What do these things have in common, you ask? Cancer. Scientists now have determined unequivocally that the ubiquitous tanning parlors pose a very real danger, particularly to the tanning public of under the age of 30. In an AP article found in the Salt Lake Tribune, the risk of ultraviolet light used in tanning beds as been upgraded from "probable carcinogens" to a definite cancer causing activity. A recent international journal, Lancet Oncology, completed an analysis of about 20 studies , and concluded the risk of skin cancer increases by 75 percent when people begin visiting tanning beds before age 30.
Tanning beds emit mainly ultraviolet radiation, which causes skin and eye cancer. With the increased popularity of tanning parlors with people under 30, doctors have noticed a rise in the numbers of young people with skin cancer, though most types of skin cancer are benign. Even more concerning, however, there has been a 20 percent increase in deadly melanoma cancer during this time.
The advice these reasearchers give to the tanning public: Try bronzing creams or spray on "fake bake" applications. If you really must look bronze, don’t risk skin cancer. Parents should make sure there teens are aware of these risks before they follow this deadly trend.
The Legal Examiner and our Affiliate Network strive to be the place you look to for news, context, and more, wherever your life intersects with the law.
4 Comments
Melissa
This is a poorly written headline. I thought this would have a more direct tie in with chimney sweeping.
c
Is anyone surprised by this? there is a related post at http://iamsoannoyed.com/?page_id=588
LDG
how often and for how long would allow yourself of your child to spend on that Long Island NY or Bermuda beach?
Not too long before you got thoughts of burning and skin cancer.
If this is the case why do indoor tanning and sunbed salons encourage unlimited monthly UV exposure packages to their clientele?
I would say its profit driven.
If you owned a tanning salon would you REALLY encourage your clients to only come 20x a year at $15 a session? That would be $300 in revenue for you per client and if you wanted a $300,000 revenue stream, the goal for most salons and thats conservative, you would need 1,000 steady clients.
With the utter saturation of indoor salons in the USA, approx. 28,000 with an additional 50,000 gyms and nail/hair salons offering a sunbed or two, thats 1,560 indoor tanning salons per state.
The reality is that mot salons have a steady client base of avid tanners of about 250 people. Using my math above that translates to $75,000 in revenue. It costs the average salon with 6 to 8 units about $6,000 per month to operate. They would have no profit. So instead they encourage the tanners to keep buying monthly packages and visit the sunbed more like 100 times per year and at $15 a pop 250 steady tanners you now have your $300,000 in revenue and your making a hell of a profit.
The bottom line is business and not true health concern for the general public. The ITA and Euro associations will continue to accuse the medical world of using “junk science” instead of truly acknowledging the fact that the sunbed operator is in it for the profit. If a few people have to die along the way so be it. That sure sounds like the tobacco mindset to me.
John
Amazing how beer, wine and salted fish are also in the same category as indoor tanning, but no one seems to make a fuss about that.
Does no one see how utterly assinine it is to suggest indoor tanning is a bad as arsenic or mustard gas?
"The bottom line is business and not true health concern for the general public."
You are correct the sunscreen business and their friends in Dermatogoly.
Comments for this article are closed.