Public Health
.
Story of the Week | September 17, 2008

Of Candidates and Tanning

Why buying a tanning booth for the Alaskan governor's mansion is a bad idea

This week we learned that VP candidate Sarah Palin had installed a tanning booth in the Governor's Mansion in Alaska. When the news broke, the first to react were the Tanning Booth Association advocates. Smart Tan Vice President Joseph Levy said: “People need to remember that indoor tanning was invented in Europe in light-deprived Northern European countries as a therapeutic exercise. It should not be a surprise to anyone that an Alaskan turns to indoor tanning.” Not shying away from the obvious juxtaposition with presidential candidate John McCain's challenge with melanoma, Levy continues: “McCain’s condition — attributed to years of sunburn on his type I skin as a prisoner of war in Vietnam — and Palin’s tanning bed should allow the tanning community the opportunity to tell our story correctly,” Levy said.
 
What are the real facts when it comes to tanning beds and health?

The truth is that we live in a culture that still places a high premium on youth, good looks and glamour. And nothing says “glamorous” more than a deep tan, or so it seems. That’s why you may have noticed a surge in tanning booths in your local community.

Tanning is big business. And young people, in particular, are plunking their money down and climbing into the booths – even though many of them realize there is a health danger associated with tanning.

Consider just how fast the tanning salon business is growing. In the United States, there are 25,000 plus tanning outlets, with 160,000 employees serving some 30 million customers. At $20 to $50 dollars per session, with beauty add-ons, that represents more than $2 billion in spending per year. All of this growth comes at a time when skin cancer rates have also soared.

The American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, the World Health Organization and a host of others say exposure to ultraviolet rays from the sun or from tanning booths is the primary culprit for today’s skin cancer rates. Studies reveal that the rays, including ultraviolet A, which damages not only the surface epidermis but the connective tissues and vessels below, and ultraviolet B, which is prone to quick surface burns, may cause cancer.

The link between ultraviolet rays and cancer doesn’t seem to concern the tanning booth industry’s lobbying group, The Indoor Tanning Association. They embrace it and run with it, saying the experience is “more than just a good tan; [customers] also enjoy the positive psychological and physiological effects of regular exposure to ultraviolet light.”  They claim that moderate tanning has never been linked to skin cancer and that tanning booths are effective for activating vitamin D and building strong bones. But the reality is that we get plenty of vitamin D from normal sources. The World Health Organization says that 5 to 15 minutes of casual sun exposure of the hands, face and arms, 2 to 3 times a week during summer months, is sufficient to keep vitamin D levels high.
 
So here we are, in the 21st century, unwilling or unable to regulate an industry whose profits come only with rising disease burdens and health costs for the nation.

The AMA has called for three simple and reasonable steps to bring about change. Number one, tanning booths should be off-limits to those 18 or younger. Number two, the FDA should conduct hearings to weigh-in on risk and the need for increased regulation. And number three, booths should come with a Surgeon General’s warning.

Responsible legislators have advanced bills, and Congress should approve these. As sponsor Carolyn B. Maloney, a Democratic congresswoman from New York says, “New cigarette packs say smoking causes cancer. We don’t want to wait another 50 years to have labels that adequately warn people that tanning beds cause cancer.”

I agree, and hope all four candidates for president and vice-president will reject tanning booths as a “healthy option.”  As always – to learn more, watch a special video embedded with this blog post (this week it’s from our Health Politics archive) or read the full transcript to learn more. Then send a comment expressing your feelings about tanning booths. Do you think they are safe?

Transcript

Read the full transcript of this story.

Related Websites

Comments
.
September 17, 2008

Of tanning and depression

    I commend your editorial.  As a physician, I think it is also extremely important to make it clear that the solution to depression or SAD (seasonal affective disorder) is not a tanning bed but other light based therapies that do not have the same risk of ultraviolet rays.
Thanks
.
.
September 17, 2008

Of Candidates & Tanning

Tanning Booths

I honestly believe everyone is entitled to make choices and if Sara Palins choice is to tan in a tanning booth, so be it. In Alaska I would think that would be the choice of many people. Using tanning booths in moderation, like everything else, I believe, is fine. It works well for people who suffer from SAD, depression, etc. I don't think the rise in melanoma is because of tanning booths. Our ozone layer is shot and exposure to the sun is way more dangerous than it was years ago, that is the main reason melanoma is on the rise. I think there are way bigger things to worry about in this world than what people do in their personal lives, really.

.
.
September 18, 2008

Moderation

We know tanning is not good for us and puts us at further risk.  However I believe we must focus on moderation.  Tanning as with anything else, moderation is key.
.
.
September 19, 2008

Learn the truth before you make a comment

I received this information from my Blue Cross newsletter.  I am a tanning facility owner.I think before  the Insurance companies and others start making comments about how tanning is not good for you , they need to read the facts.

In moderation tanning has many benefits.  If you looked at the whole scale of people that have cases  of skin cancers you will find it was the baby boomers and their children, as there  was not sun screen then, which made it easier to  get major sunburns, which over and over you are more likely to get skin cancers.
But the kids coming up now..ie ages18 or so and up had sunscreen from their parents so  they have not suffered  major sunburns.. and now they tan to prepare their skin for the summer weather or a vacation and they do it moderation.
So get the facts.. Also Melanoma.. is usually in places  that do not see the sun light.  
If you are so afraid of the uv rays..  then you better not ever go out in the sun.
There are studies  now that show all the benefits of more Vit.D..  depression, one more measure in preventive for breast cancer,  heart  attacks in men... the list goes on.
So power  to you Sara Palins.. and remember  public... the big  skin care companies just have the money to  advertise and get you to buy their sunscreen products.. so who is holding the $$..they are..
PS .. by the way.. it is not 50 or so dollars for a tanning session.. average tan price is around $6-7 .. 

so get the facts...

A Tanning Salon Owner
.
.
September 21, 2008

Don't Forget the Add-On's

To Salon Owner-

The figure $50 dollars was for the tanning session "plus add-on's". Up selling add-on's as you know is a key element of the business model.(http://ambafrance-do.org/beauty/41831.php)

And the "good feelings" that follow a session help fuel additional sales.

What are the add-on's that we see around the country? Here's a short list of the general categories that have been found in the company of Tanning Salons:

Beauty Aids

Muscle Builders

Weight Control

Stress Reduction

Supplementals and Vitamins

Nutrition Advice

Meditation

Depression Care

Alternative Health Care

Aerobics

Yoga

Positive Counselling

Spirtuality

Physiotherapy

Wealth Building

Truth is, tanning beds compromise physical and financial health for a growing number of vulnerable Americans.

Mike

.
.
September 25, 2008

Question needs answering.

Need response to tanning bed association claim.

Dr. Magee, in your report you say, "The group’s trade journal doesn’t shy away from cancer either, echoing the tobacco industry’s arrogance of the 1960's with head-on attacks such as this: “Moderate tanning has never been linked to skin cancer. In fact, by helping people tan with a reduced incidence of sunburn, indoor tanning may reduce your risk of ever contracting skin cancer.”12",               You didn't address this comment.  Is it true what they say?

Chet

.
.
September 25, 2008

Trust Sources Without A Vested Financial Interest

American Academy of Dermatology is a better organization for your question

Chet-

As we've learned from this month's financial meltdown of Wall Street, trusting information that originates from those with a vested financial self interest places you at risk. Such is the case with the Tanning Industry's professional associations. A much more reliable source is the American Academy of Dermatology. They note a wealth of research linking skin cancer causally to UV rays; and also note that UVA rays (the kind emanating from tanning booths) are far more harmful then UVB rays occuring in natural sunlight. Using a higher risk UVA to protect one from lower risk UVB makes no more sense then using the booths for Vitamin D. Finally, measured use of tanning booths is problematic since they release endorphins and have been demonstrated to elicit in many an addictive response which supports overuse. Bottom line: This industry's professional associations are supported by industry member dues, which support public information campaigns designed to maintain and increase industry sales. That's the truth.

Mike

.
Syndication OptionsRSS (Rich Site Summary) Feed Atom Feed OPML (Outline Processor Language) Feed MYST-ML (MyST Markup Language) Content Feed MS-Office Smart Tag Subscription