion that it may be safer or different to a conventional UV-focused [tanning bed].' She stresses, 'They aren't safe — with or without red light therapy.'
When I ask Crisiant if anything might put her off using a red light tanning bed, she says it's like she has 'a devil and an angel on each shoulder.' She might change her mind one day, but she can't say she'll stop for now. Crisiant isn't against a tanning bed ban, though: 'Even though I use them, if they were [banned] I don't think I'd be massively annoyed because I know that the government would be doing it for our benefit,' she says.
Little has changed since Refinery29 reported on what it would take for tanning beds to be banned entirely last May. Sadly, only a handful of US states have a blanket ban. But if we're serious about tackling rising skin cancer rates, intervention is needed. At the very least, more regulation around any kind of tanning bed use, or better yet, a total ban.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Dad issues warning about safety threat lurking beneath children's playgrounds: 'More dangerous than meets the eye'
Dad issues warning about safety threat lurking beneath children's playgrounds: 'More dangerous than meets the eye' A popular social media influencer is warning his followers about the dangers of crumb rubber. NonToxicDad (@nontoxicdad) went on TikTok to discuss crumb rubber, which is often used on artificial turf fields to help protect athletes from getting hurt when running and jumping. "Crumb rubber — made by grinding up used tires — sits beneath the turf to cushion impacts, but is more dangerous than meets the eye," the video's caption states. The material, made from shredded, recycled tires, is commonly used as a base at playgrounds and as garden mulch. It has become popular for its low cost and little need for maintenance, and it is promoted as an effective use of recycling. Its most popular use, however, may be as infill for artificial turf, particularly on athletic fields. In fact, when a football player gets tackled, or a soccer player slides on turf, it's not unusual to see flecks of rubber fly into the air. But each of those plays can come with consequences, NonToxicDad warns. "Not only is this grass made with toxic forever chemicals," he says, "underneath this fake grass is a toxic layer of crumb rubber that may cause cancer in athletes playing on these fields." He cites a Yale University study that covers some of the hazardous substances that crumb rubber contains or emits, mentioning "carcinogens like lead, mercury, benzene … and more." The study notes those concerns as well as microplastics. It and other research calls for more analysis to determine the long-term health impacts of exposure. Preaching caution when it comes to chemical exposure is usually a sound practice, and one that some governments are acting upon. Do you think the government should ban gas-powered lawn tools? No way Definitely Only certain tools I don't know Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Earlier this year, for example, California's Santa Clara County considered a ban on using artificial turf on county-owned land, citing health concerns. Commenters supported NonToxicDad's assertion that artificial turf should be "canceled," saying that they can't believe what is used to create turf fields. "And yet they are all over," one user wrote. Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
His state banned phones in class. This Alabama teacher saw an instant change. 'It's magic.'
When Alabama enacted a new law keeping phones out of classrooms for the 2025-2026 school year, one teacher saw an instant change. 'Today, all of my students, 100% of them, took notes in my class, did their assignment, asked for help when they got stuck and turned it in, and then when they were done, they talked to each other,' Jonathan Buchwalter, a Tuscaloosa County High School 11th grade history teacher, said in an Aug. 8 TikTok that reached nearly 2 million views. 'I have been pulling my hair out for like, eight years. Has it been this easy of a solution the whole time?' Buchwalter asks in the video. Thirty-three states have enacted legislation regarding school cellphone usage amid a growing push to restrict students' smartphone access in schools, primarily due to mental health and concerns about academic attentiveness. As the policies begin to roll out for the 2025–2026 school year, educators and parents alike are closely watching the on students and their mental health. These kids are swearing off smartphones: It's sparking a movement How smartphones impact the young brain Nearly half of teens say they're online constantly, according to 2024 data from the Pew Research Center, and 72% of teens say they sometimes or frequently check their notifications as soon as they wake up. 'They're chemically addicted to their phones,' Buchwalter says. 'They cannot experience anything that isn't constant stimulation.' Child psychiatrist and Yale School of Medicine professor Yann Poncin says smartphones affect the brain in three key ways: impacting productivity and prioritization, depleting the brain's cognitive patience and threshold for tolerating frustration, and rewiring the brain's pleasure pathways and dopamine release. 'Your dopamine system, over time, over multiple events, is getting set in a way that to trigger a dopamine release and a feel good release, you actually now need this phone, because nothing else in life is regularly going to give you that level of satisfaction,' Poncin says. Smartphone addiction is heavily tied to social media algorithms that feed curated content to users, but can also be impacted by color saturation, notifications and refresh screens. Over time, technology addiction rewires the brain to expect instant gratification, depleting the brain's cognitive patience and threshold for tolerating frustration in the process. 'If we over expose ourselves to these sort of easy dopamine hits, cheap dopamine hits when we're younger, then we're resetting our homeostasis where we can only feel good by having access to these items,' Poncin says. The result is that teaching today requires more 'gamification' in the form of Kahoots, Quizlet or Jeopardy-style games to learn subject content. Buchwalter says he feels more pressure now than when he started teaching to be a 'stand up comedian' and 'game show host' in order to keep students engaged. 'We don't prepare our kids well for the adult world when we say, 'everything has to be fun,'' Buchwalter says. 'The kids need to take education seriously, even if it's boring." Efforts to ban phones in schools gains traction When Buchwalter started teaching in 2017, he said phones were still an issue, but it didn't feel like a fight the way it does following the COVID-19 pandemic. Even in Buchwalter's best-behaved classes, phones became a near-daily problem. More and more, he found himself interrupting lessons to police phone usage. He felt 'completely helpless.' Should cellphones be banned from school? What students, teachers say 'By that time, because the kids had been so wired for so long, had been so tuned into the internet for so long, during COVID and quarantine, they had lost a lot of their ability to self-regulate,' Buchwalter says. For many students, this year is the first time they've navigated a school setting without constant access to devices. 'She had to actually socialize ALL DAY,' one Alabama mom captioned a TikTok of her teenage daughter reuniting with her phone after going without it all day. The post racked up 1.9M views. Buchwalter says that up until this year, cell phone policies were largely decided on a class-by-class basis, making it a challenge for teachers to enforce policies that weren't standardized. Last year, he and other teachers experienced situations where students swore and acted out if asked to put their phones away in class. 'It was absolutely exhausting," he added. In Alabama, students are required to leave any wireless communication devices, including tablets, pagers, personal computers and gamers, in lockers or personal vehicles during school hours. Opponents of the policy argue bans make it harder for parents to get in touch with their kids during emergency situations. Buchwalter, however, says his classroom saw an immediate change. 'It's magic,' Buchwalter says, adding that he won't be able to make a final evaluation of the legislation's impact until the end of the school year. 'I expected there to be a lot more friction.' It's a campaign experts like 'The Anxious Generation' author Jonathan Haidt have pushed for on the basis that phone-free academic settings provide kids with better opportunities for academic growth and socialization. Groups like Wait Until 8th and Smartphone Free Childhood encourage parents to sign pacts promising to delay giving kids devices until the end of the 8th grade, or even 16 years old. Last year, if Buchwalter's classes finished a few minutes early, the room would go dead silent as kids reached for their phones. Now, the conversations happening in class are so vibrant that he has to ask students to quiet down. 'One of my favorite parts is when they're finished with their classwork, or they're in the lunchroom, they talk to each other,' Buchwalter says. 'It was like, 'oh my God, this is how it's supposed to be.'' Rachel Hale's role covering Youth Mental Health at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Pivotal and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input. Reach her at rhale@ and @rachelleighhale on X.
Refinery29
2 hours ago
- Refinery29
Those Red Light Tanning Beds? Yeah, They're A Scam
Welcome to Sun Blocked, Refinery29's global call to action to wake up to the serious dangers of tanning. No lectures or shaming, we promise. Instead, our goal is to arm you with the facts you need to protect your skin to the best of your ability, because there's no such thing as safe sun. 'They are much safer as the red light has the opposite effect of [UV], it protects your skin.' I wince as I read this. I'm exchanging emails with 19-year-old Crisiant, who uses a red light tanning bed roughly every six weeks. Last year, she discovered that a tanning salon in her area had two of these beds, and she assumed they would be better for her skin. These machines‚ also known as collagen-boosting tanning beds, combine ultraviolet (UV) light — which tans the skin — with tubes that emit red light. Even if you've never stepped inside one, you've probably seen red light before. From LED face masks to full-body treatments that immerse the skin in red light, these devices have become skincare staples, promising to boost collagen, reduce acne, and heal skin. ' Collagen [tanning beds] make no logical sense at all. [Beds] that deliver UV radiation are harmful and cause skin cancers, full stop. Cloaking them as something good for your skin health is totally disingenuous. Dr. Clare Kiely, consultant dermatologist ' Later, on the phone, it sounds like Crisiant is well aware of the dangers of regular tanning beds. She first tried one aged 18, but learning more about the risks put her off: 'If you [use] one now and then, I didn't think it'd be too bad, but I didn't want to do it consistently because I knew how dangerous they were,' she tells me. To Crisiant, red light tanning beds felt different — a little safer: 'It still gives you a tan while doing your skin good,' she says. 'I went on it once and noticed [a difference] within the same day. I had a really bad breakout on my face, and it sort of soothed and cleared my skin. It was really strange as [tanning beds] have never done that for me before.' It also made her feel more confident. It's not hard to see why Crisiant thinks these machines are a safer, even beneficial alternative to regular tanning beds — and she's not the only one. But it highlights worrying misconceptions around red light tanning beds and their damage. Head to TikTok or Instagram, and you'll find countless videos posted by people who are convinced these beds can be used safely and that the risk of burning is lower. But that's not true. Combining red light with UV in a tanning bed counteracts any of the potential benefits. Consultant dermatologist Dr. Clare Kiely, cofounder of The Skin Diary, puts it plainly: 'Collagen [tanning beds] make no logical sense at all.' It is important to point out the differences between a red light-only bed and a tanning bed that emits both UV and red light. 'Red light therapy without UV is a very different proposition,' confirms consultant dermatologist Dr. Derrick Phillips. 'It is generally considered safe and may help with things like inflammation, wound healing and improving overall skin tone. However, the results do tend to be subtle, and I always remind patients that it's not a quick fix.' Dr. Beibei Du-Harpur, scientific engagement lead at The Skin Diary, agrees: 'More clinical evidence is needed to confirm the effectiveness [of red light] as a treatment for the skin, but there have been promising small studies from a skin aging perspective.' The bottom line? On its own, red light is low-risk. But its popularity in skincare has made some see red light tanning beds as a good thing. ' Not only does UV increase your risk of skin cancer, it breaks down collagen — the very thing red light is supposed to help boost — and speeds up the skin's aging process. In other words, any benefits of red light are immediately cancelled out by the UV. ' Are red light tanning beds 'safer' to use than regular tanning beds? The World Health Organisation has classed UV-emitting tanning devices as carcinogenic to humans since 2009. It doesn't matter if UV comes from a tanning bed that also emits red light; it still causes damage to our DNA. Not only does UV increase your risk of skin cancer, it breaks down collagen — the very thing red light is supposed to help boost — and speeds up the skin's aging process. In other words, any benefits of red light are immediately cancelled out by the UV. Dr. Kiely says that those who market machines combining UV with collagen-boosting red lights can't have a good understanding of how light affects our skin. Why? It just doesn't make sense: '[Tanning beds] that deliver UV radiation are harmful and cause skin cancers, full stop,' she says. 'Cloaking them as something good for your skin health is totally disingenuous.' Dr. Phillips agrees and sees no evidence that combining red light with UV neutralizes the harm. 'If anything, it gives a misleading impression of safety,' he says. 'These are still [tanning beds] emitting UV radiation, and they carry all the same risks as traditional tanning beds. From a dermatological perspective, they're just as concerning.' Why do people still use tanning beds despite the dangers? It's difficult to say how many of these red light and UV machines exist, but IBISWorld, a global industry research platform, reports that there were more than 28,000 tanning salons in the United States in 2024. A quick Google reveals that plenty offer combined UV-red light beds. The reasons why people use beds like these are complex. Bronzed skin remains a beauty ideal, and among younger people, tanning beds are still seen as trendy. Crisiant hints that this is partly why she first tried one: 'You see all the girls getting these [tanning beds] and a nice tan from it,' she says. 'I feel like they are that phase that doesn't end for a lot of people.' Some credit tanning beds for boosting their mood. Others believe they help them get enough vitamin D — a proven myth. Another misconception is that they can help improve skin conditions like acne or eczema, but prolonged use of tanning beds can actually worsen these conditions and weaken the skin over time, making it more susceptible to infection. Then there's the theory that using tanning beds occasionally or for short bursts makes it 'safer' — something I thought was true as a teenager. Because sun damage isn't always visible right away, it's easy to underestimate the harm. Even those who understand their risks struggle to stop using them, with some describing themselves as feeling 'addicted'. If tanning beds are so dangerous, why aren't they banned? While tanning beds remain so widely available, often without clearly displayed warnings, there is always a risk that people may assume that they are somewhat safe, otherwise they'd be banned. Refinery29's stance is clear: tanning beds should be banned, as they are in Iran, Brazil, and Australia. Just one session before age 35 more than doubles your lifetime risk of melanoma, a skin cancer that can spread to other parts of the body. Red light doesn't change that. That's why many experts support a tanning bed ban and agree that the growing trend for red light beds is another reason it's needed: 'The messaging of these collagen-boosting [tanning beds] confuses those who may not understand the detrimental effects that [tanning beds] have on our skin,' says Dr. Du-Harpur. She adds this is particularly dangerous given beauty standards around having a 'healthy' tan — a phrase that doesn't make any sense when a tan is our skin's damage response to UV. Marketing red light tanning beds as collagen-boosting, she adds, 'will encourage people to risk their health in the name of beauty and present an illusion that it may be safer or different to a conventional UV-focused [tanning bed].' She stresses, 'They aren't safe — with or without red light therapy.' When I ask Crisiant if anything might put her off using a red light tanning bed, she says it's like she has 'a devil and an angel on each shoulder.' She might change her mind one day, but she can't say she'll stop for now. Crisiant isn't against a tanning bed ban, though: 'Even though I use them, if they were [banned] I don't think I'd be massively annoyed because I know that the government would be doing it for our benefit,' she says. Little has changed since Refinery29 reported on what it would take for tanning beds to be banned entirely last May. Sadly, only a handful of US states have a blanket ban. But if we're serious about tackling rising skin cancer rates, intervention is needed. At the very least, more regulation around any kind of tanning bed use, or better yet, a total ban.
