Baffling

The tanning industry has been taking a lot of heat recently — as highlighted in the Lancet Oncology summary of the most recent issue. On July 29th of this year, the International Agency for Research on Cancer raised the risk classification of tanning (UV light-emitting devices) from “probably carcinogenic to humans” to “carcinogenic to humans.” The rest of the commentary goes on to discuss the wide variation and absent regulation of tanning salons, the risk of melanoma (75% increase when people start tanning under the age of 30), and the myths that proponents use to justify the practice (eg, that tanning is needed for vitamin D deficiency, etc).

My local paper, the Raleigh News and Observer, recently ran an article about this topic. The writers of this article interviewed a 28-year-old woman who had scars from fire burns on her legs and whose doctors asked her expressly to avoid the sun; amazingly, she has gone to tanning salons regularly for the last 12 years, as her stance was that she “refused to let doctors tell her how to live her life,” and besides, her scars “looked better” after tanning sessions. Other parts of the article quoted representatives from the tanning industry who used (unsurprisingly) misleading or outright false justifications for the practice. In the comments following the article, several subscribers used language about the evils of a “nanny state,” unfair restrictions on “choice,” and “use in moderation” to justify their own tanning habits.

I have to say that I was pretty taken aback by the opinions expressed by those quoted in the article and those making the online comments that followed. I’ve long ago excused the elaborate and irrational justifications from long-term smokers as a sad consequence of social and chemical addiction to smoking. The social determinants of eating behaviors are similarly complex, making it inappropriate to distill the obesity epidemic into a commentary about willfully unhealthy eating habits (there is obviously much more to it than that, much of it well beyond anything resembling personal choice in the matter).

But I’m not aware that exposure to artificial UV light by visiting tanning salons is addictive or inevitable; tanners are making highly conscious choices when they plan visits and drive to salons, suggesting that these individuals have at least the capacity to comprehend the health risks that they are undertaking. One could argue that the issue is a lack of information about risk, but the articles above suggest that many times, these risks are very consciously ignored. I find it ironic that those who would subscribe to all of the usual rhetoric and philosophy about “personal choice and responsibility” may demonstrate the most irresponsible behaviors of all.