Dermarolling breast enlargement scam

White Lotus claims that dermarolling can give an up to 10% increase in breast size.

They call it "Anti Aging Acupuncture Breast Enhancement treatment". This is of course complete nonsense, as dermarolling thickens the skin only - and by less than a millimeter. Dermarolling or microneedling certainly can't in any way, shape or form increase breast size. More about that later in this article.

Apparently to maximize profits whilst at the same time being able to defend themselves against the exposure of the absurd claim that microneedling can increase breast volume, they say: "It is essential that the roller is used with the Anti Aging serum, the herbs are vitally essential to the process". Amazing. They have a magic potion that can make your breasts larger. Magical thinkers may believe such claims, but us scientific folks prefer to see some evidence before we pay 85 + 30 dollars for a tiny bottle of self-made liquid and a roller which familiar design looks identical to that of the worst dermaroller in our dermaroller review.

White Lotus Anti Aging presents some pictures, for which we found evidence that they are fraudulent:

They go through great lengths assuring us that their images are in no way manipulated, and that 99% of all images online are photosshopped but theirs aren't. They are in fact correct in saying that their images are not manipulated. But that is the only truthful thing they say about those pictures that we republish here, for review purposes (fair use). The breast pictures are deliberately misrepresented, and do not at all show breast enhancement, if anything at all, they show in fact breast reduction, as we will show below.

First of all, we need the original photosgraphs on their website, not the reduced versions that you see in your browser. In order to save an image in a browser, you right-click and select "Save". However, White Lotus has disabled that, because when you right-click, this message appears:

That's strange.. The common way of protecting images is to put a Copyright message on them, the so-called "watermarking". That way, if people reuse your images, they'll be advertizing for your site, so that is an effective deterrent. Of course, putting a copyright message on an image that is in fact copyrighted by someone else is an illegal act, so if you do not really own the copyright, you can't do that and have to resort to other means. The message gives the impression that White Lotus owns the copyright, but in fact it only says that they are "copyrighted". Clever.

We do not have the same budget as White Lotus but our badly paid webmaster is not born yesterday and knew a way to download "their" photos anyway: He simply did "File - Save page as HTML". Then he had the actual images as they are stored on White Lotus' server, and a timestamped copy of their entire "dermarolling before and after" page. He said we needed it in case they would deny our evidence or even sue us, or take them offline or alter them. Update: We received a legal threat from White Lotus, saying they consider suing us for defamation-related damages. They did not explain how their "before" picture is dated after their "after" picture.

Fake before and after pictures

Our webmaster told us something we were very surprised about but it is true: When you make a photos with a digital camera, the camera embeds a lot of information into the image. Invisibly. This is called EXIF and the details can be read on Wikipedia here. If you have a way of retrieving that EXIF information, you can see when the picture was taken. The camera puts the date and time into the Jpeg image. Digital camera's have an internal clock, like video recorders etc. have. And that information survives image editing - it keeps being preserved, even when you cut and paste it into photosshop. This is to make the life of professional photosgraphers and media people easier. They need to have a reliable method of verifying the "credentials" of the photos, so to speak. Scanners also embed EXIF data. EXIF data is reliable - it has been used as evidence in court cases involving the manufacture of child porn.

There is an online service where you can paste the URL of an image and get some of that EXIF info:

I encourage you to go to White Lotus' before-and-after pictures and verify for yourself that what say is true. Here is the "before" picture, taken from

Update: White Lotus has removed the evidence, as was to be expected.

..and here is the "after" picture:

Update: White Lotus has removed the evidence, as was to be expected.

The "after" picture was taken 33 days before the "before" picture!

We asked our technical wizard webmaster to go through all before-and-after pictures on that page and he told us the following:

- Almost all photosgraphs are made with the same camera, the Olympus FE210. Meaning, they were not submitted by individual customers of their dermarollers but rather their source is a clinic of some sort.

- The photos's that have (sometimes obscured) faces on them are in his opinion not created with a camera or scanner, but they have in his opinion been copied from a PDF displayed on screen because they lack EXIF data and they are of much lesser quality than the other images.

Conclusion: These photos's are likely not copyrighted by White Lotus. In our opinion, those photos's were neither made by White Lotus, not were they submitted by their customers. In addition to that, White Lotus' assertion that they portray "before" and "after" pictures is demonstrably false.

White Lotus has crossed the line of what can be tolerated when they started to claim that dermarolling can increase breast size. It's scamming, plain and simple and we do not want our customers to tell us that there is something wrong with our rollers and our vitamin creams because "Their breasts didn't get bigger, as they do when White Lotus' products are used".

Another reason is that White Lotus has crossed another line when they started to spread deliberate nonsense on their site. Nonsense intended to take sales away from bona-fide, ethical competitors and move those sales to them. White Lotus spreads the rather monstrous lie that using vitamin A products in association with microneedling may cause "liver damage". They keep stressing that their serums are "natural" and that anything else is "artificial" and "toxic". This FUD is part of their business strategy - vitamin creams are much more expensive than self-made herbal potions, and their business model requires big profits in order to be able to grow large, using affiliates and aggressive, expensive marketing. They claim many things and most of it is utter nonsense, but those wild, unsubstantiable claims serve to move customers away from us conscientious, scientific-oriented small-scale vendors and towards their multi-million dollar business with their magical Chinese herbal potions that make your boobs bigger. Their pictures prove it - or do they?

We have no problem with healthy competition, but White Lotus is a cynical company. They peddle quackery. They charge outrageous prices for dirt-cheap, low-quality products and they spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about competitor's products. They use every dirty advertising trick in the book to win confidence and to increase their Google ranking - including paying seedy search-engine-optimization companies to spam the whole internet with links to their sites. White Lotus does not care about your skin - they care about their bottom line. If they truly cared about your skin, they would not bash proven vitamins in favor of their unproven "herbal serums". White Lotus runs a multi-level marketing business, where you can sign up as an affiliate to peddle their wares. Such a scheme is only feasible when there is a huge margin on the products. That's why they sell the cheapest dermaroller on the Chinese market. That roller costs around three dollar fifty, bulk wholesale. It has such a floppy handle that it's impossible to apply constant pressure or even hold a steady course, to give but one example why this is a bad roller.

The claim that dermarolling enhances breast volume by increasing collagen is ludicrous.

Breasts consist mainly of fat. There are also mammary glands, blood vessels, nerves and fibrous tissue but the main "structural material" in the breasts is fat and the size of your breasts depends on how much fat you have in them.

Breasts themselves have no muscles (apart from nipple muscles to erect the nipple and nodule muscles). That is why you cannot enlarge breasts by exercising and female bodybuilders have almost no breasts (most of them have implants) due to their extremely low body fat content. There is a muscle behind breasts and underneath breasts but not in breasts.

There is no way a dermaroller can cause the production of fat or anyhow enhance breast volume. A dermaroller cannot even reach the fatty tissue. A dermaroller affects the skin only and to the depth of the needles used. That means that not even if White Lotus magical miracle potion would do everything it claims to do such as "increase blood circulation", it would only increase blood circulation for a while in the skin.

Dermarolling increases collagen production in the skin and can thicken the skin somewhat, but microneedling can't possibly increase breast size by more than half a millimeter or so. Half a millimeter of gain is a great improvement for the skin because the skin itself is only a couple of millimeters thick. Thickening the skin by for example 0.2 mm will noticeably reduce wrinkles, scars and improve overall skin texture but anyone claiming that this will improve the volume of your cleavage is trying to fool you.

Microneedling can improve the skin texture of your breasts, it can improve the appearance of stretch marks on the breasts, it can improve pigmentations, sun damage and other skin related problems. Dermarolling/microneedling is excellently suited to improve scars that were the result of breast augmentation surgery though.

But there is no way it can enhance breast volume or lift the breasts - regardless of what expensive "serums" you roll into the skin on your breasts. Contrary to what the miracle serum peddlers want you to believe, increased blood flow and other phenomena can't possible result in larger breasts, even if their claims were true about increased blood flow in the breast tissue, which they are not.

Silicone/saline solution implants, or injections with one's own fat are used to enhance breast size. Microneedling can't help you with that, and if your goal is to enlarge your breasts, you should not buy our products. Neither should you buy from White Lotus.

How to recognize the scammers

You know how you can immediately recognize dermarolling scammers? They sell their own "miracle serums" instead of clinically proven vitamin creams and ointments. Vitamin creams are expensive. They are made in pharmaceutical companies and sold in pharmacies. They have proven themselves in countless medical studies and conform to strict quality requirements. Such vitamins are expensive and not much money can be made with them, hence the need to sell self-produced "serums" that cost nearly nothing to produce and can be sold at a huge profit margin. The most expensive part is the bottle and the cost of sending. Stay far away from those peddling their own serums, potions, herbal extracts and essential oil mixtures. More on how to recognize dermarolling scammers.

Scammers are recognized by how much they spam on forums and on how many "spammy" sites link to them. We do not post on forums. We do not advertise. We do not sell magical miracle lotions that cost half a dollar to make. If you want bigger breasts, don't try dermarolling - it's a waste of time.

1.  Ellemc1    Thursday, April 19, 2012

I'm so glad i checked this company out before buying anything from them. The alarm bells rang with me when I looked at their before and after pictures for Facial derma rolling, as the comparison pictures look like different people and one of the before pictures isn't showing at all (the one showing the full face). Thanks again :-)

2.  Adriana    Friday, May 25, 2012

I want to order two derma rollers from your site because i have many stretch marks and i want to know if it's safe to use them on my breasts too.I am asking you this because i have many cysts and i don't want them to grow.
Thank you very much!

3.  Sarah Vaughter    Sunday, May 27, 2012

I am not sure what you mean by "cysts". Do you mean skin tags/moles?

These will not grow bigger after dermarollling.

Yes, dermarolling can be performed anywhere on the skin, except for the upper eyelids and right below the lower eyelashes (due to the risk of pricking the eyeballs).

The most effective way to treat stretch marks is a combination of a 1.5 mm regular dermaroller and the single needles:

4.  chicofruitbat    Thursday, August 9, 2012

I never understand why companies have to viciously attack other companies with which they do not happen to agree. Why not just promote your own products, which appear to be very good, and let others be the judge of what does or does not work for them. As it happens I am well acquainted with White Lotus and just about every other derma rolling company out there. White Lotus have never claimed what you are saying they do. What they have claimed is that a course of acupuncture in the breast/chest area together with the use of a herbal product dermarolled into the breast area will achieve results that last for some time. Since my own experience with acupressure and herbal products would tend to indicate the truth of what they are suggesting, at least for some people including myself, I think it is always prudent to restrict one's comments to what one does know on the basis of one's own experience rather than trying to limit other peoples' experience referring to nothing more than one's own prejudices and limited perceptions.

Furthermore it is always very dangerous to sound off about 'scammers' as though one was the exclusive judge and jury in these things. No one person has a monopoly of truth and from the tone of your writing I am wondering if by 'scammer' you are meaning someone with whom you disagree or know nothing about rather than someone whose products you have researched to such a degree that you can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that firstly their products do not work and secondly that they are dishonestly motivated. To call someone a 'scammer' is a very serious accusation and one that could see you facing very serious legal consequences if you say it about the wrong person. How would you like it if someone levelled the same accusation at you? Can you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that your products work and work really well? Isn't it the case that with all naturapathic remedies there is never exact certainty and that results are always variable and achieved by trial and error? I have heard at least one skin specialist say, a so-called doctor of the 'establishment', that there is no evidence whatsoever that dermarolling works. He would probably call you a scammer. I hope that you can see where this is going and in future will confine your comments to your own products and your own experiences leaving other practitioners free to talk about the work they have done without having their reputations sullied by you.

5.  Sarah Vaughter    Thursday, August 9, 2012

The reason we decided to expose White Lotus Antiaging as scammers (which they at least verifiably were at the time of publication - we presented ample evidence above) is because they repeatedly (and likely still) called us scammers and worse.

Answering your: "How would you react when someone calls you scammers"? Well, we investigate the accuser's business practices and we usually find that they themselves are the ones with skeletons in their closet, as turned out with White Lotus as well.

You see, White Lotus started to attack our products as being "dangerous", because they contain "pharmaceutical vitamins that can cause toxicity". Their site is well-visited and repeatedly and sternly warns against companies that recommend and sell vitamin products. This is akin to calling them scammers. They say that we either have too little expertise in the dermaneedling arena, or, even worse, they imply that we do but that we deliberately rip off our customers by advising them useless vitamins that may even kill them through "liver damage". Such preposterous claims were made on their site and perhaps still are - I have stopped reading their site.

After some of our own customers started to doubt our advice, referring to White Lotus' claims, we investigated that company and discovered that they practice deceptive marketing tricks, such as using falsified before-and-after pictures and stating exact claims that can't be substantiated, such as that dermarolling increases breast size by up to 10% ("supported" by provenly fake "before-and-after" pictures that they deleted when we exposed them as being fake).

So this article is a defense against us being accused by them of poisoning our customers. We just want to highlight that perhaps they just have no clue about dermaneedling, and instead are just a bunch of scammers. It's up to the reader to decide. We strongly disagree with their "Voodoo philosophy". They believe in things unproven by medicine. We believe in logic, the laws of nature and scientific experiments. We would like to have customers who are the same, so when we expose magical thinkers as scammers and potential customers take issue with that, we prefer them not to buy from us because in our experience, magical thinkers are a support burden, since they do not take scientific research seriously, and everything we say and do is based on scientific evidence.

Our before-and-after pictures often have a verifiable source, such as a customer posting on our forum. We also do not mind EXIF investigation, as we did with White Lotus to demonstrate that their photos were fake. And we occasionally even give out the email address of the customer to another customer, if the latter wants to know the details. So were are open and transparent with our evidence that our vitamin-supported dermaneedling approach works. And we demonstrated verifiable proof that White Lotus' images were false, making them scammers in our book, since claiming that your merchandise significantly enlarges breasts and then posting fake pictures of such enhancement constitutes blatant scamming with intent to make a hefty profit. Especially because as a dermaneedling expert, I know that dermaneedling most definitely can not augment breast size. We prefer to be honest instead of selling more rollers. We take the long-term, honest approach instead of the short-term scam approach. We think you can make more money in the long term by not lying to your customers. We are very strange that way, I know.

As to dermaneedling being a "naturopathic" treatment, we disagree. "Naturopathy" in its current commercial form is more like a religion, a philosophy. It has little to do with science, even though science today is corrupted as well.

White Lotus knows very well that dermarolling was not invented in China as a form of acupuncture, as they claim. They have never provided evidence to such because such evidence does not exist. Their business philosophy is to appeal to magical thinkers, and we are happy someone takes magical thinking customers off our hands so we would hate to see White Lotus go. It's a similar case with Scientia. Scientia appeals to people who really haven't got a clue and will believe anything written online, especially when enough bright colors and exclamation marks are used. Scientia attacked our company as well and rather viciously I may say, so of course we also wrote an article on Scientia's scam, being that they sell a Dr. Roller (there is no such thing as the Scientia brand) for a price much higher than Dr. Roller is sold elsewhere. And they never answer customer questions, because the company is run by a young man in the UK without the slightest knowledge of, or interest in dermaneedling, someone who very obviously only cares about money, given the way he conducts business.

To summarise: We only expose scammers when the scammer themselves initiates a serious attack on our company first. We offer verifiable evidence that our advice and products work. We offer verifyable evidence that scammers are scammers. We were confronted with a low-level war going on in the dermaneedling business, and decided to fight back.

I understand that you work for White Lotus. UK libel laws are the best in the world for those who think they have been libeled. So if you think you have a case against us, you are free to sue. But remember that UK libel law has recently been modified to make truth a perfect defense. In that case, there will be a public court decision stating that White Lotus is indeed guilty of fraudulent advertising. We'll publish it here.

6.  Rebecca    Thursday, October 31, 2013

That's awesome, Sarah! By the way, let me just say as a customer, I would much rather buy off of you than off of White Lotus or any other derma needling company. You actually tell the truth about your products (and you back it up with scientific evidence), and you're in it to help people -- not just to make a few bucks (as evidenced by the fact that you advise customers not to "overbuy"). For these reasons, I highly respect you and your company, and I cannot tell you how refreshing it is to find a company like yours where right off the bat, I didn't have to sift through your site for evidence of "scam" material. In addition, I found your site to be extremely informative! Thank you so much for all your research and hard work! So, would I rather buy a product off of a company that tells me the truth, or would I buy from a company that sugar coats everything for me and wastes my money? hmm...that's a tough one...

7.  Deirdre Elizabeth Martin    Thursday, April 21, 2016

Please, for the love of all that is holy, recognize and correct the glaring punctuation error used repeatedly in this article. "Photos" is the correct plural form of photo. "Photo's" suggests that the photograph owns something. For example, "The photo's discoloration was caused by improper storage over many years." This would be the correct usage of punctuation as the discoloration belongs to the photos. "We took several photos of mallard ducks yesterday". This is an example of the correct plural form of the word photo. "These photo's were likely not copyrighted..." suggests a poor knowledge of the English language, or perhaps general laziness. I apologize for my high level of bitchiness this morning. I enjoyed the article, in fact, I read it in its entirety. However, I'm so tired of seeing articles and web pages with second grade mistakes all over them. It's not just you, is one of the worst offenders in this area. We ask our children to excel in school, to meet our high demands, yet we are not practicing what we preach. Let's be better role models for our youth and take pride and care in what we put in print.

8.  Sarah Vaughter    Thursday, April 21, 2016

Apologies and thank you for pointing it out - it was written years ago by someone that is not a native speaker of English: Me - or do I need to say "I"? I fixed some mistakes now.

Commenting on this article is not possible anymore.
Our store has instructions for our products.