The Early Days Of Sunlamps

The Early Days Of Sunlamps

by Patricia E. Reykdal and Donald L. Smith

A little over a year ago,we bought an old tabletop unit on eBay and were absolutely stunned by the results we got when we tested it.We expected it would have a high level of UVB photons but did not expect to find that it would have 96 percent UVC! This finding caused us to buy several other old tabletop devices (more than 20 at last count) and test them to see how they perform.

As you will learn, the spectral output of these tabletop units are absolutely and categorically not comparable to the sunlight reaching the earth. Keep in mind as you read this article that a) it is possible that much of the increase in skin cancer seen today in senior citizens was caused by the overexposure resulting from using these tabletop tanning devices; b) 14,000 to 15,000 complaints were made each year in the mid-1970s to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because of sunburns suffered while using these tabletop tanning devices; and c) these complaints resulted in the adoption of the sunlamp standards that regulate the indoor tanning industry today. Indeed, while these tabletop units were in widespread use, there was no American commercial indoor tanning industry at that time.

The graph to the right clearly shows why the tabletop units that enjoyed widespread use in the United States from 1930 to the mid-1980s caused so much skin damage. While the sunlight reaching the earth contains no UVC photons and approximately 4.8 percent UVB, all of the tabletop units we tested contain varying levels of UVC and UVB.

(We also have included data on the FS Series sunlamp that commonly was used in the early days of the indoor tanning industry and, unfortunately, is still used today by the research community. This sunlamp has 1.1 percent UVC and 65.7 percent UVB and, therefore, is not an appropriate sunlight surrogate unless, of course, your study objective is to show skin damage. For this reason, we have repeatedly protested the fact that the FDA is using FS Series sunlamps in its UVRinduced erythema [sunburning] study.) Tanning Lamps ’05 Tanning Lamps ’05 66 LOOKING FIT, May 2005

Sun-Kraft
The Sun-Kraft tabletop unit was one of the most popular in the United States between 1930 and the mid-1980s and, after testing this unit, we were absolutely stunned by the results. Although this unit was rated for a 10-minute MET (maximum exposure time), it had a Te (4 MED) time of 1.6 minutes and a 0.75 MED (i.e., the initial session time) time of 0.3 minutes (18 seconds). These results show why the FDA received 14,000 to 15,000 complaints per year and why it was so dangerous. The Sun-Kraft “Cold Quartz Ultraviolet Ray Therapy Lamp” was one of the most popular tabletop units for more than 50 years. The words below come verbatim from the Sun-Kraft, Inc. brochure. “Sun-Kraft will not only create ‘erythema’ (skin tan) but because its rays peak intensity in the 2537 Angstrom waveband (253.7 nm), it induces Vitamin D production and acts as a powerful germicidal agent as well.” “FOR AN EVEN FACIAL SUNBURN [these words were capitalized in the brochure] it is necessary to make three separate, consecutive Sun-Kraft applications.”

Sea & Ski
The Sea & Ski portable tabletop unit was billed as a “Tanning And Health Lamp,” although facts dispute that claim since it had 9.6 percent UVC and 20.3 percent UVB. This unit had a Te time of 5 minutes and a 0.75 MED time of 0.9 minutes (54 seconds).

GE/Sylvania
The GE/Sylvania tabletop unit was very popular and also was sold under the Sears, Roebuck brand name. Although this unit only had 0.012 percent UVC, it had 43.3 percent UVB, a Te time of 5.5 minutes and a 0.75 MED time of 1 minute (60 seconds).

Sperti
The Sperti tabletop had 2.5 percent UVC and 33.6 percent UVB with a Te time of 6 minutes and a 0.75 MED time of 1.1 minutes (68 seconds).

How Can You Use This Information?
Keep in mind that there is a long latency period (30 years or more) involved in the induction of skin cancer and, therefore, the tabletop units that commonly were used from the 1930s to the mid-1980s were more likely than not to have been a primary causative factor of the reported increase in the incidence of skin cancer, especially in individuals who are over 50 years of age today. Also, information from this article can be combined with that from the article about “new era” sunlamps (page 68) to show how the sunlamp companies serving the indoor tanning industry have developed sunlamps that 1) significantly reduce the photons associated with skin damage and immunosuppression, 2) provide sufficient energy to stimulate the production of pre-vitamin D and melanin, and 3) tan much better than existing sunlamps. Sun-Kraft Sperti

Patricia E. Reykdal, who owns and operates four tanning salons in Tucson, Ariz., and her husband, Donald L. Smith, who is director of research of the Non-Ionizing Radiation Research Institute, have written more than 100 articles promoting sensible, moderate and responsible exposure to ultraviolet radiation.