Group Declares Tanning Beds 'Carcinogenic to Humans'

LONDON — International health officials declared UV-emitting tanning devices a human carcinogen after reviewing epidemiologic studies that indicate an association with cutaneous melanomas.

A working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer raised the ultraviolet ray-emitting tanning devices to their Group 1 list of carcinogens, joining tobacco and tobacco smoke, asbestos, and human papillomaviruses.

The working group said a meta-analysis of 20 epidemiologic studies has shown that use of tanning devices before age 30 raises the risk of cutaneous melanomas by 75%. In addition, case-control studies indicate an increased risk of ocular melanoma when using these devices. "Therefore, the working group raised the classification of the use of UV-emitting tanning devices to Group 1, carcinogenic to humans," the report noted (Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:751–2).

"The link between sunbeds and skin cancer has been convincingly shown in a number of scientific studies now, and so we are very pleased that IARC have upgraded sunbeds to the highest risk category," Jessica Harris, health information officer with Cancer Research UK, said in a written statement.

"Given the dangers of sunbeds, we want the government to act now to ban under 18s from using sunbeds, close salons that aren't supervised by trained staff, and ensure information about the risks of using sunbeds is given to all customers," she noted.

Based on animal studies, exposure to ultraviolet radiation was also added to the Group 1 list, and exposure to solar radiation was reaffirmed as carcinogenic, according to the authors.

The working group also reaffirmed as Group 1 carcinogenic agents internally deposited radionuclides that emit alpha or beta particles, such as radon. Humans can be exposed to radon through soil and building materials. Also in Group 1 are x-rays, gamma radiation, phosphorus-32, radium-224, and a number of other radioactive materials involved in medicine or manufacturing.

The carcinogenic classification probably will not be enough to convince hard-core tanners to abandon their bronzing, said Mark Leary, Ph.D., director of the social psychology program at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

"I suspect that some people will rethink the importance of a tan with the new labeling, but I don't expect it to make a great difference," Dr. Leary said. "The perceived value of being tanned in terms of enhancing one's appearance and social acceptance is simply too strong."

Another reason that die-hard tanners probably won't quit—the short-term benefits of looking good carry more weight than the possibility of skin cancer 20–30 years down the road, Dr. Leary added.

He explained that tanning behaviors aren't likely to change unless the norms of attractiveness change so that paler skin becomes preferable. In the 1800s, for example, being tanned was a signal that you were a farmer or outdoor laborer, while pale skin signaled that you had an indoor, professional job, Dr. Leary said.

"Only after the Industrial Revolution moved much of the working class inside factories [where they developed pale skin] did being tanned signal status," he said.

The carcinogen message alone is unlikely to discourage teens and young adults from tanning, Dr. Leary added.

But Dr. Leary's previous research showed that an essay about the negative effects of tanning on appearance was more effective in reducing tanning than an essay about skin cancer. A publicity campaign featuring images of wrinkled, saggy skin in relatively young people might make an impact, he said.

LONDON — International health officials declared UV-emitting tanning devices a human carcinogen after reviewing epidemiologic studies that indicate an association with cutaneous melanomas.

A working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer raised the ultraviolet ray-emitting tanning devices to their Group 1 list of carcinogens, joining tobacco and tobacco smoke, asbestos, and human papillomaviruses.

The working group said a meta-analysis of 20 epidemiologic studies has shown that use of tanning devices before age 30 raises the risk of cutaneous melanomas by 75%. In addition, case-control studies indicate an increased risk of ocular melanoma when using these devices. "Therefore, the working group raised the classification of the use of UV-emitting tanning devices to Group 1, carcinogenic to humans," the report noted (Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:751–2).

"The link between sunbeds and skin cancer has been convincingly shown in a number of scientific studies now, and so we are very pleased that IARC have upgraded sunbeds to the highest risk category," Jessica Harris, health information officer with Cancer Research UK, said in a written statement.

"Given the dangers of sunbeds, we want the government to act now to ban under 18s from using sunbeds, close salons that aren't supervised by trained staff, and ensure information about the risks of using sunbeds is given to all customers," she noted.

Based on animal studies, exposure to ultraviolet radiation was also added to the Group 1 list, and exposure to solar radiation was reaffirmed as carcinogenic, according to the authors.

The working group also reaffirmed as Group 1 carcinogenic agents internally deposited radionuclides that emit alpha or beta particles, such as radon. Humans can be exposed to radon through soil and building materials. Also in Group 1 are x-rays, gamma radiation, phosphorus-32, radium-224, and a number of other radioactive materials involved in medicine or manufacturing.

The carcinogenic classification probably will not be enough to convince hard-core tanners to abandon their bronzing, said Mark Leary, Ph.D., director of the social psychology program at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

"I suspect that some people will rethink the importance of a tan with the new labeling, but I don't expect it to make a great difference," Dr. Leary said. "The perceived value of being tanned in terms of enhancing one's appearance and social acceptance is simply too strong."

Another reason that die-hard tanners probably won't quit—the short-term benefits of looking good carry more weight than the possibility of skin cancer 20–30 years down the road, Dr. Leary added.

He explained that tanning behaviors aren't likely to change unless the norms of attractiveness change so that paler skin becomes preferable. In the 1800s, for example, being tanned was a signal that you were a farmer or outdoor laborer, while pale skin signaled that you had an indoor, professional job, Dr. Leary said.

"Only after the Industrial Revolution moved much of the working class inside factories [where they developed pale skin] did being tanned signal status," he said.

The carcinogen message alone is unlikely to discourage teens and young adults from tanning, Dr. Leary added.

But Dr. Leary's previous research showed that an essay about the negative effects of tanning on appearance was more effective in reducing tanning than an essay about skin cancer. A publicity campaign featuring images of wrinkled, saggy skin in relatively young people might make an impact, he said.

LONDON — International health officials declared UV-emitting tanning devices a human carcinogen after reviewing epidemiologic studies that indicate an association with cutaneous melanomas.

A working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer raised the ultraviolet ray-emitting tanning devices to their Group 1 list of carcinogens, joining tobacco and tobacco smoke, asbestos, and human papillomaviruses.

The working group said a meta-analysis of 20 epidemiologic studies has shown that use of tanning devices before age 30 raises the risk of cutaneous melanomas by 75%. In addition, case-control studies indicate an increased risk of ocular melanoma when using these devices. "Therefore, the working group raised the classification of the use of UV-emitting tanning devices to Group 1, carcinogenic to humans," the report noted (Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:751–2).

"The link between sunbeds and skin cancer has been convincingly shown in a number of scientific studies now, and so we are very pleased that IARC have upgraded sunbeds to the highest risk category," Jessica Harris, health information officer with Cancer Research UK, said in a written statement.

"Given the dangers of sunbeds, we want the government to act now to ban under 18s from using sunbeds, close salons that aren't supervised by trained staff, and ensure information about the risks of using sunbeds is given to all customers," she noted.

Based on animal studies, exposure to ultraviolet radiation was also added to the Group 1 list, and exposure to solar radiation was reaffirmed as carcinogenic, according to the authors.

The working group also reaffirmed as Group 1 carcinogenic agents internally deposited radionuclides that emit alpha or beta particles, such as radon. Humans can be exposed to radon through soil and building materials. Also in Group 1 are x-rays, gamma radiation, phosphorus-32, radium-224, and a number of other radioactive materials involved in medicine or manufacturing.

The carcinogenic classification probably will not be enough to convince hard-core tanners to abandon their bronzing, said Mark Leary, Ph.D., director of the social psychology program at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

"I suspect that some people will rethink the importance of a tan with the new labeling, but I don't expect it to make a great difference," Dr. Leary said. "The perceived value of being tanned in terms of enhancing one's appearance and social acceptance is simply too strong."

Another reason that die-hard tanners probably won't quit—the short-term benefits of looking good carry more weight than the possibility of skin cancer 20–30 years down the road, Dr. Leary added.

He explained that tanning behaviors aren't likely to change unless the norms of attractiveness change so that paler skin becomes preferable. In the 1800s, for example, being tanned was a signal that you were a farmer or outdoor laborer, while pale skin signaled that you had an indoor, professional job, Dr. Leary said.

"Only after the Industrial Revolution moved much of the working class inside factories [where they developed pale skin] did being tanned signal status," he said.

The carcinogen message alone is unlikely to discourage teens and young adults from tanning, Dr. Leary added.

But Dr. Leary's previous research showed that an essay about the negative effects of tanning on appearance was more effective in reducing tanning than an essay about skin cancer. A publicity campaign featuring images of wrinkled, saggy skin in relatively young people might make an impact, he said.