Our Opinion: Should government climb in the tanning bed?

News Tribune editorial

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Legislative proposals to limit use of tanning beds in Missouri raise intriguing questions about the proper role and scope of government.

A measure sponsored by state Rep. Gary Cross, R-Lee’s Summit, would require people younger than age 17 to have written, in-person parental permission to use a commercial tanning bed.

Another bill, by Jefferson City’s Jay Barnes — also a Republican representative — would ban children under age 6 from using a tanning bed.

“I’d like to hear someone make the case that a tanning bed is an appropriate place for a 5-year-old,” Barnes said.

No practical case is possible, but a philosophical case can be argued on the basis that it is overreach by government.

Is tanning bed use by young people a health issue to be legislated or a lifestyle issue to be handled by parents?

A House panel on health care policy heard testimony Wednesday focusing on the health implications.

“Someone who tans is 75 percent more likely to get melanoma,” said Cross, a cancer survivor and parent of a 24-year-old daughter diagnosed with a pre-cancerous condition.

“This is a deadly, serious thing that can transpire if not discovered and treated,” said the committee chairman, state Rep. Keith Frederick, RRolla.

“Teens are not fully mature and can’t make these informed decisions,” said Katelyn Davis, a medical student at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. “This bill (by Cross) would allow parents and children to come together and make an informed decision.”

We are sensitive to the health consequences.

But we also are wary about extending the reach of government into the realm where parental guidance and common sense should reign.

Supporters of the measures may contend if parents fail to act, government has a responsibility to regulate.

Detractors may counter that nanny government not only absolves parents of responsibility, it discourages them from practicing it.

We invite our readers, including parents, to share their thoughts. As always, letters are welcome, but we also encourage brief comments sent to editor@newstribune.com.

More like this story

paleskinner 3 months ago

You are opposed to this child protection/cancer reduction effort, not for practical reasons, but philosophical? Did you take the time to review the Senate report? Parental consent does not reduce youth tanners.. It is you that lacks common sense News Tribune, not the parents whose children have been lied to and exploited for a buck. Banning minors sends a clear message to all citizens that UV radiation is a recognized carcinogen - it encourages responsible sun exposure.

Question: How can you rationally expect the public to pay attention to important UV warning messages while governments permit school children to use indoor tanning beds - some of which are reportedly up to 15 times hotter than the sun?

shelly75ngml 3 months ago

This should absolutely be the parent's decision and the government has no place in it. As the mother of a son with terrible acne, I have found that tanning beds are a efficient and affordable way to help my son's skin clear up. The assumption that the only reason a youth would want to use a tanning bed is to get a tan is flat out wrong. There are plenty of other reasons, such as my son's, there are other skin conditions that can be helped with UV exposure such as psoriasis, and eczema. If a family is about to go on a vacation to a sunny location they may chose to visit a salon to acquire a base tan to minimize the risk of sunburn. Let's be clear, SUNBURN is the factor that increases the risk of skin cancer, not a tan. If the option of tanning in a salon is taken away from anyone, they may seek out other means like home units and spending extended periods of time outdoors. A salon offers a controlled environment of UV exposure to avoid burns, they take into consideration a person's skin type and limit the amount of time a person is in a tanning bed based on science. You do not get that safety precaution through a home unit or outdoors. I feel that limiting access to a salon would have the opposite affect that what is sought by these laws that are being proposed. As for the person that commented before me about tanning beds being "15 times hotter than the sun" you need to do some research. Tanning beds are only 2 to 3 times more concentrated UV. They are designed that way to get tanned in a fraction of the time it would take under the sun. As I said before, a salon limits the time you spend in a bed based on your skin type and equipment being used and the formula is meant to give a client 2/3 the time it would take to induce a sunburn, therefore safely being below dangerous levels of UV exposure. Not to mention the fairest skin type person (skin type 1) are not allowed to tan in a salon because there is too much risk for burning. Salons adhere to safe and responsible practices and should be acknowledged for that instead of wrongly blamed for skin cancer.

JCLifer 3 months ago

This is so sad that the economy is taking a dump, 0 People need jobs, and the governmennt fritters with this kins of stuff. No wonder they want to take our firearms! The are scared of a revolutiin that we so desparetly need.

paleskinner 3 months ago

FDA:

"Evidence suggests that tanning greatly increases your risk of developing skin cancer. And, contrary to popular belief, getting a tan will not protect your skin from sunburn "

fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/Tanning/ucm116432.htm

National Cancer Institute melanoma risk factors - sunburn is clearly not the only risk factor.

NCI:"Risk factors for melanoma include having fair skin that burns easily, high lifetime exposure to natural or artificial sunlight, a history of blistering sunburns, having a dysplastic nevus or many common moles, and a family history of melanoma." cancer.gov/researchandfunding/snapshots/pdf/Melanoma-Snapshot.pdf

Leading cancer researcher DeAnn Lazovich, PhD comments on burns:

"Researchers said patients were more likely to have reported painful burns while tanning indoors - experienced a greater number of burns while using a tanning device or experienced painful sunburns at a time when they thought they were protected from the sun by indoor tanning -" hemonctoday.com/article.aspx?rid=65930

American Academy of Dermatology references burns -

"In a recent survey of adolescent tanning bed users, it was found that about 58 percent had burns due to frequent exposure to indoor tanning beds/lamps."

"The FDA estimates that there are about 3,000 hospital emergency room cases a year due to indoor tanning bed and lamp exposure."

aad.org/media-resources/stats-and-facts/prevention-and-care/indoor-tanning

Study finds " Sunburn a Common Result of Indoor Tanning by College-Aged Females"

 "Among those who did use indoor tanning, 1,429 indoor tanning sessions were reported, with one in five sessions resulting in sunburn. 
 'In 39 percent of the sessions, study participants did not wear goggles to shield their eyes from radiation."

.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120730134444.htm

AMA and the AAP support legislation

" Indoor tanning is particularly dangerous, because tanning beds can emit 10 to 15 times more UVR radiation than the midday sun said Dr. Balk, also a professor of clinical pediatrics at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University in New York. "If we protect kids from smoking, why shouldn't we protect them from this other carcinogen?" Dr. Balk asked.

"There are over 50,000 tanning salons in the United States, more than there are McDonalds and Starbucks combined, and it's an industry that's completely unregulated," Dr. Chitkara said "

.ama-assn.org/amednews/2011/03/21/hlsa0321.htm

FDA - lamps

    "In a December 2008 Report to Congress, FDA noted that FDA/NCI studies found that  the UV exposures typically provided by sunlamp products are excessive-"

.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm186687.htm

traciec8 3 months ago

Tanning beds do not emit 10 to 15 times the radiation. A tanning bed emits about what you would get standing at the equator at noon. And, because of controlled exposure times, it's a much smarter dose than the unpredictable outdoor sun. Intensity x time equals dose. Light photons are the same; indoors or out.

Tanning beds ARE regulated by the FDA, as are exposure schedules. There are not 50,000 tanning salons in the US. There are 14,000.

paleskinner 3 months ago

@ traciec8 has any pediatrician ever told your child to put on NON SPF lotion and sun bathe at the equator at noon?

Did you know the FTC does not permit salons to say indoor tanning is "safer than tanning outdoors because the amount of ultraviolet light received when tanning indoors is monitored and controlled- look it up.. ftc.gov/opa/2010/01/tanning.shtm

Did you know the FDA is considering changes to its performance standard for sunlamp products? The UK is not having much luck enforcing theirs - "A new study by Cancer Research UK looked at sunbeds in England and found 90 percent failed existing safety rules for levels of UV (ultraviolet) rays."

wtvy.com/4yourhealth/headlines/Tanning-Beds-Ugly-Side-Revealed-in-UK-Study-188325461.html

AAP

"Sunlamps and tanning beds are the main sources of deliberate artificial UVR exposures.16 The intensity of UVA radiation produced by large, powerful tanning units may be 10 to 15 times higher than that of the midday sun. Artificial tanning is a common practice among teenagers."

AAP RECOMMENDS " Federal, state, and local governments should work toward passing legislation to ban minors' access to tanning salons. Governments should work to ensure that such legislation is enforced."

//pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/3/588.full

CPS

"While the precise roles of specific UV wavelengths in both melanin production and carcinogenesis are still to be fully elucidated, DNA damage appears to be the key intermediary for both. Tanning induced by UVR that is devoid of carcinogenic risk may be scientifically impossible."

"Recently, in order to achieve more efficient tanning in shorter sessions, high-intensity UVA-emitting lamps have been introduced. These high-intensity sunbeds are capable of emitting up to 10 to 15 times more UVA compared to midday sunlight "

cps.ca/documents/position/tanning-facilities

IBISWorld notes 19,152 businesses

ibisworld.com/industry/default.aspx?indid=1721

Quote from interview with FairWarning health care journalist Bridget Huber Q: You mention that indoor tanning is a $4.9 billion industry – where did you get that number?

A: That figure comes from the market research firm IBISWorld. One thing to note about that figure, too, is that it only includes tanning salons. So, it doesn't take into account the companies that make and sell sunbeds, lamps, lotions, goggles, etc. So, the broader industry is actually even bigger, overall, though I couldn't find a solid figure quantifying its size.

reportingonhealth.org/2012/08/27/qa-bridget-huber-how-indoor-tanning-industry-selling-sun-scare-conspiracy

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune

Breaking News