The following letter is what the ITA sent out notifying reporters about statements made by Vincent Cogliano, head of the IARC Monographs program at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, in a recent article in The Kingston Whig Standard.
Dear _____,
Two weeks ago, you ran a story about the dangers of tanning beds based on an IARC report that reclassified tanning equipment as a Group 1 carcinogen. Your story, like so many other stories on this new report, went overboard in its characterization of the relative risk of tanning beds.
As proof, I direct you to recent comments made by Vincent Cogliano, head of the IARC Monographs program at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, where he admits the results on which many of the reclassification conclusions are based are "limited."
He goes on to say that the reason the report highlighted tanning beds had nothing to do with the level of risk they present, but rather the rhetorical focus they wanted their report to have. He also admitted that a number of the studies in the report included fair-haired European subjects (skin type I) who are naturally susceptible to melanoma.
The following is an excerpt from the article in The Whig Standard:
"‘Most (of the 2009 position) is based on the 2006 working group report and we do not have the gold standard, double-blind type of research to work with,’ Cogliano said.
When asked why tanning beds were made such a focus of this WHO/IARC position, Cogliano said: ‘It was our 100th year and we wanted to pick something that looked at the past and into the future. UV radiation and the sun is (from the) past, tanning beds (are linked to) the future.’
The IARC research working group of international experts on skin cancer and UV radiation conducted a "systemic review" of all literature and studies regarding UV radiation and skin cancer and sunbed use.
The working group's review looked at 23 previously published studies that investigated the association between indoor tanning and melanoma risk in fair-skinned populations.
But the studies included only fair-skinned people, who have been long proven to be more susceptible to melanoma. Cogliano said the use of fair-haired study subjects was natural since they are the ones who get the disease most often.
Data from 19 of the studies was then used to determine that the relative risk associated with use of indoor tanning facilities could be projected to be 14 percent higher compared to those who never use indoor tanning facilities, in the test subjects reviewed.
None of these was double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, as they simply looked back over other studies and tried as best they could to amalgamate all the results.
When the analysis was restricted to just 10 specially selected studies, the risk of developing melanoma was projected to be 17 percent higher for those who engage in indoor tanning than for people who did not. ‘The evidence gathered on sunbed use and skin cancer so far is limited by problems with the characterization of exposure and the potential confounding effect of sun exposure,’ the group's report said.”
I hope you will consider this information next time you write a story that grossly exaggerates the dangers of tanning bed use. The way the media, and the authors of the report, mischaracterized and exaggerated the dangers of tanning beds is truly irresponsible and had been very damaging to thousands of small business owners.
We will continue to promote moderate and responsible use of our products so that our customers have access to all the benefits that UV light provides.
Source:
Indoor Tanning Association (ITA)
Related Content:
