Thursday, July 30, 2009
International cancer experts have moved tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation into the top cancer risk category, deeming them as deadly as arsenic and mustard gas..."It's absolutely preposterous to make the comparison between sun beds and hazardous chemicals such as arsenic and mustard gas. The sun itself has been included in the top risk category since 1992, so it is no surprise that tanning beds that emit the same UV light would be included in this category. The WHO (World Health Organization) expects the world population to be naive enough to believe that the single most important source of human life (the sun) is as deadly as poisonous gas. "...A new analysis of about 20 studies concludes the risk of skin cancer jumps by 75 percent when people start using tanning beds before age 30..."The study's authors admit they did not adjust for outside sun exposure or sun sensitivity due to skin type. Even if the information is accurate, let's examine the 75% risk increase and what it means with this example - Your relative risk of getting a fatal form or skin cancer is 0.12%. If that number increases by 75%, then your relative risk is still only 0.21%. So scare tactics are used to make you believe that 75% of tanners will develop skin cancer. From the above example you can see THIS SIMPLY IS NOT TRUE.Also, most of the studies referenced above were conducted in the UK where a much greater percentage of the tanning population were skin type I. Skin type I burns very easily and very quickly and does not tan. Sunshine Tan Spa believes that those with skin type I should not be exposed to UVR. When skin type I was factored out of these studies, there is no evidence of an increased risk to skin cancer. Additionally, of the 23 studies (some dating back to the 1980's) 5 were excluded for unusable data, 6 had results that suggested tanning beds actually REDUCE the risk of cancer, and 16 had results within the margin of error."...Experts also found that all types of ultraviolet radiation caused worrying mutations in mice, proof the radiation is carcinogenic. Previously, only one type of ultraviolet radiation was thought to be lethal..."This simply is not true, there have only been "casual" correlations between UVR and skin cancer. This is the same as saying we should avoid water altogether because every single fatal drowning has included water.Additionally, the skin type of a lab mouse is significantly different than that of a human with skin type II-VI. At Sunshine Tan Spa we believe that moderation is key and skin type I should not be exposed to UVR. Also, there is no reference to the amount or intensity of UVR that the mice were exposed to, this seems to be an intentional omission."...The new classification means tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation are definite causes of cancer, alongside tobacco, the hepatitis B virus and chimney sweeping, among others..."The "others" that are included in this category are red wine, beer, and fish. This is another intentional omission considering the WHO has also conducted studies that conclude red wine in moderation is good for heart health and fish in moderation can help lower bad cholesterol. Is it not absurd to say "a glass of merlot is as lethal as mustard gas"? The key word here is moderation. Moderate UVR directly stimulates the production of Vitamin D which is necessary for our health and has been shown to fight many forms of internal cancer. Therefore it is also absurd to conclude that "moderate exposure to UV is as lethal as arsenic"."...But as use of tanning beds has increased among people under 30, doctors have seen a parallel rise in the numbers of young people with skin cancer. In Britain, melanoma, the deadliest kind of skin cancer, is now the leading cancer diagnosed in women in their 20s. Normally, skin cancer rates are highest in people over 75..."Since 1974 the number of dermatologists offices has nearly doubled from 5,700 to 10,700 by 2006 in the US. This is four times greater than the increase in US population during that same time period. Undoubtedly, many more Americans are visiting dermatologists and the screening of skin cancer has greatly improved thus leading to more detections.An interesting correlation to this data is the increased usage of sunscreens. During this same time period, the sunscreen industry grew from just a few million dollars in revenue per year to $35 billion. So using the same logic can't we then say that there is a definite correlation between the increased use of sunscreen and the increase in skin cancer detections?