anyone does indoor tanning?

[l1festyle]

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but to tell somebody they are stupid for making their own decision is a little ridiculous in my opinion.

I agree to

I cannot believe the amount of people ITT who would rather have skin cancer than be their natural colors.

And not

tell somebody they are stupid for making their own decision

:-)

[SultanaK]

What?

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but to tell somebody they are stupid for making their own decision is a little ridiculous in my opinion.

Sure, they are. However, some decisions can still be more stupid than others.

Nothing personal, luckynumber13as. I've just never understood the appeal given that strenuous tanning is starkly correlated to skin cancer. This information is everywhere, and there are folks who still swear by it. Baffles me.

[Wyomann]

Sure, they are. However, some decisions can still be more stupid than others.

Nothing personal, luckynumber13as. I've just never understood the appeal given that strenuous tanning is starkly correlated to skin cancer. This information is everywhere, and there are folks who still swear by it. Baffles me.

She doesn't want people to compete with her and her golden skin color. I actually find pasty white women attractive, especially with dark hair, like a vampire look. Maybe it's cause I know they want to suck, blood...

I'm 1/4 native american, but fairly white. In Cherokee they call me "E qua U ne gv A yv wi ya" it means The Great White Indian.

[SultanaK]

She doesn't want people to compete with her and her golden skin color. I actually find pasty white women attractive, especially with dark hair, like a vampire look. Maybe it's cause I know they want to suck, blood...

I'm 1/4 native american, but fairly white. In Cherokee they call me "E qua U ne gv A yv wi ya" it means The Great White Indian.

U w0t mate? That's not what my aunties and mother tell me. Need to go buy some skin bleaching products to make them happy, but I'm pretty happy with my skin color and other people should be, too. Fair skinned people belong with their naturally fair skin, and darker skinned people belong with their naturally darker skin.

You don't look even remotely Native, even features-wise. I bet you qualify as an URM.

[rockangel]

She doesn't want people to compete with her and her golden skin color. I actually find pasty white women attractive, especially with dark hair, like a vampire look. Maybe it's cause I know they want to suck, blood...

I'm 1/4 native american, but fairly white. In Cherokee they call me "E qua U ne gv A yv wi ya" it means The Great White Indian.

Well hello there......



but srsly, my blond hair blue eyed white baby is registered seminole, so sometimes you cant tell.

either way, i dont tan. i dont care if people want to give themselves skin cancer and look like leather.

[kaleida]

Debating whether or not to get involved in this thread... lol

I use tanning booths 1-2 times a week for vitamin D and seasonal affective disorder. I spent many hours researching this and reading arguments on both sides before I decided to do it... it's an interesting thing to read about if you have some time.

I read about it and came to the conclusion that small, regular, non-burning UV exposure is healthier than not enough UV exposure (and also healthier than too much UV exposure). How much UV is healthy... depends on your skin type.

It helps me a lot with seasonal affective disorder. I get fewer colds and have a lot more energy compared to years when I didn't tan. It gives me a mood boost and energy boost that I don't get from vitamin D pills so I suspect more going on besides just vitamin D.

I own a vitamin D meter and used it to measure how much vitamin D I get from the sun on a typical day - nowhere near enough because I work indoors. Even though my desk is right next to a window, glass blocks UVB light, which is the type of light that causes vitamin D production. In the tanning booth I get about 1500 IUs twice a week.

[sgtpeppers]

Already had precancerous skin cells removed. Don't even tan.

Luck o' the Irish.

But I was a lifeguard/swim instructor from 15-18. I did use sunscreen though.

[ilovethe80s]

Debating whether or not to get involved in this thread... lol

I use tanning booths 1-2 times a week for vitamin D and seasonal affective disorder. I spent many hours researching this and reading arguments on both sides before I decided to do it... it's an interesting thing to read about if you have some time.

I read about it and came to the conclusion that small, regular, non-burning UV exposure is healthier than not enough UV exposure (and also healthier than too much UV exposure). How much UV is healthy... depends on your skin type.

It helps me a lot with seasonal affective disorder. I get fewer colds and have a lot more energy compared to years when I didn't tan. It gives me a mood boost and energy boost that I don't get from vitamin D pills so I suspect more going on besides just vitamin D.

I own a vitamin D meter and used it to measure how much vitamin D I get from the sun on a typical day - nowhere near enough because I work indoors. Even though my desk is right next to a window, glass blocks UVB light, which is the type of light that causes vitamin D production. In the tanning booth I get about 1500 IUs twice a week.

very interesting, I owe you reps I was thinking of doing a few indoor tans this winter for this very reason (horrid winter blues). I'm Jamaican so I've never burned, but was planning putting a large brimmed spf rated hat over my face and just tanning my body, feeling the warmth for a bit. Glad to hear it helps you, I think I will give it a shot this winter.

[aintevenmad]

I cannot believe the amount of people ITT who would rather have skin cancer than be their natural colors. Holy fuk.

Your guys' stupidity baffles me - and I mean this in the nicest way possible.

You know what the nicest way possible to word your post would have been?

To not post it.

I suppose if anyone starts a thread about alcohol you're going to post a similar resopnse? No? Okay then shut up and go away.

And I mean that in the meanest way possible.

[kaleida]

You know what the nicest way possible to word your post would have been?

To not post it.

I suppose if anyone starts a thread about alcohol you're going to post a similar resopnse? No? Okay then shut up and go away.

And I mean that in the meanest way possible.

To be fair to sultana, the anti-tanning message is the only widely advertised side of it .... cosmetics companies have a vested interest in making everyone think that daily SPF is a basic necessity for everyone. So that's the side that the typical person is likely to hear - unless they go digging on their own.

I was also anti-sunlight and anti-tanning for a long time, then stumbled across a nutrition blog that said regular sunshine had health benefits...which sounded strange to me at first but it gave me the idea to go and read more on my own.

[kaleida]

PS. Skin type is very important ...how much UV is "too much" depends on your skin type... some people are skin type I, genetically not capable of producing melanin and they are at the highest risk for skin cancer. they also can produce vitamin D with extremely small amounts of UV light. At the other end of the scale, dark-skinned people have the lowest risk for skin cancer and but they are more at risk for vitamin D deficiency because it takes them longer to produce vitamin D from UV light. I am in the middle, skin type III...pale skin but darker hair and eyes.

http://dermatology.about.com/od/cosm...itzpatrick.htm

there's a frequently-quoted study that says "indoor tanners have a 70% higher risk of skin cancer"....that study did not take skin type into account. When skin type is taken into account, the risk of skin cancer is very similar between people who tan indoors and people who don't. I can dig up that reference later if anyone is interested ...right now I'm at work and probably shouldn't be miscing...lol

[conj916]

Tan once a month brah checkin in...... works mighty for my excema

[kaleida]

very interesting, I owe you reps I was thinking of doing a few indoor tans this winter for this very reason (horrid winter blues). I'm Jamaican so I've never burned, but was planning putting a large brimmed spf rated hat over my face and just tanning my body, feeling the warmth for a bit. Glad to hear it helps you, I think I will give it a shot this winter.

just make sure you use the longer bulbs (the ones shaped like fluorescent lights) - those are the ones that have a mix of UVA and UVB, and vitamin D production requires UVB

The high-pressure bulbs (the square purple ones) are 100% UVA, which is not useful if you want vitamin D...and I'm a dork so I tested high pressure bulbs with my vitamin D meter....yep, zero IUs per minute

[Orexis]

I use tanning booths 1-2 times a week for vitamin D and seasonal affective disorder. I spent many hours researching this and reading arguments on both sides before I decided to do it... it's an interesting thing to read about if you have some time.

I read about it and came to the conclusion that small, regular, non-burning UV exposure is healthier than not enough UV exposure (and also healthier than too much UV exposure). How much UV is healthy... depends on your skin type.

It gives me a mood boost and energy boost that I don't get from vitamin D pills so I suspect more going on besides just vitamin D.

Pretty much everything kaleida has said.

It's all personal preference and beliefs -- even though i live in south Florida, I work indoors, and miss pretty much all of the sunlight hours, so I tan 1-2x a week. I'm irish and northern european so naturally fair skinned, but it takes me much longer to burn than it used to, because my vitamin D level is up from both the tan and supplementation. I agree that there's a lot of good info around about sunlight (however you get it) and overall health.

It's also my opinion that the crazy chemical lotions are the bigger hidden problem, but meh. Also to whoever wasn't using goggles at least... yikes. Please get some, they're under $5. Some form of moisturization does help though, for both skin health and it does more than wearing nothing.

[Artemis00]

You know what the nicest way possible to word your post would have been?

To not post it.

I suppose if anyone starts a thread about alcohol you're going to post a similar resopnse? No? Okay then shut up and go away.

And I mean that in the meanest way possible.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

And love that you didn't sugar coat it by saying you meant it in the nicest way possible.

[Curreal]

I don't tan as often as I used to but when I do .. I do some quick sessions like 45 mins,1 hour break then again 45 mins under the sun.

[aintevenmad]

To be fair to sultana, the anti-tanning message is the only widely advertised side of it .... cosmetics companies have a vested interest in making everyone think that daily SPF is a basic necessity for everyone. So that's the side that the typical person is likely to hear - unless they go digging on their own.

I was also anti-sunlight and anti-tanning for a long time, then stumbled across a nutrition blog that said regular sunshine had health benefits...which sounded strange to me at first but it gave me the idea to go and read more on my own.

Ohdar1ing also asked op to reconsider. I certainly didn't flame her. Sultanas response was both ignorant and passive aggressive. Bit like "oh I'm not racist but...". If youre act like an arsehole, then either own it, or don't act like one.

The benefits of tanning are many. There are reasons the Scandinavian countries have such high suicide rates. The sun is good for us, but we phucked up the ozone layer. Tanning salons provide a controlled environment independent of that.

Tanning helps my mood too. It got rid of my boyfriends bacne forever.

[sonti]

I don't & I won't (for the same reason most others don't). But I have to ask - I have a wedding at the end of the month (just a guest) and I thought of doing a spray tan. Should I do a test first or just do it? It's $ but I would really like to. Do you guys have experience?? I'm very pale/green eyes/freckles etc.

[SultanaK]

You know what the nicest way possible to word your post would have been?

To not post it.

I suppose if anyone starts a thread about alcohol you're going to post a similar resopnse? No? Okay then shut up and go away.

And I mean that in the meanest way possible.

With the amount of sun damage preventiion initiative out there these days, it just seems silly to me for people to willingly put themselves in harm's way.

My post was toward excessive tanning (ex: keeping it up during winter months). It's a little different from having acquired a natural glow, if you will, from just being outside here and there because, as you've said, the sun is an important part of humans' well-being (both physical and psychological).

I'll take back some of what I said because, admittedly, it seems the separation line between healthy and excessive deteriorates exponentially once one has delved into the trend.

If someone were to post a thread about alcohol, I'd probably post something similar calling people who choose to drive home after having had a lot to drink stupid. I don't see a reason to sugarcoat things that are already widely accepted in society. The odds of them not knowing about the high risks aren't likely, and there are readily available ways to get home apart from driving oneself.

I know you tan and so does the other chick, so I apologize if you two took it personally. Don't. We don't even know each other, lol. Once in a blue moon, I'll post an opinion of less than eloquent stature and this was one of those times.

[aintevenmad]

With the amount of sun damage preventiion initiative out there these days, it just seems silly to me for people to willingly put themselves in harm's way.

My post was toward excessive tanning (ex: keeping it up during winter months). It's a little different from having acquired a natural glow, if you will, from just being outside here and there because, as you've said, the sun is an important part of humans' well-being (both physical and psychological).

I'll take back some of what I said because, admittedly, it seems the separation line between healthy and excessive deteriorates exponentially once one has delved into the trend.

If someone were to post a thread about alcohol, I'd probably post something similar calling people who choose to drive home after having had a lot to drink stupid. I don't see a reason to sugarcoat things that are already widely accepted in society. The odds of them not knowing about the high risks aren't likely, and there are readily available ways to get home apart from driving oneself.

I know you tan and so does the other chick, so I apologize if you two took it personally. Don't. We don't even know each other, lol. Once in a blue moon, I'll post an opinion of less than eloquent stature and this was one of those times.

There is nothing wrong with winter tanning. SAD is a real thing. So is psoriasis, and they can both get worse in winter.

Tanning and drinkdriving are not comparable. Tanning and drinking, period, are. And as far as I'm aware, no one has ever left a tanning salon and beaten someone up for looking at them funny. Nor has anyone ever suffered as a result of being exposed to someones solarium glow

Most people don't get enough sun because we're in an office for most of the day. We live a wholly unnatural lifestyle. To treat tanning like some deadly sin is nuts.

[kaleida]

I think we all mean well... everyone makes mistakes in wording sometimes

mmm....I don't think it's excessive to use a tanning booth year-round ... winter is when it helps me the most I live at a latitude where the sun isn't high enough in the sky to allow vitamin D production between November and March. I read somewhere that if the sun is lower than 45 degrees in the sky then there is no vitamin D production (basically if your shadow is as tall as you are or taller).

me in a winter without tanning: emotionally depressed, tired, needing 10+ hours of sleep every night, catching every cold that goes around
me in a winter with tanning: just a little bit tired and looking forward to spring, needing 8 hours of sleep a night, and fine other than that ... not usually getting sick even when my coworkers have colds

My vitamin D meter says something piddling like 3 IUs per minute at noon on a sunny day in direct sunlight in the winter. (compared to summer, when I get a reading like 45 IUs per minute in the same conditions)

[SultanaK]

There is nothing wrong with winter tanning. SAD is a real thing. So is psoriasis, and they can both get worse in winter.

Tanning and drinkdriving are not comparable. Tanning and drinking, period, are. And as far as I'm aware, no one has ever left a tanning salon and beaten someone up for looking at them funny. Nor has anyone ever suffered as a result of being exposed to someones solarium glow

Most people don't get enough sun because we're in an office for most of the day. We live a wholly unnatural lifestyle. To treat tanning like some deadly sin is nuts.

Welllll, the long term effects of long term tanning are deadly! So it isn't completely bizarre to compare it to alcohol. Sometimes, I get the feeling the reason people OD on it is because the negatives aren't apparent immediately like in most cases involving alcohol. However, I suppose it's hard to pin when to draw the line when it provides teh good feels.

I still think people look the best in their natural colors with the exception of 1-2 shades standard deviation.

[kaleida]

When you hear that statistic "indoor tanners are 75% more likely to get skin cancer" they're quoting a study that was fundamentally flawed because it didn't take skin type into account. For most skin types, the risk of skin cancer is pretty much identical between people who tan and people who don't.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/...010+MW20100315

A new study published in the peer-reviewed journal
"Dermato-Endocrinology" shows that there is no statistically significant
connection between sunbeds and melanoma in those who can develop suntans
(skin type II-VI), with increased risk centered only on those whose skin
is so fair it cannot tan (skin type I).

William B. Grant, PhD, a former NASA atmospheric research scientist and
founder of SUNARC, Sunlight, Nutrition and Health Research Center
(SUNARC), re-examined the same epidemiological data used by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) group from their
findings in 2007 titled, "The association of use of sunbeds with
cutaneous malignant melanoma and other skin cancers: a systematic
review." Grant's study strongly challenges this review and argues it is
both flawed and cannot be used as the basis for U.S. health policy.

The IARC review originally claimed a 15% increased risk of melanoma for
ever use of sunbeds and a 75% increased risk in melanoma for respondents
who had ever used or first used a tanning bed prior to age 35. Grant's
findings show that with the removal of those with skin type I who possess
the greatest genetic risk of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM), there
fails to be any statistically significant link between ever use of indoor
tanning facilities and CMM.

Cosmetics companies will spend a ton of money getting the anti-UV message out, but they won't tell you that their marketing is based on a flawed study. Why would they? lol...no one would buy their SPF foundation if people thought a little bit of regular sunlight was healthy

[aintevenmad]

When you hear that statistic "indoor tanners are 75% more likely to get skin cancer" they're quoting a study that was fundamentally flawed because it didn't take skin type into account. For most skin types, the risk of skin cancer is pretty much identical between people who tan and people who don't.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/...010+MW20100315



Cosmetics companies will spend a ton of money getting the anti-UV message out, but they won't tell you that their marketing is based on a flawed study. Why would they? lol...no one would buy their SPF foundation if people thought a little bit of regular sunlight was healthy

or their bronzer.

There's an ad here about the dangers of skin cancer. It's something like "Our brother never went tanning, always wore a tshirt and sunscreen when surfing, and still got skin cancer. Don't tan!". My response is ".....". The whole family is in the ad and they are all pale, freckly, prone to sunspots types- the type that a reputable salon would not allow to use their services.

The problem is geographical displacement- this family lives in Australia, where the weather isn't suited for their genetics.

[l1festyle]

I am thinking of giving it a try starting next month bc im pretty pale. Could any of you resoond to this thread and I can pm and share info on lotions, goggles, safety? Ty

http://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/video?clipI...ylistPageNum=1

Here's a story that may make you wants rethink..

[penny0527]

I cannot believe that with the amount of research that has been done to prove that indoor tanning is linked to skin cancer that people still do it. Get outside. Real sun in moderation is even good for you. Tanning indoors is not at all good for you.

There are so many options so you do not have to use tanning beds. There is natural sun, tanning lotions, spray tans. Use the alternatives.

[kaleida]

I cannot believe that with the amount of research that has been done to prove that indoor tanning is linked to skin cancer that people still do it. Get outside. Real sun in moderation is even good for you. Tanning indoors is not at all good for you.

There are so many options so you do not have to use tanning beds. There is natural sun, tanning lotions, spray tans. Use the alternatives.

See post #55 above ...the study that everyone quotes about increased risk was flawed because it didn't take skin type into account.

And the skin type that does have increased risk if they tan indoors (skin type I) should definitely not be tanning outside in the sun as an alternative - it's best for skin type I to avoid all forms of tanning, indoors and out

[penny0527]

See post #55 above ...the study that everyone quotes about increased risk was flawed because it didn't take skin type into account.

And the skin type that does have increased risk if they tan indoors (skin type I) should definitely not be tanning outside in the sun as an alternative - it's best for skin type I to avoid all forms of tanning, indoors and out

I did not quote that study?

I don't think that getting a little bit of sun is going to be detrimental. Tan is probably a matter of opinion. When I "tan" I get a little less pasty white. Going super dark is too risky in my mind.

Anyone who has that skin tone is not going to tan anyway. They just get red. For them to tan is not going to happen.

[kaleida]

I did not quote that study?

I don't think that getting a little bit of sun is going to be detrimental. Tan is probably a matter of opinion. When I "tan" I get a little less pasty white. Going super dark is too risky in my mind.

Anyone who has that skin tone is not going to tan anyway. They just get red. For them to tan is not going to happen.

which study were you quoting?

[penny0527]

which study were you quoting?

Www.cancer.gov

Now I'm off to "tan" I kid I kid