Will Common Sense About Tanning Ever Prevail?

Will Common Sense About Tanning Ever Prevail?

by Donald L. Smith

Let us be completely honest about our feelings regarding critical comments made about the indoor tanning industry. Do you ever despair that common sense regarding the truth about tanning will ever prevail? I admit that when I read or hear something negative about tanning it really sets me off, and I am not the most pleasant person in the world to be around.

Why is there so much adverse publicity being disseminated about tanning when the facts clearly show that the incontrovertible benefits of sensible, moderate and responsible tanning far outweigh the minimal and manageable benefits for everyone who can develop and maintain a tan? The answer is simple--money.

The dermatology community and the sunscreen industry are anti-sun and anti-tanning notwithstanding the fact that they know the risks of UVR avoidance outweigh the risks of overexposure of UVR (defined as the dose of UVR sufficient to cause a sunburn) and the risks of UVR avoidance far outweigh the risks of exposure to UVR (defined as a dose of UVR less than the amount required to cause a sunburn).

How pervasive is the problem? It is very pervasive because the indoor tanning industry has allowed the anti-tanning cabal to criticize us for the past 15 years without response. Why did I mention the time period of 15 years? Because it was approximately 15 years ago that the dermatology community abandoned all meaningful research into the benefits of tanning because they had discovered the financial benefits of promoting sunscreens. Has the use of sunscreens worked? Here is what Garland, et al in the publication Epidemiology Causes and Prevention of Skin Diseases titled "A Lack of Efficacy of Common Sunscreens in Melanoma Prevention" had to say about sunscreens.

"The medical literature beginning in 1966 was searched using the Medline database (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Md.). This database includes almost all medical research studies published in the United States and most studies from other countries published since Jan. 1 1966, and covers virtually all of the major epidemiological, dermatological and scientific journals likely to publish articles on the epidemiology of melanoma and other skin malignancies, research on biological and clinical effects of chemical sunscreens, and spectral analyses related to ultraviolet carcinogenesis. No epidemiological studies were identified that showed a protective effect of use of chemical sunscreens on risk of melanoma or other cutaneous malignancies in humans."

Moreover, Garland et al stated in their summary statement that, "For most individuals moderate year-round exposure to UVR (ultraviolet radiation) is desirable to stimulate accommodation and protective pigmentation, as well as for adequate synthesis of vitamin D in the skin. Such moderate year-round exposures would be appropriate for all but those who can't develop protective pigmentation or who have a history of cutaneous malignancy."

In other words, according to Garland, et al, the benefits of sunscreen use does not outweigh the risks involved; however, the benefits of developing and maintaining a tan does outweigh the minimal and manageable risks involved.

Additionally, the following statements in the article "Sunscreens, Skin Photobiology and Skin Cancer: The Need for UVA Protection and Evaluation of Efficacy" by Francis P. Gasparro from the March, 2000 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives provides additional evidence to show that the use of a sunscreen cannot be depended upon to prevent skin cancer.

"Although some have promoted daily use (of sunscreen) for the prevention of premature aging of the skin and the prevention of skin cancer, actual data is lacking to support these recommendations."

"As counter-intuitive as this (statement) may appear, several studies have demonstrated a correlation of skin cancer with sunscreen use."

"In fact, all a (sunscreen) label can say with any confidence is that the use of this product will prevent sunburn if used appropriately."

"Finally, the meaning of the acronym SPF should be changed from sun protection factor to sunburn protection factor to avoid giving the consumer an impression of solar invincibility and a false sense of security. SPF defined as sun protection factor connotes an impervious armor protecting against all assaults on skin biology. There likely never is to be any such product."

It is clear that the dermatology community and the multibillion dollar sunscreen industry are united in their desire to demonize tanning for their own financial gain. They do so even though they know, or ought to know, that the benefits of sensible, moderate and responsible exposure to UVR outweigh the minimal and manageable risks involved for everyone who can develop and maintain a tan. They ignore the scientific facts about tanning in their quest for the almighty dollar and that, in my opinion, is reprehensible.

What can the indoor tanning industry do to double the number of clients routinely patronizing our salons?

First of all, we must forget about finding the "magic button" to push because that option is not viable. It is counterproductive and wasteful of our time and resources to think that a high-powered Washington, D.C. lobbying firm can accomplish anything other than lining their own pockets.

The power to double the number of clients patronizing YOUR salon lies in each of your hands. All you have to do is get each one of your loyal clients to bring one of their friends (who has probably heard all of the scare stories about tanning) into your salon so that you can clearly and concisely go over the risks vs. the benefits of tanning.

Salon professionals must sell yourself, your indoor tanning salon and tanning. Therefore, you must take the time to educate yourself so you can explain the tanning process. You also must adopt a standardized skin typing (subtyping) system in order to show the client that (1) you know what you are doing, and, (2) that you care about them as an individual.

Then, you must provide a statement of the risks involved in tanning by using a comprehensive client release and informed consent form. Finally, you must adopt a standardized exposure schedule system that neither overexposes, nor underexposes your clients to UVR.

If you do not have a skin typing (subtyping) system or a client release and informed consent form, you can access the North American Alliance of Tanning Salon Owners (TSO) Web site at www.naatso.org and download a model format. Call me at (888) 994-3828 (toll- free in the United States and Canada) if you need assistance or additional information.

Once you have doubled the number of clients patronizing your tanning salon, double it again. And again. Don't wait for someone else to do the job for you; rather resolve to start talking to your existing clients today and the results will, in a relatively short period of time, amaze you. One more thing. Sell year-round tanning year-round. As an industry we have convinced ourselves that there is a logical reason for a slow season and all it takes to turn this problem around is to start today selling year-round tanning, year-round.

The way for the indoor tanning industry to become a profession is for each and every one of us to become more professional. Working together we can and will make a difference.