Study: Tanning beds and UV radiation as deadly as arsenic, must...

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.

[SRM LRM]

The headline is more than a little misleading. Yes, exposure to UV radiation, over time, increases the risk of skin cancers. The key is "over time" Equating that to arsenic and mustard gas is ridiculous.(Mustard gas is an oily blistering agent that can easily kill with a single exposure, and the blisters typically leave victims scarred for life with even small exposures. Arsenic is a heavy metal. Arsenic causes systemic organ failure. See? Not the same.)

Second point: "The classification of tanning beds as carcinogenic was disputed by Kathy Banks, chief executive of The Sunbed Association, a European trade association of tanning bed makers and operators." If you substitute 'tobacco' for 'tanning beds' and 'The Tobacco Institute' for 'The Sunbed Association', it's exactly the same tactic that was used to try and convince people that tobacco use didn't cause lung/throat/oral cancers. Technically, she is correct; there is no scientific proof that "responsible" tanning causes skin cancer. Of course, this is because it would require having a control and experimental group, with the intention of causing cancers in the experimental group. To 'prove' it to the standard that she sets you would have to run human trials, which no responsible group would ever do. Failing that, it *has* been demonstrated that exposure to large amounts of UV radiation, over time, significantly increases the risks of skin cancers. Seriously, do we really need to 'prove' it before we can fairly say that it's an unhealthily risky activity?

[Crook County]

I don't care what they say about tanning beds. They must stay. I like my strippers nice and bronze.

[meh]

SRM LRM wrote:

The headline is more than a little misleading. Yes, exposure to UV radiation, over time, increases the risk of skin cancers. The key is "over time" Equating that to arsenic and mustard gas is ridiculous.(Mustard gas is an oily blistering agent that can easily kill with a single exposure, and the blisters typically leave victims scarred for life with even small exposures. Arsenic is a heavy metal. Arsenic causes systemic organ failure. See? Not the same.)
Second point: "The classification of tanning beds as carcinogenic was disputed by Kathy Banks, chief executive of The Sunbed Association, a European trade association of tanning bed makers and operators." If you substitute 'tobacco' for 'tanning beds' and 'The Tobacco Institute' for 'The Sunbed Association', it's exactly the same tactic that was used to try and convince people that tobacco use didn't cause lung/throat/oral cancers. Technically, she is correct; there is no scientific proof that "responsible" tanning causes skin cancer. Of course, this is because it would require having a control and experimental group, with the intention of causing cancers in the experimental group. To 'prove' it to the standard that she sets you would have to run human trials, which no responsible group would ever do. Failing that, it *has* been demonstrated that exposure to large amounts of UV radiation, over time, significantly increases the risks of skin cancers. Seriously, do we really need to 'prove' it before we can fairly say that it's an unhealthily risky activity?

yep. all good points. keep in mind, it's an associated press story written off the "news" that "international cancer experts have moved tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation into the top cancer risk category." in other words, the AP had no choice but to write this story...it's not based on their own investigative journalism.

translation: it's filler.

[Cicero Unga]

Please just go outside and let the Sun do your tanning for you. It's much more healthy.

[Tan away]

those who use tanning beds are the same knuckleheads who text while driving. let em' burn if that's what they want. thin the herd.

[Arrest Obama]

Tan away wrote:

those who use tanning beds are the same knuckleheads who text while driving. let em' burn if that's what they want. thin the herd.

Its all about looks isnt it, agree 100 percent on thinning the herd. Then all the Mother Thresa's out there wouldnt agree

[Web Spider]

SRM LRM wrote:

The headline is more than a little misleading. Yes, exposure to UV radiation, over time, increases the risk of skin cancers. The key is "over time" Equating that to arsenic and mustard gas is ridiculous.(Mustard gas is an oily blistering agent that can easily kill with a single exposure, and the blisters typically leave victims scarred for life with even small exposures. Arsenic is a heavy metal. Arsenic causes systemic organ failure. See? Not the same.)
Second point: "The classification of tanning beds as carcinogenic was disputed by Kathy Banks, chief executive of The Sunbed Association, a European trade association of tanning bed makers and operators." If you substitute 'tobacco' for 'tanning beds' and 'The Tobacco Institute' for 'The Sunbed Association', it's exactly the same tactic that was used to try and convince people that tobacco use didn't cause lung/throat/oral cancers. Technically, she is correct; there is no scientific proof that "responsible" tanning causes skin cancer. Of course, this is because it would require having a control and experimental group, with the intention of causing cancers in the experimental group. To 'prove' it to the standard that she sets you would have to run human trials, which no responsible group would ever do. Failing that, it *has* been demonstrated that exposure to large amounts of UV radiation, over time, significantly increases the risks of skin cancers. Seriously, do we really need to 'prove' it before we can fairly say that it's an unhealthily risky activity?

Radiation can kill

[eye]

quick chicago, ban their use indoors and within 20 feet from a doorway!!!

[Lyndall Caldwell]

Forms of fluoride added to drinking water are between lead and arsenic in toxicity but there seems to be some kind of widespread media conspiracy to ignore this.

[Danno]

This will be the next nanny-state initiative.

[In my day]

In my day we didn't have fancy cancer machines like these spoiled young whippersnappers got now. Back then, you had to make a special trip to Ma Kettle's general store, where she had limited quantities of products designed to make your skin cells reproduce at supersonic speed. It took time, but eventually our skin would get good 'n crusty. Kids today just don't have patience no more!

[Ben Dover]

You can't be very smart if you use a tanning bed or sit in the sun for excessive ours. Even if you don't get cancer, your skin will eventually look like a dried up prune. Tanning beds are for chicks who attend junior college and hang out at dance bars.

[Ben Dover]

Arrest Obama wrote:

<quoted text>Its all about looks isnt it, agree 100 percent on thinning the herd. Then all the Mother Thresa's out there wouldnt agree

Dude, it would be nice if there 80% less people on the planet, but that's a bit harsh.

[Wrinkled Corporate broad]

This finding is ridiculous. Having a tan, especially derived from a tanning booth, gives one a healthy APPEARANCE. And having a having a healthy APPEARANCE means, by definition, that one is HEALTHY. You can't argue with that kind of iron-clad, Vulcan logic.
Sincerely,
Kathy Banks
Chief Executive and Primary Shareholder
The Sunbed Association

[Florida Jim]

This is how government works 25 years after introducing tanning beds the government says they are bad for you.
This will be government Health Care 25 years from now we will be saying remember when you could choose your own Doctor and get service within two days!
25 years from now we will be saying remember that stupid Al Gore and his silly global warming scare!
Wake up before our beloved country is stolen from us and given to ACORN and SEIU types!

[Don RICO]

>>>>> chocolate skin!!!!!

[JTO]

Lyndall Caldwell wrote:

Forms of fluoride added to drinking water are between lead and arsenic in toxicity but there seems to be some kind of widespread media conspiracy to ignore this.

You're thinking of flourine, which is extremely dangerous and reactive. And yes, there are forms of flouride which are very toxic, but they are not used to treat drinking water. There are also extremely hazardous forms of chloride that are poisonous in minute amounts. However, we use a few of them in large amounts to season and preserve our food (sodium and potassium being the most common).

Since you're talking dangerous chemicals, regular coffee contains several essential oils and compounds, of which a single drop would kill a human. However, in moderation, coffee is delicious and healthy.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just ignorance.

[U R We Todd Did]

Tan away wrote:

those who use tanning beds are the same knuckleheads who text while driving. let em' burn if that's what they want. thin the herd.

Are they driving those killer SUVs too? Sound like you can't get laid.

[Hiram Idtent]

Well, the chimney sweeps have no choice, that's their job. How can they prevent the cancer?

[Winona]

I have no problems with tanning beds or "laying out" (at least that's what they called it when I was growing up)- if you want to slowly kill yourself in a way that does not affect me what-so-ever, then go for it!!