PDA

View Full Version : Do any of you ladies use tanning beds ?



gymgirl1021
08-11-2012, 07:37 PM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.

I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.

I'm 17 right now.

Is it worth it ?

cyanotikat
08-11-2012, 07:56 PM
Eh, like nearly everything else there are pros/cons. Tis a personal preference.
See: Pros/Cons of Tanning (http://voices.yahoo.com/the-pros-cons-using-tanning-bed-166141.html)
Pros:
1. Fit and Healthy Feelings
2. Relaxed Moods
3. Production of Melanin
4. Production of Vitamin D

Cons:
1. Tanned Skin = Damaged Skin*
2. Skin Problems
3. A Proven Cause of Skin Cancer
4. Eye Damage

I personally don't use them because I tried and I can't. (Fair skin, burn after 1 min in a bed) So instead I use Jergens tanning lotion...

Botika
08-11-2012, 08:04 PM
No, it's not worth it. Tanning beds just destroy the collagen in your skin which means it loses it's elasticity. Basically it will start to sag earlier.

If you want to preserve your looks then wear a broad spectrum sunscreen every day and avoid too much sun. Stick to spray tans or tanning creams. When you are 40 and look 30 (not 50), you will be glad you did.

FameKills
08-11-2012, 08:46 PM
Nope. I don't get the obsession with being tan.

amazon22
08-12-2012, 10:31 AM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.

I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.

I'm 17 right now.

Is it worth it ?

You will no doubt have some degree of skin aging from tanning. When the skin tans, it is releasing melanin (which makes the skin darker) in an attempt to ward off the damaging rays. It does look pretty for a while but later on is when you really start to see negative effects. I know women in their 40's that have tanned a good bit and their skin looks like leather. They also have many moles, which also is dangerous because uneven moles can be cancerous and sometimes not noticed. I don't recommend tanning, get some vitamin D in the natural sunlight a couple times per week and eat carotenoid rich foods like sweet potatoes, carrots, spinach, tomatoes, strawberries, to give your skin a natural glow. Here's an article about that: http://www.shape.com/lifestyle/mind-and-body/gorgeous-sunless-tan-eat-these-healthy-skin-foods

elainedeluca
08-12-2012, 10:42 AM
Hey, I'm a pasty white Irish girl too. When I need a tan for competitions, I get it painted on. I like my skin, thanks very much. When I want a little color I use a self tanner or tanning towelette. And maybe throw on a little sparkly bronzer if I'm going out for the evening.

My advice, stay away. You want to look 30 when your 40, not 60.

mellie369
08-12-2012, 11:10 AM
[QUOTE=elainedeluca;931579923My advice, stay away. You want to look 30 when your 40, not 60.[/QUOTE]

^this. Don't do it. The damage you do far outweighs any benefit.

*lj
08-12-2012, 11:21 AM
^this. Don't do it. The damage you do far outweighs any benefit.

Agreed! Think it's the classic short-term vs long-term gain position. For tanning bed the short-term gain is pretty good as per the pros laid out in the beginning of this thread. The long-term gain however doesn't exist.

If you plan on living past 30 and being happy with how you look, best staying away.

Most people are taught that it's the UVB exposure that will do you in when using a tanning bed which is generally true as this causes structural damage to your DNA. But recent results are that UVA will actually cause negative interaction with melanin too. Which means double trouble. The more study that gets done, the worse tanning beds get painted. No studies are saying anything redeeming about them.

wakechica
08-12-2012, 11:44 AM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.

I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.

I'm 17 right now.

Is it worth it ?

You're 17.... don't waste your money. I use it every now and again, helps with scarring etc but I prefer natural rays. Stick to fake tan for now.

You also don't need to go 3 times/week, that's just plain stupid.

ReClassify
08-12-2012, 12:09 PM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.
I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.
I'm 17 right now.
Is it worth it ?

im english irish welch polish scottish... fair skin , used to burn so bad that I coud peel sheets of skin off me, I had sun poisioning a few times before i was 20 and had 3 melanoma removed (wrist/forearm/leg).
Than i started tanning about 10years ago at my gym...low an slow. now i can do high 10min and not even be pink, have not had any melanoma or burning it was the best thing i ever started doing. i get tons of flack about it from my family about the science and health issues BUT the fact remains that MY life and MY skin cancer has changed for the better as a tanner ...so to each theier own :)

hope that helps some ~ good luck

Artemis00
08-12-2012, 03:00 PM
im english irish welch polish scottish... fair skin , used to burn so bad that I coud peel sheets of skin off me, I had sun poisioning a few times before i was 20 and had 3 melanoma removed (wrist/forearm/leg).
Than i started tanning about 10years ago at my gym...low an slow. now i can do high 10min and not even be pink, have not had any melanoma or burning it was the best thing i ever started doing. i get tons of flack about it from my family about the science and health issues BUT the fact remains that MY life and MY skin cancer has changed for the better as a tanner ...so to each theier own :)

hope that helps some ~ good luck


This is one of the main reasons that I tan as well. Once you have a base tan, you can be exposed to the sun for longer times without getting burned. The burning cause far more damage then the tanning itself. Starting tanning 11 years ago and haven't had a burn since (and that is with spending hours out in the sun). Genetics plays a much bigger role in the aging of your skin then tanning does. I'm 35 and I've never been told that I look 40+. And a woman I workout at the gym is 49 and tans, and she could easily pass as 35.

As for the studies that show it causes cancer, premature aging, etc...I never believe any study I ever read. Too many times those that do these studies don't seem to understand the difference between correlation and causal studies when they publish these studies...and most of them are correlation which means absolutely nothing. Besides, aren't the new studies basically saying that sunscreens now cause cancer from the chemicals. So if I plan on going outside, I guess I'm getting cancer either way.

Then again, there is one really big side effect that I have seen from tanning. The number of people that feel it is there right, because I tan, to lecture me on the negative effects of tanning and how I should stop. I never asked for their opinion and I certainly don't lecture them about not tanning. Usually I shut them up by saying "my family has history of dying from cancer...I'm just chosing what form of cancer to die from". They don't really know how to come back from that.

freebirdmac
08-12-2012, 03:30 PM
What you want to do is use a bed that most closely imitates the sun's UVA/UVB ratio. Do not use the beds that are low on UVB (makes you red) as it's UVA that is really damaging. Going 3x week in the beginning is ok, but you want to drop back to 2x week as soon as possible. Supplement with the sun as often as possible and do not use sunscreen unless you are going to be out long enough to burn. Lastly, once you have some color, stop increasing the time in the bed. Tanning is like lifting, as soon as you have some color (muscles) it doesn't seem like it's enough. Know when to stop increasing time.

oregonchick76
08-12-2012, 07:32 PM
LOL. I'm irish/norwegian. I used tanning beds from about the age of 16-24. Also had a few bad sunburns. Now I have millions of moles, sunspots, sun-damaged neck/chest skin, and have had to have 1/2 a dozen moles surgically removed because they were 'suspicious'. Personally, I just wouldn't do it. I'm 36 but my skin looks 60.

Botika
08-12-2012, 08:07 PM
Just wanted to point out that your skin doesnt actually need to burn to cause skin damage or skin cancer. People once thought cigarettes were safe too.

freebirdmac
08-12-2012, 08:28 PM
You know, I just have to say this because all of this skin cancer stuff pisses me off. Yes, too much of anything is harmful. Yes burning is harmful. But doggone it we were *made* to be exposed to the sun. Our primary source of vital vitamin D is from the sun. All of this fear of the sun and overuse of sunscreen is *causing* cancer. Not just skin cancer. Did it ever occur to you phobics out there why people who are never in the sun get melanoma? Or why melanomas occur in areas that never see the sun? Yeesh. Go pop a pill and get your D. Yeah that'll work. Never go in the sun or use beds and be protected. Don't hold your breath.

If you have half a brain and actually read the skin cancer studies, and really pay attention to the stats, you will find that everything you have been told to fear ups your risk by maybe 1 percent. Like many things in this world it's all about parting you from your money. And btw not telling you about how toxic those SPF formulas really are.

Get some sun without sunscreen during prime sun times. Do not get burned. That is your best defense.

Miranda
08-12-2012, 09:39 PM
i'm very pale-skinned with a lot of moles and freckles and i tan poorly, if at all.

i lived in the northern hemisphere and i've avoided direct sun exposure/used sunscreen half my life. then i moved to australia in my early 30s. the sun here is considered to be at its strongest/harshest on the whole planet. despite continuing to cover up (even wear a hat) and wearing sunscreen, i've accumulated a lot more freckles on the exposed areas. i've developed more moles too and some of the existing ones have become larger/darker and changed shape. i had one zapped off last year.

so i'd say if your skin isn't up to it, don't bother with [excessive] tanning/tanning beds. the idea isn't to take in as much as you think you can get away with.

Botika
08-12-2012, 11:20 PM
Yeah my view is based on what I've experienced living in Australia. When it's over 40 degrees (104 F) outside in summer you'll be burnt in 15 mins regardless. Skin cancer is a huge issue here:

- Australia has the highest skin cancer incidence rate in the world.
- Australians are four times more likely to develop a skin cancer than any other form of cancer.
- Approximately two in three Australians will be diagnosed with skin cancer before the age of 70.

crazygal17
08-13-2012, 12:08 AM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.

I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.

I'm 17 right now.

Is it worth it ?

I don't. Please don't do it. You can get skin cancer and have your skin age from tanning beds. I am Irish too and super pale, but I've learned to accept my skin color! Having pale skin rocks! It's so unique, but I understand if you want to tan! It's fine to do it outside with SPF, but don't do it excessively.

sonti
08-13-2012, 04:19 AM
Yes, I agree we were meant to be exposed to the sun. But I also don't think we were meant to live until 80 years old and I'm pretty sure Adam & Eve (or whoever you believe was the first humans) were white, pale, and Irish with blonde or red hair. Living in Northern climates for so long has changed our bodies. As a white girl in Canada, I'm pretty sure I don't look the same as my ancient Nubian ancestors and need to adjust my expectations of sun exposure realistically.

ozziefitchick
08-13-2012, 04:36 AM
why would you want to do this? is skin cancer evidence not enough? if you are pale and burn easy you're at even more risk.
fake bake if you must

Artemis00
08-13-2012, 07:25 AM
FYI. Those that recommend fake tanning...do a quick google search on the text "fake tanning causing cancer".



Guess what...it causes cancer as well.

LoveMyInk
08-13-2012, 07:46 AM
I really want to start using them because I'm SO (irish and scottish heritage) but I'm scared of skin aging and skin cancer
have any of you experienced aging with using tanning beds?
If I started I'd go 3 times a week (using an spf) to get a base tan , then once a week to maintain my tan.
I'd go for the shortest amount of time.

I already moisturize every day, so I'd continue to do that too.

I'm 17 right now.

Is it worth it ?

Not worth it put aome sun block on and lay outside.


I go occasionally, used to tan year round and im scared of what ill look like in a few years

sonti
08-13-2012, 08:08 AM
FYI. Those that recommend fake tanning...do a quick google search on the text "fake tanning causing cancer".



Guess what...it causes cancer as well.

You were the one who mentioned questionable validity of medical studies - is there a reason that you think websites such as "The Daily Mail", a UK tabloid, contain more validity than decades of cancer research by thousands of medical doctors?

Or are you one of those people who feels that because decades of medical research does not anecdotally apply to her (... so far, as you are only 35 ...), that it must be false and that very questionable sources online are just as valid as peer-reviewed research?

oregonchick76
08-13-2012, 08:20 AM
You know, I just have to say this because all of this skin cancer stuff pisses me off. Yes, too much of anything is harmful. Yes burning is harmful. But doggone it we were *made* to be exposed to the sun. Our primary source of vital vitamin D is from the sun. All of this fear of the sun and overuse of sunscreen is *causing* cancer. Not just skin cancer. Did it ever occur to you phobics out there why people who are never in the sun get melanoma? Or why melanomas occur in areas that never see the sun? Yeesh. Go pop a pill and get your D. Yeah that'll work. Never go in the sun or use beds and be protected. Don't hold your breath.

If you have half a brain and actually read the skin cancer studies, and really pay attention to the stats, you will find that everything you have been told to fear ups your risk by maybe 1 percent. Like many things in this world it's all about parting you from your money. And btw not telling you about how toxic those SPF formulas really are.

Get some sun without sunscreen during prime sun times. Do not get burned. That is your best defense.I really think it depends on your heritage/skin. Some people are just not meant to tan... And those are the ones who need a lot more exposure to develop color, and are also the ones most susceptible to burning/cancer. And unfortunately are also the ones who are most likely to want to tan in the first place because they are so pale! FWIW, I would LOVE to be tan. But I recently tried to build up a base tan for a trip to Hawaii. I went 3 times a week, but could only go for like 5 min max before I burned. I went like that for 3 months and got a barely perceptible tan. I stopped going after Hawaii, and lost that 'base tan' in like 3 weeks.

And then there are those people who go a few times and get a nice color with very little exposure.

There is no 'one size fits all' here.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 08:44 AM
I love how people get sucked into the latest fear craze and refuse to dig into it and learn for themselves. Let's make it simple. You get both UVA and UVB from the sun. UVA penetrates deeper into the skin and is primarily responsible for skin damage and skin cancers. UVB is what your body needs exposure to in order to create vitamin D. Both UVA and UVB cause tanning and burning but UVB is more influential. So, as nature intended, if you are out in the sun during the highest UVB exposure (10am-2pm) to the point where you start turning pink you are optimizing your exposure for vitamin D and minimizing your exposure to the more harmful UVA rays. Your risk of cancer of any type and for many other diseases is greatly improved. This is of course without sunscreen products which can be toxic in and of themselves but many also do not block the more harmful UVA rays. If you are going to be out in the sun past the point of turning pink, make sure your sunscreen blocks both UVA as well as UVB.

As for indoor tanning, stay with the lower level beds which more closely meet the sun's UVA/UVB ratio. Build slowly, allow at least 48 hours between sessions, and don't increase your time needlessly.

Here's a good place for finding a safe sunscreen http://breakingnews.ewg.org/2012sunscreen/.

Lack of sunshine created vitamin D is the real health crisis. Indoor tanning isn't ideal, but for many people it's the only way to get exposure. Be smart and ask questions about the beds.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 08:48 AM
I really think it depends on your heritage/skin. Some people are just not meant to tan... And those are the ones who need a lot more exposure to develop color, and are also the ones most susceptible to burning/cancer. And unfortunately are also the ones who are most likely to want to tan in the first place because they are so pale! FWIW, I would LOVE to be tan. But I recently tried to build up a base tan for a trip to Hawaii. I went 3 times a week, but could only go for like 5 min max before I burned. I went like that for 3 months and got a barely perceptible tan. I stopped going after Hawaii, and lost that 'base tan' in like 3 weeks.

And then there are those people who go a few times and get a nice color with very little exposure.

There is no 'one size fits all' here.

Those with light skin, red hair, blue eyes do not need as much exposure time to get sufficient levels of vitamin D. Attaining color is a challenge, but that's secondary and really irrelevant. There are spray tans that can accomplish that. Everyone on this planet needs skin produced vitamin D.

sla07
08-13-2012, 10:52 AM
since this topic is here...curious to know what options are there for a trip coming up, to cancun...my gf is light skin...im darker skin so i dont worry about burning..she burns easily though...i think its too late for her to get a base tan since the trip is at the end of the month...whats the best option for her not to burn, at the very least, so that she can enjoy the trip?...spf 75+ or something?...

Artemis00
08-13-2012, 12:05 PM
You were the one who mentioned questionable validity of medical studies - is there a reason that you think websites such as "The Daily Mail", a UK tabloid, contain more validity than decades of cancer research by thousands of medical doctors?

Or are you one of those people who feels that because decades of medical research does not anecdotally apply to her (... so far, as you are only 35 ...), that it must be false and that very questionable sources online are just as valid as peer-reviewed research?


My point (which you have obviously overlooked) was that if you look hard enough...you will find that everything causes cancer in some study or another.

And since you are the one now stating the claim. Please provide links to the CAUSAL studies that you are referencing. I'm sure with "decades of cancer research by thousands of medical doctors", you will have no difficulties finding these references. Again...please don't waste my time with correlations studies, they are absolutely useless.

As for the "Medical Research"....I'm just glad at my age (since you feel that has any reference in this conversation)...that I at least know the difference between a causal study and a correlation study and can weed through the BS. But thanks for taking it to that level.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 12:36 PM
I'm correcting my 1% to 3 tenths of one-percent. http://www.healthjournalism.org/blog/2010/05/tanning-beds-what-do-the-numbers-really-mean/

Be smart.

Artemis00
08-13-2012, 12:48 PM
since this topic is here...curious to know what options are there for a trip coming up, to cancun...my gf is light skin...im darker skin so i dont worry about burning..she burns easily though...i think its too late for her to get a base tan since the trip is at the end of the month...whats the best option for her not to burn, at the very least, so that she can enjoy the trip?...spf 75+ or something?...

From my perspective, take it or leave it...when I went to Cancun, I found that the intensity of the sun there was significantly higher than what I was used to in the states. I would highly recommend you take a look at that link that Freebirdmac provided (post #25) to find a safe sunscreen. And even with the base tan that I have, if I go back to Cancun, I would still wear sunscreen and apply frequently any time I was going to be in the sun for a signficant amount of time.

sla07
08-13-2012, 12:54 PM
From my perspective, take it or leave it...when I went to Cancun, I found that the intensity of the sun there was significantly higher than what I was used to in the states. I would highly recommend you take a look at that link that Freebirdmac provided (post #25) to find a safe sunscreen. And even with the base tan that I have, if I go back to Cancun, I would still wear sunscreen and apply frequently any time I was going to be in the sun for a signficant amount of time.

thanks...yea i figured the sun may be a bit stronger there...although we both are born and raised in miami...she just has fair/light skin to begin with...i dont really burn much so im not concerned with me so much as i am her...i will take a look at the link...thanks again :)

Kricket09
08-13-2012, 01:27 PM
im a redhead, i dont use a tanning bed unless im going on vacation somewhere hot in the winter and want a base tan;) but I do like to get a tan outside in the summer. Im just really careful about it and never get a burn like I used to when I was a teen. Id say skip the tanning beds and get some sun outside, everything in moderation. Sometimes I think sunscreen might cause more troubles than we think, although there are definately times when its warranted.

Lunu
08-13-2012, 05:36 PM
Another Australian checking in! It seems most of us have been raised with more caution when it comes to the sun and rightly so given it's strength here.

I'm always surprised by the number of people who tan whenever I visit the States. I barely know anyone these days here who would consider sunbeds or burn in the scorching sun. Theres a very fine line here between getting some vitamin D and damaging your skin. It's mostly tourists on the beaches who end up fried as they dont realise how fast it actually happens. Most of my US family and friends tan a lot though and seem surprised that I don't given the tanned, beach body image of Australia.

Nearly all the women I know in Aus either fake tan or embrace the pale. I fake tan but I'm very conscious of what ingredients I'm putting on my skin and use certified organic products.

Each to their own but Statistics don't lie and I'd rather not put myself at unnecessary risk.

I'd also prefer to not look like leather face before my time :p

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 05:59 PM
Another Australian checking in! It seems most of us have been raised with more caution when it comes to the sun and rightly so given it's strength here.

I'm always surprised by the number of people who tan whenever I visit the States. I barely know anyone these days here who would consider sunbeds or burn in the scorching sun. Theres a very fine line here between getting some vitamin D and damaging your skin. It's mostly tourists on the beaches who end up fried as they dont realise how fast it actually happens. Most of my US family and friends tan a lot though and seem surprised that I don't given the tanned, beach body image of Australia.

Nearly all the women I know in Aus either fake tan or embrace the pale. I fake tan but I'm very conscious of what ingredients I'm putting on my skin and use certified organic products.

Each to their own but Statistics don't lie and I'd rather not put myself at unnecessary risk.

I'd also prefer to not look like leather face before my time :p

Your risk of getting melanoma with tanning is 3/10 of 1-percent. Without tanning it's not zero. Compare that to vitamin D deficiency related diseases.

Miranda
08-13-2012, 06:01 PM
you can supplement with vitamin D in addition to getting regular sun exposure. no need to use a tanning bed.

Lunu
08-13-2012, 06:04 PM
Your risk of getting melanoma with tanning is 3/10 of 1-percent. Without tanning it's not zero. Compare that to vitamin D deficiency related diseases.

It's my understanding that you can get adequate vitamin d intake without damaging sun exposure. I agree that Vitamin D is very important and I personally take capsules to supplement as I don't always see enough sun. This thread is about tanning for colour though which is more about the discussion of sun damage, not benefits?

Re: cancer and the sun, the Australian government have some solid statistics which I can post later (currently on my phone).

Artemis00
08-13-2012, 06:25 PM
Another Australian checking in! It seems most of us have been raised with more caution when it comes to the sun and rightly so given it's strength here.

I'm always surprised by the number of people who tan whenever I visit the States. I barely know anyone these days here who would consider sunbeds or burn in the scorching sun. Theres a very fine line here between getting some vitamin D and damaging your skin. It's mostly tourists on the beaches who end up fried as they dont realise how fast it actually happens. Most of my US family and friends tan a lot though and seem surprised that I don't given the tanned, beach body image of Australia.

Nearly all the women I know in Aus either fake tan or embrace the pale. I fake tan but I'm very conscious of what ingredients I'm putting on my skin and use certified organic products.

Each to their own but Statistics don't lie and I'd rather not put myself at unnecessary risk.

I'd also prefer to not look like leather face before my time :p


I certainly commend you on putting in the effort and being conscious of what products you are fake tanning with. Better to be knowledgeable about it then doing it blindly. And I respect your personal decisions that you make regarding your body and appreciate the same consideration.

My issue is with your comment about statistics. Statistics do lie. I've had many classes over the years regarding statistics where you are taught to basically exclude data for whatever various reasons...Remember that statistics are still controlled by a human. Outliers are removed due to the assumption that they are anomolies (an example of that would be excluding a person in the data pool that has extremely limited sun exposure but has skin cancer). So you never really know how far they take the fudging of the data.

And Freebirdmac also provided an excellent link on how statistics can be manipulate in order to mislead the public. It was an insightful read (post #29).

Lunu
08-13-2012, 06:38 PM
I certainly commend you on putting in the effort and being conscious of what products you are fake tanning with. Better to be knowledgeable about it then doing it blindly. And I respect your personal decisions that you make regarding your body and appreciate the same consideration.

My issue is with your comment about statistics. Statistics do lie. I've had many classes over the years regarding statistics where you are taught to basically exclude data for whatever various reasons...Remember that statistics are still controlled by a human. Outliers are removed due to the assumption that they are anomolies (an example of that would be excluding a person in the data pool that has extremely limited sun exposure but has skin cancer). So you never really know how far they take the fudging of the data.

And Freebirdmac also provided an excellent link on how statistics can be manipulate in order to mislead the public. It was an insightful read (post #29).

Yeah, it wasn't the most sensible statement to make. You'd have to be a bit loopy to believe every statistic in every study published - I'm not about to attempt to start a debate about that. I was specifically referring to the widely used statistics in relation to Skin Cancer and Sun exposure in Australia. Whether someone chooses to believe those or not is their own prerogative I guess.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 06:40 PM
It's my understanding that you can get adequate vitamin d intake without damaging sun exposure. I agree that Vitamin D is very important and I personally take capsules to supplement as I don't always see enough sun. This thread is about tanning for colour though which is more about the discussion of sun damage, not benefits?

Re: cancer and the sun, the Australian government have some solid statistics which I can post later (currently on my phone).

Tanning for color follows the same principles as tanning for vitamin D. You want to be in the sun between 10 and 2 when UVB rays are the strongest and stop when you start turning a bit pink. This maximizes both tanning for color and vitamin D. Over time, you will be able to stay in the sun longer. The same holds with tanning beds at the same UVA/UVB ratio.

Post up your Australian stats but pretty much all quoted stats come from the same study. You also have to be careful of incident reports as screening has made it seem as if melanoma were on some meteoric rise which is not the case. It's also good to look at office workers versus outdoor workers. Guess which group has more problems.

While popping a D3 pill is far better than nothing, as usual, it's always better to get it the way nature intended. The sun is the best way. Whole foods like eggs, organ meats, animal fat, and cod liver oil are better than pills.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 06:45 PM
Yeah, it wasn't the most sensible statement to make. You'd have to be a bit loopy to believe every statistic in every study published - I'm not about to attempt to start a debate about that. I was specifically referring to the widely used statistics in relation to Skin Cancer and Sun exposure in Australia. Whether someone chooses to believe those or not is their own prerogative I guess.

See, that's the problem and I am trying to open your eyes. The much touted statistics that are thrown around like candy are twisted to sell more products and services. When I was a kid 40 some years ago we lived outside. Sunscreens sucked. People tanned with baby oil. Guess what? We're not leathery prunes dying of skin cancer. Tanning in low to no UVB beds and way overdoing it is definitely not good. But, there are almost as many people with skin cancers who never tanned in the sun or in beds.

Lunu
08-13-2012, 06:50 PM
Tanning for color follows the same principles as tanning for vitamin D. You want to be in the sun between 10 and 2 when UVB rays are the strongest and stop when you start turning a bit pink. This maximizes both tanning for color and vitamin D. Over time, you will be able to stay in the sun longer. The same holds with tanning beds at the same UVA/UVB ratio.

Post up your Australian stats but pretty much all quoted stats come from the same study. You also have to be careful of incident reports as screening has made it seem as if melanoma were on some meteoric rise which is not the case. It's also good to look at office workers versus outdoor workers. Guess which group has more problems.

While popping a D3 pill is far better than nothing, as usual, it's always better to get it the way nature intended. The sun is the best way. Whole foods like eggs, organ meats, animal fat, and cod liver oil are better than pills.

This website has a lot of the information I'm referring to, some of which was posted earlier in the thread: http://www.sunsmart.com.au/skin_cancer

I have no intention of forcing my opinions onto others for the record - was simply giving the OP my thoughts and opinions about her initial question.

Miranda
08-13-2012, 06:55 PM
it's always better to get it the way nature intended.

better for what? :confused:

people take fish oil supplements and protein powder, too, for example. apart from a lot of things that are completely 'unnatural'.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 07:09 PM
This website has a lot of the information I'm referring to, some of which was posted earlier in the thread: http://www.sunsmart.com.au/skin_cancer

I have no intention of forcing my opinions onto others for the record - was simply giving the OP my thoughts and opinions about her initial question.

Yep. They are using WHO statistics for indoor tanning. Only not reporting the 3/10 of 1 percent stat. Just like everyone else.

There are several medical conditions where doctors prescribe tanning. Indoor if that's the only viable way. I have psoriasis. Popping a pill helps, but tanning works far better. The same is true for MS patients. Pills are better than nothing, but the overall effect is not the same. We were made to create our own vitamin D via UVB through the skin. Something is lost by ingestion of the vitamin.

Lunu
08-13-2012, 07:35 PM
Yep. They are using WHO statistics for indoor tanning. Only not reporting the 3/10 of 1 percent stat. Just like everyone else.

There are several medical conditions where doctors prescribe tanning. Indoor if that's the only viable way. I have psoriasis. Popping a pill helps, but tanning works far better. The same is true for MS patients. Pills are better than nothing, but the overall effect is not the same. We were made to create our own vitamin D via UVB through the skin. Something is lost by ingestion of the vitamin.

You keep referring to illness where the benefits may outweigh the risk of being in the sun. Do the benefits of simply being brown outweigh that risk? That's up to each individual to decide. The risk of cancer doesn't have to be a large one in order for people to care about it.

Moving away from statistics, a guy I know used to be a pool cleaner and is currently having to have a possibly cancerous mole removed from the back of his head. Another friend recently had half of his ear removed due to melanoma, while another has just had over 14 pre-cancerous moles removed from her legs and is nervously waiting on the results of some from her chest. Is it worth risking any of that for being brown? Not to me personally. Do I think it a good idea to monitor your sun exposure to absorb Vit D while avoiding damage to skin? Definitely.

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 07:53 PM
You keep referring to illness where the benefits may outweigh the risk of being in the sun. Do the benefits of simply being brown outweigh that risk? That's up to each individual to decide. The risk of cancer doesn't have to be a large one in order for people to care about it.

Moving away from statistics, a guy I know used to be a pool cleaner and is currently having to have a possibly cancerous mole removed from the back of his head. Another friend recently had half of his ear removed due to melanoma, while another has just had over 14 pre-cancerous moles removed from her legs and is nervously waiting on the results of some from her chest. Is it worth risking any of that for being brown? Not to me personally. Do I think it a good idea to monitor your sun exposure to absorb Vit D while avoiding damage to skin? Definitely.

Possibly cancerous and precancerous are, not being flippant, not cancer. You are assuming due to fear tactics that sun exposure is responsible for all skin cancers. Not so. Dermatologists are whipping off moles like crazy. I've had 11 removed myself. It's seriously out of control.

Benefits outweighing risks? That's true for a multitude of health issues including heart disease and of all things, skin cancer! Kids are not outside without sunscreen like they used to be. Heck, not outside nearly like they used to be. Add to that the over abundance of dermatological caution and you got what seems to be a big yellow evil thing in the sky. Don't you wonder why my generation didn't suffer so in our youth?

Lunu
08-13-2012, 07:56 PM
Possibly cancerous and precancerous are, not being flippant, not cancer. You are assuming due to fear tactics that sun exposure is responsible for all skin cancers. Not so. Dermatologists are whipping off moles like crazy. I've had 11 removed myself. It's seriously out of control.

Benefits outweighing risks? That's true for a multitude of health issues including heart disease and of all things, skin cancer! Kids are not outside without sunscreen like they used to be. Heck, not outside nearly like they used to be. Add to that the over abundance of dermatological caution and you got what seems to be a big yellow evil thing in the sky. Don't you wonder why my generation didn't suffer so in our youth?

I think there's a lot more wrong with the current generation of youth than being fearful of the sun ;)

Pre-cancerous or not, I'd rather not go through any of that so will simply slip, slop, slap. I'll leave it there as I feel like we're just going to go round in circles!

freebirdmac
08-13-2012, 08:04 PM
I think there's a lot more wrong with the current generation of youth than being fearful of the sun ;)

Pre-cancerous or not, I'd rather not go through any of that so will simply slip, slop, slap. I'll leave it there as I feel like we're just going to go round in circles!

It is circular. Unfortunately there are a lot of health issues like this where we have been fed a bunch of bull. You should see me on my breast cancer soap box :)

Botika
08-13-2012, 08:39 PM
I guess in the end all sun exposure adds up to cause damage in to your skin. If you are somewhere with harsh summers like Australia then I'm not sure that you would want to compond the issue with solarium use. Clearly different studies from different parts of the world are going to show different risks. In Australia it's considered a serious enough issue that some states are banning solariums outright from 2014.

The flip side are reports like this from The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency that give these headline numbers....

"There is compelling evidence that individuals who use artificial indoor tanning devices will increase their risk of skin cancer. Results from a meta-analysis of 21 studies investigating the association between solarium use and risk of skin cancer show an increased risk for developing melanoma (by 22%) and squamous cell carcinoma (by 78%), an increased risk of melanoma for first users under 35 years (by 98%) and for women (by 71%)." http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rhc/QIMR_solaria07.pdf

Everyone needs to make their own decision because it's their body and they will need to live with any protential repercussions. Clearly there is conflicting information though, so I think it's important to be presented with the information from both sides. I've used solariums before but have decided I would rather not take the risk anymore... regardless of how big or small the risk actually is.

freebirdmac
08-14-2012, 03:45 AM
I guess in the end all sun exposure adds up to cause damage in to your skin. If you are somewhere with harsh summers like Australia then I'm not sure that you would want to compond the issue with solarium use. Clearly different studies from different parts of the world are going to show different risks. In Australia it's considered a serious enough issue that some states are banning solariums outright from 2014.

The flip side are reports like this from The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency that give these headline numbers....

"There is compelling evidence that individuals who use artificial indoor tanning devices will increase their risk of skin cancer. Results from a meta-analysis of 21 studies investigating the association between solarium use and risk of skin cancer show an increased risk for developing melanoma (by 22%) and squamous cell carcinoma (by 78%), an increased risk of melanoma for first users under 35 years (by 98%) and for women (by 71%)." http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rhc/QIMR_solaria07.pdf

Everyone needs to make their own decision because it's their body and they will need to live with any protential repercussions. Clearly there is conflicting information though, so I think it's important to be presented with the information from both sides. I've used solariums before but have decided I would rather not take the risk anymore... regardless of how big or small the risk actually is.

The report you cite also uses the WHO report. I'm telling you guys, everything you read comes from the same WHO report.

It does not matter where you live. The only difference is the amount of time it takes in the sun to get to that slightly pink stage.

Kricket09
08-14-2012, 08:37 AM
Im with FBM on this one, I think in the end it all comes down to the almight dollar and keeping us "afraid" and "sick" is one way to get that $. And while I dont promote the use of tanning beds I see nothing at all wrong with getting some sun (in moderation) if youre smart about it and dont stay out there all day and scorch yourself. I get a tan every summer , I have SAD because here in Canada we seriously only see that sun for a couple of months a year so you can bet im soakin it up! On a side note, I have a friend dying from melanoma. A spot on the bottom of his foot has turned into brain,liver,bone,lymph cancer. It absolutelly had nothing to do with sun exposure as I said we live in darkness most of the year and he has worked in a office the last 20 yrs (40yrs old!). It can happen to anybody.

sweetkissees918
08-14-2012, 03:34 PM
I do but not often. I mean if your in there all the time, i can see that being harmful. But once in a great while get a little color, hasn't done anything to me.

Lunu
08-15-2012, 01:11 AM
Not trying to hijack thread, but do you ladies who are very skin-conscious put sunscreen allover your exposed areas every day, just to run errands, go to work, etc.? I do not, but I am wondering if I'm doing myself a huge disservice when I take a look at myself at 30, in spite hardly ever "laying out" or using tanning beds...

There's an SPF in my face moisturiser but I don't wear sunscreen on other parts of my body on a day to day basis, unless I know I'm going to be out in the sun for awhile!

Botika
08-15-2012, 02:09 AM
I apply sunscreen to my face, neck and tops of my hands every morning but I don't reapply during the day. These are obviously the areas that get the most exposure day to day and age the quickest. :)

I only wear sunscreen on other parts of my body if I'm going to be in the sun for a prolonged period (swimming, sport etc).

prudenceclaire
08-15-2012, 02:54 AM
I occasionally use tanning beds. I'm highly aware of the dangers of skin cancer because I have plenty of moles and I'm fair.

If you're going to take the risk, do it in a calculated way. I get my moles checked every six months. I've been tanning on and off since I was 17 and for a good five year period I went every single week and never once got sunburnt. When I'm not tanning I have to be extremely careful in the sun because I burn easily.

A benefit from tanning that I never heard about previously is that it clears up my eczema which in summer is excruciatingly painful and itchy (and ugly), and requires a strong cortisone cream only available by prescription. When I tan, it's as though I don't even have eczema.

Lastly, I'm 31 and frequently get mistaken for someone in their early twenties. People are always shocked when I tell them how old I am.

Ultimately the smartest choice is not to use tanning beds, but if you are going to go ahead with it, be smart and be careful.

shirun
08-15-2012, 05:32 AM
Nope. I don't really care about tanning. Besides, despite being a redhead I spend a lot of time outdoors so I end up getting quite tanned anyway. Nothing extreme but at least I don't look like an albino.