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. 

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.

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.”

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”. 

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.