Is it true that tanning indoors is as unsafe as cigarettes, arsenic and mustard gas?

We've seen the headlines and the associated articles. These extreme associations really aren't all that different from other over-the-top, agenda- driven messages made in the past about tanning. Just add a little media-created scare flair to an already fright-filled press release, and you've got the recipe for another terror-mongering headline. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) who published the press release, is part of the World Health Organization. WHO/IARC has a history of making public declarations after manipulating data to produce desired research results.

This is the same group that:

·        Publicly declared second-hand smoke to be dangerous based on their studied research, but then refused to release the actual research.

·        For years claimed that saccharin, the artificial sugar found in Sweet and Low^®, causes cancer.  They based the claim on inhumane rat tests.  The rats were fed daily amounts of saccharin in the average amount that you would find in 800 soft drinks a day.  Nothing happened.  Then their eventual offspring were given the same amounts of saccharin and many of them got bladder cancer.  In another double generation test, rats and their offspring were fed saccharin in the amounts found in 1500 soft drinks a day. The offspring rats achieved similar cancer results. 

·        Has become susceptible to influence from various industries with financial interests in the outcomes in IARC research. Our thought is that manipulated science is junk science. It’s also a way to get agenda-forced conclusions publicized, such as "tanning is as unsafe as mustard gas."

Humans need light to live.  UV light from tanning lamps is similar to UV light that comes from sunshine.  The source of one is emissions from a distant star, the other comes from a nearby tanning lamp.  The sun doesn’t control the amount of UV light that it gives you to prevent injury.  Conversely, responsible tanning salon owners and operators take the time to screen their customers first, to ensure that each customer gets optimized exposures that maximize their tanning potential while minimizing any risk for injury.  They do this prior to exposing their customers to those tanning lamps.  

UV light in moderation, is good for those who can tolerate the exposure.  Exercise is also good for those who can tolerate the increased level of activity.  You can exercise too much, and you can tan too much.  Too much of any good thing can be bad for people.  But to compare sunshine to arsenic, tobacco products and even mustard gas, things that are toxic to humans in any amount, is over the top. 

IARC is in effect suggesting that society create a self-imposed sun prohibition, because UV exposure, even in the smallest amounts is toxic, and will kill you as surely as mustard gas.

Are you interested in the research that led them to this conclusion? There is no true research. Our understanding is that it was just a selective review of existing research on the topic. As they similarly handled the second-hand smoke issue, a declaration has been made, but IARC is unwilling to release the actual report.  They are content to publish a conclusion and hope the public will accept it, at least for now.

Our hope is that the public will avoid light starvation and fight for their right to light by tanning indoors after being screened by certified, trained, professional tanning equipment operators.