Friday, July 31, 2009

Tanning is bad?

Here’s something shocking: on Wednesday, the AP announced that tanning beds raise the risk of cancer by a whopping 75 percent, at least for those who begin to tan before the age 30. (Well, thank God someone finally shared this secret with the world, because here I was thinking that laying in a box of ultra-violet light was good for us all. It’s not!?)


Honestly, though, tanning is now way up there on the list of cancer no-no’s, along with smoking, hepatitis b, and- uhh- chimney sweeping? (Sorry, are we in 19th century London, here?) My major question about this is what about the occasional tanner? These studies mention nothing about the frequency of tanning. Do infrequent tanners, such as myself, still run the 75 percent risk, or is it significantly lower? For example, in any given year, I may tan indoors a total of 15 to 20 times for 10 minutes apiece. Do 200 minutes of direct, boxed UV-rays really raise my risk of skin (and eye!? Ew!) cancer risk up to 75 percent?


The study also doesn’t seem to take into account a person’s skin type. Yet again, let me bring myself into the lime-light here, and mention that I am Greek and Italian, and have one sunburn on record to date. (August, 2008. Cape Cod, Massachusetts. I went boating, insisted I didn’t need sun-block because I don’t burn. Didn’t factor in that sunlight bounces off the water’s surface and thus onto one's skin. No bueno.)


The good news about all of this? Tanning still doesn’t rank as cancerous as arsenic. Thank God, since we all come in contact with that on a daily basis.

3 comments:

  1. I also rarely go tanning...but the few times I've gone before spring break and prom or just when im deathly grotesquely white (yes I get whiter than I am now) does that mean I still have that big a chance of skin cancer? I wondered the exact same thing when I read that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're definitely right... after reading several articles (had to get some background so I could respond a bit more knowledgeably) there was no mention of the frequency of use or type of skin. Maybe scientist felt that all they really needed to see was some kind of connection between tanning beds and cancer so they could get their research out there... I meeeeeean... it's a possibility.

    I can agree with one thing stated in one of the articles that I read: people should not feel the need to get a tan based on some sense of competition. Don't go sitting in a light box for 10 minutes a day just 'cause someone else did it-- you're going to end up looking like a burnt carrot some day if you think like that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kaite, you're hilarious! Seriously a good writer and had me laughing at your side comments and stories.

    I'm not surprised tanning is unhealthy. However, you raise good points that this study, or at least the article about it, does not delve deep enough into each factor. (by the way, I'm jealous you've only been sunburned once. I have survived a week being called El Gigante Rojo.)

    ReplyDelete