More

Tougher Cancer Warning On Tanning Beds Debated By FDA

LAURAN NEERGAARD   01/18/10 09:31 PM ET   AP

Tanning Bed

WASHINGTON — Just as millions head to tanning beds to prepare for spring break, the Food and Drug Administration will be debating how to toughen warnings that those sunlamps pose a cancer risk. Yes, sunburns are particularly dangerous. But there's increasing scientific consensus that there's no such thing as a safe tan, either.

This is a message that Katie Donnar, 18, dismissed until a year ago when, preparing for the Miss Indiana pageant, she discovered a growth on her leg – an early-stage melanoma, the most dangerous form of skin cancer.

She can't prove tanning beds are to blame, but started using them as a sixth-grade cheerleader, says she stepped under the bulbs about every other day during parts of high school, and at one point even owned one. No more.

"It seemed somewhat of a myth that I was putting myself at risk," says Donnar, of Bruceville, Ind., who found the melanoma before it spread.

"The warning label was so small, nothing to make me stop and think, 'This is real,' " she said of the tanning bed.

The World Health Organization's cancer division last summer listed tanning beds as definitive cancer-causers, right alongside the ultraviolet radiation that both they and the sun emit. They'd long been considered "probable" carcinogens, but what tipped the scales: An analysis of numerous studies that concluded the risk of melanoma jumps by 75 percent in people who used tanning beds in their teens and 20s.

Next comes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which has long regulated tanning beds as "Class I devices," a category of low-risk medical devices that includes bandages. Tanning beds do bear some warnings about the cancer link, but the FDA recently decided those labels aren't visible enough to consumers and don't fully convey the risk, especially to young people.

So in March, the FDA's scientific advisers open a public hearing to explore stricter tanning bed regulation, both stiffer warnings and reclassifying them to allow other steps.

"We don't recommend using them at all, but we know people do use them so we want to make them as low-risk as possible," says FDA UV radiation specialist Sharon Miller.

The Indoor Tanning Association, already fighting pending legislation that would tax tanning salons to help pay for Congress' health care overhaul, argues there's no new science to justify increased FDA regulation. Any risk is to people who overdo it, says ITA President Dan Humiston, arguing that's easier to do in the sun.

The industry is open to some change in warning labels, Humiston says, to ensure customers "understand the whole process, so there's no chance they could be overexposed, no chance they could get a sunburn."

But the FDA also says some people go too often, using tanning beds three times a week, for example, when its research shows once a week would provide visually the same tan.

The tanning bed debate isn't an excuse to roast in the sun instead. Nor is melanoma the only risk. Also linked to UV exposure are basal and squamous cell carcinomas, which affect more than 1 million Americans a year. They're usually easily removed but the American Cancer Society counts 2,000 annual deaths. Melanoma is more lethal: Nearly 69,000 U.S. cases were diagnosed last year, and about 8,650 people died.

Fair-skinned people who don't tan easily are at highest risk. Melanoma is particularly linked to sunburns at a young age, and while it usually strikes in the 40s and 50s, doctors are seeing ever-younger cases like Donnar.

A good tan provides the equivalent of a sunscreen rated just SPF-4, and even good tanners can get melanoma, says Dr. Margaret Tucker of the National Cancer Institute. Their risk, like everybody's, increases with increasing UV exposure.

Why? "If there was enough (UV) to give you a tan, it had to have triggered DNA damage," says Dr. David Fisher of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and a spokesman for the Skin Cancer Foundation.

Here's how: A protein called p53 is activated by genetic damage from UV rays. Its main job is to mend such damage, but it also sets off a chain reaction – triggering production of a hormone that filters down to pigment-producing cells called melanocytes and orders them to color the skin's surface, Fisher explains.

In other words, "the very pathway for tanning is directly biochemically linked to the same pathway of carcinogenesis," says Fisher.

He acknowledges it's impossible to predict if a drop in indoor tanning might translate into less cancer because everyone gets sun.

"We don't want people to become indoor cave-dwellers," says NCI's Tucker.

So be out in the early morning and late afternoon, when those UV rays penetrate less, and use sunscreen. In Indiana, that's Donnar's new lifestyle, plus some spray-on tanners for pageants.

"My friends call me 'snow princess' now but I feel comfortable in my own skin."

___

EDITOR's NOTE – Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

WASHINGTON — Just as millions head to tanning beds to prepare for spring break, the Food and Drug Administration will be debating how to toughen warnings that those sunlamps pose a cancer risk. ...
WASHINGTON — Just as millions head to tanning beds to prepare for spring break, the Food and Drug Administration will be debating how to toughen warnings that those sunlamps pose a cancer risk. ...
Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:20 AM on 01/19/2010
Can't believe people are paying to have thier skin turn into splotchy old leather bags.
Paying for premature aging...funny.

One can get enough vitamin D from normal incidental exposure.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ginny1920
08:24 AM on 01/19/2010
Not only that but I am pretty sure tanning beds only emit UVA rays, and it's UVB that triggers vitamin D production, so there is no health benefit at all to tanning beds.
11:44 PM on 01/18/2010
Ok now
Sos
You guys use
lightening cream
&
we use
tanning beds?
08:01 PM on 01/18/2010
They should make big labels of the risk like on cigarette packets in the UK.

Girls, faux tan out of bottle!

Vicky
Author of art, adventure, pop culture and life blog http://www.anticelebrity.net
06:24 PM on 01/18/2010
This is just like cell phones.They know it harmful radiation to brain cells let alone the driving danger.But
since it has reached critical mass we just throw up our hands and tinker around the edges.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RMankovitz
Researcher, inventor, entrepreneur, author
03:00 PM on 01/18/2010
The following includes research from my book "The Wellness Project."

I would like to have changed the title of this article to read: "Tough Cancer Warning on Sunscreens Debated by FDA," I will even propose a sample warning:

"Frequent use of this sunscreen over large portions of the body may contribute to cancer and other serious illnesses in those with a vitamin D deficiency. Some of the ingredients have been shown to become toxic to living cells when exposed to UV radiation."

In my opinion, skin cancer requires two necessary conditions: UV exposure, and a defective immune system. The article itself hints that an adequate amount of p53 tumor suppressor protein can repair DNA damage. What can suppress the immune system? How about eating a diet that follows the FDA food pyramid. Perhaps the pyramid itself should also come with a health warning.

Out of frustration with dangerous sunscreens, I designed and patented (US 6,783,754) a non-toxic plant-based sunscreen formula for use on humans, based on how nature protects plants and other living things from UV damage. I funded university research at UC Santa Barbara’s Cellular Biology Department to determine efficacy, and the results are extremely positive. The initial study on the effect of the active ingredient on cancerous cells has been peer reviewed and will be published in a few months. For an abstract, see:

http://sites.google.com/site/montecitowellness/Home/non-toxic-sunscreen/university-research

Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ginny1920
08:27 AM on 01/19/2010
You are oversimplifying a complicated subject and seem to have an agenda and something to gain by scaring people away from using sunscreens.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RMankovitz
Researcher, inventor, entrepreneur, author
11:11 AM on 01/19/2010
Thank you for sharing your personal opinions. As you can see from my HuffPo bio, whatever is gained from my research is reinvested in further research in the field of illness prevention.

I wish you the best of health.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AAKAlan
Web Developer, photographer, artist, old fart.
02:31 PM on 01/18/2010
Nothing is ever completely black or white ... or tan, in this case.

I have avoided the sun and tanning beds for the last few years due to the many warnings by researchers and the press.

I recently came down with a terrible illness that caused me to sleep, almost continuously, for more than a month plus diahhrea and fever. I had laboratory work done and the only thing wrong was my Vitamin D count - only 15% of normal. Supplements started relieving symptoms in only three days.

As it turned out, my avoidance of both the sun and my regular winter tanning-bed usage had caused me to become ill. Researches say that more than 60% of people in the North of the United States are D-deficient in Winter. Cabin fever? SAD? Both symptoms of D deficiency.

Be warned: if you use high SPF blockers when out in the sun and limit yourself to early-morning and late-afternoon exposure, you likely have a D deficiency and should take supplements (D-3).

Researchers now believe that D is not a vitamin, but a hormone, like insulin or thyroxin, necessary to the proper function of the human body, including the immune system.

I'm not recommending that you go out and get a sunburn to avoid D-deficiency, but that you regularly get sun, unprotected, for short periods of time. The body synthesizes D when exposed to UV. We were not designed to live in caves like bats.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Gover
02:52 PM on 01/18/2010
Where I live, in this place called "the 21st century," they've solved this problem by simply putting Vitamin D in the milk.
04:30 PM on 01/18/2010
Yeah, but as I understand it, the body doesn't really do much to absorb that kind of raw vitamin D without a little help from the sun.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
belyeu
07:56 PM on 01/18/2010
You must drink a lot of milk.
photo
hypnotoad72
Real democracy = living wages.
03:06 PM on 01/18/2010
Seconded.

Sunlight helps people with eczema and psoriasis, too. I was recommended to try tanning beds, but I'm more inclined to find a secluded area and sunbathe there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
topachic25
Tryin to get this damn monkey off my back
01:06 PM on 01/18/2010
The FDA should do something that has an impact and will really protect the public! Pass some additional (or any for the matter) legislation on BPA, or labeling GMO foods to start with.

Simply making a larger / more visible warning label won't change peoples actions. After all don't we have warnings on Cigarettes, Chewing Tobacco, Alcohol, Etc. People will choose to do what they want to do no matter the danger involved. I think the cast of the Jersey Shore is all we need to see about the dangers of excessive tanning.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:22 PM on 01/18/2010
People don't pay much attention when they're drunk, of course, as 2 men in their 20s found out this past week in Charlotte, NC. Alcohol was ruled a contributing factor in these deaths: one was trying to get from one balcony to another 20 stories up in a downtown highrise condo and fell to his death; the other one, at a party in the top story of the downtown Omni Hotel got access to an airshaft and fell to his death, also. Alcohol is increasingly overused by young people, and even without the use of drugs in addition, it can be extremely hazardous to your health, even your life. My 20-something granddaughter gave up life in the city because the peer pressure to use (in addition to drugs like ecstasy) was everywhere and she said the fight to resist was just not worth the aggravation it caused. She doesn't miss it at all. But she never smoked a cigarette in her life.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lmpub
12:58 PM on 01/18/2010
An issue to be reviewed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:57 PM on 01/18/2010
ah tanning beds. I mean what about all the organ failure causing GMO's all the chems they deem safe to put in our water with no testing, All these big pharma drugs that give u 50 side affects to fix one little problem?
12:21 PM on 01/18/2010
i clicked here because i thought that girl was cute
12:11 PM on 01/18/2010
Healthy tan = oxymoron (tanning is the skin's blatant *defense* against UV rays which are, by definition, found in tanning beds. In other words: of course it's dangerous).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AAKAlan
Web Developer, photographer, artist, old fart.
02:34 PM on 01/18/2010
The UV is also required for human life.
04:49 PM on 01/18/2010
And, like oxygen, too much of it can kill you.

Nobody with any sense sits in front of UV lights for the vitamins they could otherwise get from sunlight.
04:53 PM on 01/18/2010
Although...perhaps I must stand corrected...as reading your other posts here seem to indicate something I would never have guessed. That sitting in front of UV-B rays and getting a tan is actually 'healthy'.

Be that the case...I do stand corrected though color me skeptical. Vitamin D is needed for healthy living, of course.

Perhaps sitting in front of a UV lamp for help with a vitamin-D deficiency is one thing...sitting half-naked in a UV bed for hours for the sake of vanity is something else entirely.
11:54 AM on 01/18/2010
Altering the color of your skin (even temporarily) has always seemed crazy to me. If you HAPPEN to get a tan while out on a hike or something, that is one thing, but intentionally sitting out on the beach or in a cancer box for the sake of looking good is another.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
11:53 AM on 01/18/2010
This is a prescription for vitamin D deficiency, which causes cancer.

Melanoma is probably caused by sunscreens.
12:20 PM on 01/18/2010
Great point. Melanoma had never been seen anywhere before sunscreens were invented.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AAKAlan
Web Developer, photographer, artist, old fart.
02:36 PM on 01/18/2010
As a victim of D-deficiency, I could not agree more.

UV is required for life. I am currently taking supplements, but plan to return to light-winter tanning this month to improve my overall health without them.

Like most people, I didn't know the downside risk of avoiding UV until D-deficiency landed me flat on my back.
photo
BlackBuddha
I didn't mean to, I meant to
11:43 AM on 01/18/2010
Don't tell Jersey Shore!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Gover
11:30 AM on 01/18/2010
I disapprove of this.

Excellent genetic selection is applied by allowing idiots to irradiate themselves with known cancer causing rays all they want.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AAKAlan
Web Developer, photographer, artist, old fart.
02:37 PM on 01/18/2010
So, anyone who's ever been out in the sun is an idiot?
Tell that to 98% of the human race.