Especially during the drab winter months, indoor tanning beds may sound like the perfect answer for those who desire a bronzed, glowing skin tone. But a new report shows that tanning salons are misleading customers about the severity of health risks associated with indoor tanning
Each year in the U.S. more than 2 million people are diagnosed with skin cancers, and reports from the American Academy of Dermatology Association (AADA) estimate that one in five Americans will develop skin cancer at least once in their lifetime. Though the medical community has only anecdotally been able to link indoor tanning to skin cancer, they haven’t been able to establish a causal link between tanning and cancer.
The study, led by researchers at the University of California-San Francisco (UCSF) , illustrates that tanning salons are partly to blame for the misinformation regarding the health risks of tanning salons.
Published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, it found that although tanning salons are required to provide information about the harmful effects of tanning, more than 60 percent of salons contacted by a study investigator denied any danger from ultraviolet (UV) exposure from indoor tanning equipment.
Some salons also claimed unlawfully that indoor tanning provides specific health benefits such as increasing vitamin D production and helping prevent future sunburns.
Studies from the AADA have also found that exposure to UV radiation increases a person’s risk of developing melanoma — the most dangerous type of skin cancer — by 75 percent. The risk increases with each use of a tanning bed, which is why the AADA and others advocate for a total ban on the production and sale of indoor tanning equipment for non-medical purposes.
The AADA says that “Unless and until the FDA bans the sale and use of indoor tanning equipment for non-medical purposes, [. . .] No person or facility should advertise the use of any UVA [Ultraviolet A] or UVB [Ultraviolet B] tanning device using wording such as ‘safe,’ ‘safe tanning,’ ‘no harmful rays,’ ‘no adverse effect,’ or similar wording or concepts.”
Ultraviolet A and Ultraviolet B radiation, more commonly referred to as UVA and UVB rays, are a form of radiation that increases the risk of skin damage, skin cancer and eye injury according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Unlike the UV rays emitted by the sun, UV rays from indoor tanning equipment are about 12 times stronger, which is why more people are likely to get sunburned from indoor tanning sessions than from outdoor exposure. Additionally, UVA rays are able to penetrate into the deepest layers of skin, where the radiation can damage collagen fibers and elastin, causing the skin to thin, sag and crease.
The new study from UCSF is similar to a 2012 investigation conducted by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce. Democrats on the committee accused the indoor tanning industry of providing false and misleading information about the health risks of tanning bed use.
In that investigation, committee investigators posed as fair-skinned teenage girls and contacted tanning salons throughout the country. Of the 300 salons investigated, 78 percent claimed indoor tanning posed no health dangers to users, 51 percent denied that indoor tanning increases the risk for skin cancer, and 90 percent reported that tanning had no known health dangers whatsoever.
John Overstreet is the executive director of the Indoor Tanning Association. “If those who were conducting the survey had actually visited a professional tanning salon and were indeed under 18,” he said in a statement responding to the report, “they and their parents would have had a more thorough conversation about the tanning process and the potential risks of overexposure.”
Despite the industry’s denial of any health concerns associated with the indoor tanning, the World Health Organization has declared indoor tanning devices to be known cancer-causing agents and have placed the beds in the same category as tobacco. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has also categorized UV radiation as a known carcinogen.
In the U.S., six states have passed legislation that restricts access to indoor tanning equipment by either banning minors from using the equipment entirely or requiring parental consent. Many tanning salons often offer deals around homecoming, spring break and prom.
No such thing as a ‘safe’ tan
Tricia Thompson was 32 when her hairstylist spotted a dark brown mole behind her ear. Thompson says that although she worked at an indoor tanning salon in high school and college, she didn’t think much of it and had a dermatologist freeze it off.
“I tanned an average of two or three times a week from the time I was about 14 until I was 21,” she said. “I remember there was a waiver everyone had to sign, but that was just protocol. Nobody ever sat down to talk about the dangers of indoor tanning so I didn’t really think about them.”
But about a year later, the mole had grown back and this time was a greenish-blue color. Thompson made an appointment with a different dermatologist who took a biopsy of the mole, which tested positive for melanoma.
Becky Kocon was 23 when she was diagnosed with melanoma. She said she started going to tanning salons with her mom when she was 17.
“When I got to college, I’d go two or three times a week. I knew tanning wasn’t good for me, but I didn’t think I’d get cancer. At least not in my twenties.”
Since melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer, killing one person every 50 minutes, it is also one of the most studied forms of skin cancer.
The Mayo Clinic released a study last year that found that the number of melanoma cases has increased eightfold among women ages 18 to 39 since 1970, specifically among young adults aged 15-29 years old.
“Melanoma is a new epidemic in young women,” said Jerry Brewer, a Mayo Clinic dermatologic surgeon and author of the study. “Other studies have shown an increase, but this study found melanoma occurring in women 705 percent more often.
“It’s astounding,” he said. “If we can change the behavior of young women and get them to stop tanning, the curve of the incidence of melanoma would change.”
Brewer reported that although 65 percent of young adults believe getting a “base” tan is a healthy way to protect their skin, he says there is no such thing as a safe “base” tan.
“Patients always ask me, ‘How much tan is OK for me?’ and the answer, no matter your skin tone, is ‘No amount of tan is healthy.'” Brewer explained any level of tan means the DNA in the deep layers of your skin has been damaged, and your body is trying to protect itself from more damage.
Deborah Sarnoff, a dermatologist in Manhattan and Greenvale, New York, and senior vice president of The Skin Cancer Foundation, agreed. “It’s significant that melanoma is on the rise in the same group of people who use indoor tanning beds more than anyone else.”
But in response to the study, Overstreet released a statement saying that the Indoor Tanning Association was “surprised that an institution usually as well-respected as the Mayo Clinic would publish a report like this; the study itself has nothing to do with indoor tanning, yet the authors make a leap of pure speculation to suggest that rising melanoma rates may have a connection to indoor tanning.
“The fact is there is no consensus among researchers regarding the relationship between melanoma skin cancer and UV exposure either from the sun or a sunbed, despite what the press release would have you believe.”
Overstreet said that the study looked at young adults in Minnesota, which he said has a “disproportionately high population of fair-skinned people of Scandinavian/Nordic ancestry who, because of their skin type are at a higher risk for melanoma skin cancer,” and are not representative of the U.S. population as a whole.