Kevin Halsey's core claim here is deceptively simple: infrared saunas aren't a different kind of sauna experience, they're a more efficient heat delivery system. And when you understand the physics, that argument holds up. Traditional saunas heat the air, which heats you. Infrared saunas heat you directly, skipping the air entirely. Far infrared radiation at the right wavelength is absorbed by water — and your skin is about 80% water. The physics lines up.
What I find compelling about this framing is that it reframes the whole debate. People often ask whether infrared "counts" as real sauna — whether you're getting the same benefits as the Finnish research suggests. And the honest answer is: we don't know yet. The landmark cardiovascular studies, the ones showing 50% reductions in cardiovascular mortality with four to seven sessions per week, were conducted on traditional Finnish saunas at 170 to 200 degrees Fahrenheit. Infrared saunas typically run 120 to 150 degrees Fahrenheit. The air temperature is lower. The core temperature elevation may be different.
This is where the nuance lives. The mechanisms Rhonda Patrick describes — heat shock proteins clearing misfolded cellular debris, growth hormone spikes, cardiovascular adaptations from elevated heart rate — these all depend on how much you raise your core body temperature, and for how long. Infrared proponents argue that deeper tissue penetration at lower air temperatures produces equivalent or superior core temp elevation. That's plausible. But the direct research on infrared-specific outcomes is thinner than the Finnish sauna literature.
What infrared does have going for it, unambiguously, is accessibility. Lower air temperatures mean longer tolerable sessions. More consistent use. And consistency, in every thermal therapy protocol I've read, matters more than intensity. A 20-minute infrared session four times per week almost certainly outperforms a brutal 30-minute Finnish session once a month.
Halsey's point about the 38-inch depth being intentional — not a compromise, but a feature — is worth sitting with. Infrared radiation disperses with distance. Move further from the heater panels, and you lose dose rapidly. The counterintuitive takeaway: a smaller, well-designed infrared sauna may deliver more therapeutic heat than a large, premium-feeling unit with beautiful cedar walls but heaters six feet away.
If you're using an infrared sauna, treat the temperature difference seriously. You may need longer sessions — 30 to 45 minutes rather than 15 to 20 — to achieve meaningful core temperature elevation. End with a cold plunge or cold shower to amplify the contrast response and accelerate recovery. And use it consistently. Three to four times per week is where the research starts showing real adaptation.
Here's what most infrared sauna marketing doesn't mention: far infrared radiation is the same spectrum that dominates natural sunlight warmth. When you sit in the sun on a cold day and feel warmth despite cool air temperatures, that's far infrared penetrating your skin directly. Your body has been adapting to this wavelength for millions of years. Infrared saunas aren't a technological novelty — they're a concentrated, controlled version of something ancient. That context changes how you think about the experience. You're not sitting in a box with heaters. You're using a tool calibrated to your biology's deepest wavelength preferences.