One more day, Marcos Llorente wants to convince you not to use sunscreen. One more day, we know it’s a bad idea

In 2026, we are not going to discover Marcos Llorente. Not just because it is an old acquaintance of the Spanish public conversation: midfielder for Atlético de Madrid, Instagrammer with more than two million followers and owner of an enormous amount of pseudoscientific (and, above all, very dangerous) ideas on health issues. But because the large media groups are already in charge of ensuring that it does not go unnoticed. Last night, in the Hormiguero, he repeated again verbatim his usual speech against sunscreen. It is true that Pablo Motos confronted him with data from the Spanish Academy of Dermatologybut Llorente got away without a problem, questioning the studies and maintaining that “many dermatologists and health professionals defend this lifestyle. It is simply having a coherent relationship with the sun.” This, of course, it’s a lie. But we are talking about a serious topic and, for that reason, it is worth returning to it. A “coherent” relationship with the sun? On the one hand, The Skin Cancer Foundation estimates that 86% of melanomas and 90% of other skin cancers are associated with UV radiation. On the other hand, the AEDV maintains that “a significant portion of sun damage accumulates before the age of 20.” In this sense, having TikTok star footballers defending that chemical protection is useless is extremely dangerous. Above all, because it is not (far from it) the first time he has defended it. And we must not forget that, every year, more than a thousand people die from cutaneous melanoma. A misconception, but a very widespread one. Because we must not forget that, as José María Ricart explained to usdermatologist and medical director of the Ricart Medical Institute (IMR), “many people still believe in the idea of ​​a ‘healthy tan’, when in reality it is a sign of skin damage.” Sometimes we have the feeling that sunbathing without protection is little more than simple carelessness; but no: it is a practice that accelerates skin aging and increases the risk of skin cancer. We focus on the most well-known rays, but not the most insidious ones. As Ricart explainedit is important to know well the two types of ultraviolet radiation that can affect us. On the one hand, UVB rays, more powerful in summer, are those that cause sunburn and damage cellular DNA. On the other hand, UVA rays, present all year round, even on cloudy days, penetrate more deeply and are responsible for premature aging. It’s time to stop seeing melanin as a “biological protection” and tanning as something positive. They are not. Tan “is nothing more than a defensive response of the body. It is its way of saying: ‘I am damaging myself’. If anyone still doubts this, compare the skin of the face with that of the buttock, an area never exposed to the sun: without spots, without wrinkles, without photoaging,” explained the dermatologist. What is happening? let there be people deciding not to apply sunscreen going tan is problematic (and bad news for your dermatological health); But the fact that large media groups have no problems with bringing these types of ideas to ‘prime time’ is absurd. Because it is worth remembering that, despite the fact that he presented it as a debate, what was done yesterday in Hormiguero is advertise personal opinion of a footballer against the consensus of the AEDV, the WHO, the SEOM and the Ministry of Health. The mere idea of ​​calling it ‘debate’ is a mistake. Image | The Anthill Xataka | That the AEMPS withdraws six sunscreens is good news. That the OCU had to ask for it is worrying

Marcos Llorente has an eccentric and disturbing relationship with light. And science has things to say about it.

Marcos Llorente is news. Again. And not because of football or anything remotely related to sports. It is because a video of almost four minutes recorded (and published) by the RFEF during the Red concentration in which the man from Madrid reveals some of his “healthy” habits, practices that include the use of red lights inside the house or glasses with yellow lenses to filter blue light. Opinions that highlight its eccentric appearance and raise the eyebrows of the experts. What has happened? That Marcos Llorente has become news beyond the sports pages. And he has done it on account of a video published by the RFEF in which he does not talk about techniques, his play on the field or how he sees the National Team facing the next World Cup. No. What he’s talking about is his personal health routines. More specifically those related to light and sight. What exactly did he say? First of all, at home you only use certain lights. “During the day I don’t turn on the light because either I’m always in the garden or, if I go into the kitchen or living room for anything, light comes in through the windows,” explains in the video under intense reddish lighting. “When the sun goes down, this is the light I have throughout the house. What this lamp does is bring that red and infrared into the room and makes it more similar to the light outside.” Click on the image to go to the tweet. Is there more? Yes. The man from Madrid elaborates on an accessory that has been seen on him on other occasions and it has also caused people to talk: the yellow lens glasses. “They are for when you are, during the day, indoors. Outside you should never wear glasses of any kind. They should always give you the sun’s rays in your eyes and skin, without anything interfering. And red glasses, with the red lens, what they do is filter all that blue light that lamps and televisions or telephones have.” And why all that? For health. Or at least that is what the footballer maintains, who defends that what he does transcends his role as a footballer. “I feel very good. All these things I do are for health, not for football. What happens is that in the end one thing is linked to the other. I think that when I leave football I will continue with this and surely I can do it more perfect,” concludes the man from Madridwho during the video shares other of his habits, such as going outside before dawn or starting the day with coffee and “two or three tablespoons” of butter. What do the experts say? Whatever Marcos Llorente says, the effectiveness of the filters is debatable to say the least. In an article Published a few years ago, the Spanish Society of Ophthalmology already insisted that “blue light from screens does not affect the eyes or cause blindness.” The report was actually launched after a study “of dubious scientific origin” created alarm with “unfounded conclusions” about the supposed impact that this light can have on eyesight. “Although blue light is often associated with computers and phones, the largest source of blue light is sunlight. Exposure to blue light from screens is much less than the amount of blue light we are exposed to from the sun. Additionally, it is no more harmful than sunlight,” comment Dr. Rahul Kurana, spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Do the lenses work? Ophthalmologist Sara E. Hernández is blunt in statements collected by The Vanguard: “There is little or no effect of lenses or glasses with a yellow filter on visual performance, measured in terms of best corrected visual acuity, compared to lenses without a blue light filter.” There are studies, such as It is published in 2013 in Journal of Human Kineticswho after carrying out tests with colored lenses found that there are no “significant differences” in issues such as visual acuity or depth perception. Where does this come from? Concerns about blue light and the benefits of filters are not new, as remember the Spanish Society of Ophthalmology itself, and have been expanding as the use of screens and LED lights spread. They have spoken on the subject users, academics and collegiateincluding the American Academy of Ophthalmology, which in 2017 published an article written by Celia Vilmont and reviewed by Dr. Khurana that begins with a blunt statement: “There is no scientific evidence that blue light from digital devices can cause damage to the eyes.” Now Marcos Llorente becomes the new greatest exponent of these theories, despite the paucity of evidence scientific. Is it something new? More or less. The RFEF video is new, but it is not the first time that Llorente has made headlines for his opinions on topics that have nothing to do with football. In his day it was for the use of glasses and now it is also for his statements about the chemtrails. His words achieve notoriety for several reasons. The first, his status as a footballer. The second, the speaker that you have beyond your personal networks, such as the official account of the National Team or media in which share his extra-sports comments. Images | RFEF In Xataka | Some Nordic cities are putting red lights on their streetlights. It looks like a horror movie, but it makes sense

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.