Friday, January 29, 2010

Why Tanning Beds Are the Cigarettes of Our Age

Kate White

Editor-in-chief of Cosmopolitan

Posted: January 28, 2010 04:18 PM


Why Tanning Beds Are the Cigarettes of Our Age


When we first launched Cosmopolitan's Practice Safe Sun (PSS) campaign in

2006, it was in response to some shocking statistics I'd just learned:

Melanoma had become the second most frequently reported cancer in women in

their 20s. It was only later, though, that I began to hear the stories

behind the stats, and they've been heartbreaking: Women in their 20s and 30s

having multiple and disfiguring surgeries to remove the cancer and many

dying of the disease. I learned this week about a young mother who died of

melanoma five months after her twins were born. So often the common

denominator among these women is that they loved to be tan--from the sun and

often from tanning beds as well.


These stories have kept us highly motivated at Cosmo to make women aware of

the dangers of both outdoor and indoor tanning. This week we took Cosmo's

PSS initiative to a new level. We hosted a press conference in our offices

at which Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Congressman Charlie Dent

(R-PA) announced their plans to introduce The Tanning Bed Cancer Control

Act, a key piece of bipartisan legislation that would expand federal

regulation of tanning beds with the aim of limiting the strength of the UV

rays emitted by tanning beds and the time consumers may be exposed to

harmful radiation.


If you have any doubts about how dangerous beds are, consider the

announcement made in July by the World Health Organization. They described

tanning beds as definitely carcinogenic--putting them in the same category

as cigarettes, asbestos, and uranium. If you tan indoors before age 30, your

skin cancer risk rises by 75 percent (and nearly 70 percent of customers are

young women). When we did an undercover report with ABC's 20/20, we found

tanning salons routinely misrepresented the risks.


But at the same time that the evidence against tanning has become more

clear, we've seen the continuing glorification of the tan in popular

culture. Just check out the pervasive reality series, Jersey Shore. The

daily routine is "GTL"--gym, tanning, laundry.


As Representative Maloney said when she introduced this new bill, tanning

beds are the cigarettes of our age. We owe it to everyone, particularly to

young women, to make sure that the risks of tanning are clearly communicated

and understood and that tanning beds are regulated as tightly as devices

with their risk-profile merit. Please write your congressperson and let him

or her know you support this legislation.


And if you use a tanning bed, please stop. Now.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kate-white/why-tanning-beds-are-the_b_440880.h

tml

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Indoor Tanning Association Settles FTC Charges That It Deceived Consumers

In a news release issued on January 26, 2010, according to the Federal Trade Commission, the Indoor Tanning Association has been charged with making false health and safety claims about indoor tanning.

Indoor Tanning Association Settles FTC Charges That It Deceived Consumers About Skin Cancer Risks From Tanning

The Federal Trade Commission today charged the Indoor Tanning Association with making false health and safety claims about indoor tanning. Contrary to claims in the association’s advertising, indoor tanning increases the risk of squamous cell and melanoma skin cancers, according to the FTC complaint. The association has agreed to a settlement that bars it from any further deception.

“The messages promoted by the indoor tanning industry fly in the face of scientific evidence,” said David C. Vladeck, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The industry needs to do a better job of communicating the risks of tanning to consumers.”

The Indoor Tanning Association represents tanning facilities and suppliers of tanning equipment. The FTC complaint alleges that in March 2008, the association launched an advertising campaign designed to portray indoor tanning as safe and beneficial. The campaign included two national newspaper ads, television and video advertising, two Web sites, a communications guide, and point-of-sale materials that were provided to association members for distribution in local markets. In addition to denying the skin cancer risks of tanning, the campaign allegedly also made these false claims:

  • Indoor tanning is approved by the government;
  • Indoor tanning is safer than tanning outdoors because the amount of ultraviolet light received when tanning indoors is monitored and controlled;
  • Research shows that vitamin D supplements may harm the body’s ability to fight disease; and
  • A National Academy of Sciences study determined that “the risks of not getting enough ultraviolet light far outweigh the hypothetical risk of skin cancer.”

The complaint also alleges that the association failed to disclose material facts in its advertising.

Under its settlement with the Commission, the association is prohibited from making the
misrepresentations challenged in the complaint, from misrepresenting any tests or studies, and from providing deceptive advertisements to members. The settlement also requires that future association ads that make safety or health benefits claims for indoor tanning may not be misleading and must be substantiated. Further, the order requires that certain future advertisements from the association contain disclosures. Ads that make claims about the safety or health benefits of indoor tanning are required to clearly and prominently make this disclosure:

“NOTICE: Exposure to ultraviolet radiation may increase the likelihood of developing skin cancer and can cause serious eye injury.”

Ads that claim exposure to ultraviolet radiation produces vitamin D in the body, or make other claims about the effectiveness or usefulness of indoor tanning products or services for the body’s generation of vitamin D, must clearly and prominently make this disclosure:

“NOTICE: You do not need to become tan for your skin to make vitamin D. Exposure to ultraviolet radiation may increase the likelihood of developing skin cancer and can cause serious eye injury.”

For more information about how indoor or outdoor tanning increases the risk of melanoma and other types of skin cancer, read the FTC Consumer Alert Indoor Tanning athttp://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt174.pdf

The Commission vote to approve the administrative complaint and proposed consent agreement was 4-0. The FTC will publish an announcement regarding the agreement in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through February 26, 2010, after which the Commission will decide whether to make it final. To file a public comment, please click on the following hyperlink:https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/indoortanningassoc and follow the instructions at that site.

Copies of the complaint, the proposed consent agreement, and an analysis of the agreement to aid in public comment are available from both the FTC’s Web site athttp://www.ftc.gov and the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. A consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission of a law violation. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,700 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

MEDIA CONTACT:
Betsy Lordan
Office of Public Affairs

202-326-3707
STAFF CONTACT:
Janet Evans
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-2125
(FTC File No. 0823159) (Indoor Tanning.wpd)

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/01/tanning.shtm

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Indoor Tanning Industry Fights Back??

Despite the overwhelming body of scientific study that has shown a causal relationship between indoor tanning and skin cancer, the indoor tanning industry is fighting back with an argument that our country's Bill of Rights should be expanded to include the "right to tan."


Studies last summer reported that “…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.”

Indoor tanning before age 30 has been associated with a 75 percent increase in the risk of melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, according to a review of medical literature last summer by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization.

Today, two US reps introduced the "Tanning Bed Cancer Control Act."

According to the International Smart Tan Alliance (ISTA), "The bill is yet another attempt by the AADA and cosmetics industry at dismantling the indoor tanning industry for their own benefit." So ISTA believes that it's cosmetics companies, not UV rays, that are causing cancer.

The following news release from the ISTA came through my Google alert


Jan 26, 2010 08:30 ET


Opposing Statement to Rep. Carolyn Maloney Tanning Bed Bill Available to Media


Indoor Tanning Industry Spokesperson Available for Comment to the Media Highlighted Links

Smart Tan

JACKSON, MI--(Marketwire - January 26, 2010) -


WHAT: U.S. Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Charles Dent (R-PA) are introducing legislation called the Tanning Bed Cancer Control Act on Tuesday, January 26, 2010.


WHO: Joe Levy, Vice President of the International Smart Tan Alliance -- the voice of the indoor tanning market


QUOTES: The following statements can be attributed to Joe Levy, Vice President of the International Smart Tan Network, and utilized by the media. "In creating this bill Rep. Maloney and Dent have been duped by the cosmetics industry, chosen to ignore the latest research on UV light and have sided with cosmetic companies who seek to keep all of America out of the sun and covered with sun screen.


"At the Vitamin D Conference in Toronto last fall, doctors reported that the sun scare message is the primary source of America's epidemic Vitamin D deficiency which is linked to the increased risk of 105 different diseases including heart disease, MS, and 30 types of deadly cancer including colon and breast cancer.


"Dermatologists use the same tanning equipment in their offices and regularly prescribe UV light treatment to patients to treat cosmetic conditions such as Psoriasis. The bill is yet another attempt by the AADA and cosmetics industry at dismantling the indoor tanning industry for their own benefit.


"The indoor tanning industry supports 20,000 businesses, employs more than 190,000 people and services more than 30 million customers each year. Salon owners and customers have sent hundreds of post cards and petitions to Rep. Maloney's office in support of indoor tanning and sought to meet with her to voice their opinion on the topic. Reps. Maloney and Dent have chosen to ignore their constituents and the millions who support the right to tan.


"The indoor tanning industry has been working with the FDA for the last 10 years on appropriate regulations and self-regulation. There is no need for more regulations on this industry or U.S. citizens; it is a redundant bill that is a waste of taxpayer's time and money."


WHEN: Availability upon request, please contact Lotus Public Relations to schedule an interview with Joe Levy, VP International Smart Tan Network


About The International Smart Tan Network

The International Smart Tan Network (Smart Tan) was founded in 1985 to provide information and support to indoor tanning businesses in North America. In 1996, Smart Tan became a membership organization serving the indoor tanning retailers and now has more than 3,000 members representing over 6,000 professional tanning businesses. Smart Tan provides educational information and training to salon owners and employees to help encourage

professionalism in all aspects of operation. Smart Tan's technical and service-based training helps member businesses service the needs of the 21st century indoor tanning community. For more about Smart Tan, visit

www.smarttan.com

Monday, January 25, 2010

New Bill to Help Prevent Tanning Bed Cancers

New Bill to Help Prevent Tanning Bed Cancers
-U.S. Reps. Maloney & Dent, Kate White, Doctors, Cancer Survivors Gather at Cosmo HQ to Discuss New Tanning Bed Cancer Control Act-
New York, NY – On Monday, U.S. Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Charlie Dent (R-PA) were joined by Cosmopolitan Magazine Editor-in-Chief Kate White, American Academy of Dermatology member Dr. Ellen Marmur, oncology nurse Rajni Kannan, and melanoma survivor and former Miss Maryland Brittany Lietz Cicala to announce Tuesday’s introduction in Congress of the Tanning Bed Cancer Control Act. This bill would expand federal regulation of tanning beds with the aim of limiting the amount of UV rays emitted by tanning beds and the time consumers may be exposed to harmful radiation. More information on the new bill follows. “Tanning beds are the cigarettes of our time: cancer-causing and poorly regulated,” said Rep. Maloney. “Those who use start using tanning beds before the age of 30 have a 75% higher risk of developing melanoma. Every hour, one American dies of this disease. Through education and improved regulation, we can save lives. I thank my friend and colleague Charlie Dent for joining me in introducing this legislation, and I applaud Kate White and her team at Cosmopolitan and the American Academy of Dermatology for their ongoing efforts to save Americans from the needless dangers posed by indoor tanning.”

“Melanoma is a devastating disease that has impacted many American families, including my own. But it is also a disease that is often preventable,”
said Rep. Dent. “The World Health Organization confirms that tanning beds are a cause of cancer, and tanning bed users put themselves at a 75 percent higher risk of developing melanoma. This legislation will ensure that standards are updated to minimize risk, and that labels are positioned and worded to send a clear and prominent message about the real dangers associated with tanning.”

“At Cosmo, we’ve been warning our readers about the dangers of tanning for years. With research now showing that tanning beds are carcinogenic, it’s even more important to educate consumers about the risks and ensure proper safeguards are in place,” s
aid Kate White. “We’re proud to support Carolyn Maloney’s and Charlie Dent’s important legislation, which will curb skin cancer rates caused by tanning bed exposure. We look forward to seeing it signed into law.”

In July 2009, the World Health Organization raised the classification of the use of UV-emitting tanning devices to Group 1, “carcinogenic to humans.” This new carcinogen classification placed tanning beds alongside tobacco, asbestos and uranium as a definite cause of cancer.

Cosmopolitan Magazine has been a longtime advocate for skin safety. Alarmed by the high rate of skin cancer among young women, Cosmo launched the “Practice Safe Sun” campaign in 2006, with ongoing educational editorial and events. Cosmo was also one of the lead supporters of the Tanning Accountability and Notification (TAN) Act, which was signed into law in September 2007. Most recently, the magazine conducted a joint undercover investigation with ABC’s 20/20 into how tanning salons deceive customers about the health risks.

Background on the bill:

On Tuesday, Reps. Maloney and Dent will introduce the Tanning Bed Cancer Control Act, which will address tanning bed safety by expanding the FDA’s regulation over tanning beds—ultimately limiting the strength of the UV rays emitted from the tanning bed’s sunlamp and the amount of time a consumer may be exposed. The legislation will address two sides of regulation: device classification (for tanning beds that have yet to enter the market for consumer use) and performance standards (for tanning beds that are currently in circulation).

Device Classification: Tanning beds are currently listed by the FDA as Class I medical devices, characterized as posing minimal potential harm to users. Other examples of Class I medical devices are Band-Aids, tongue depressors, breast pumps, and latex gloves. Rep. Maloney’s legislation will ask the FDA to reexamine the classification of tanning beds to ensure that it accurately reflects their technology and associated risks. (Note: a higher classification would make all newly developed devices subject to pre-market surveillance and evaluation.)

Performance Standards: Performance standards regulate the use of tanning beds including the strength of the UV rays emitted from the lamp and the recommended amount of time a consumer should remain in the tanning bed. The standards that govern tanning bed use have not been updated since 1985—despite significant advances in technology over the last 25 years. In a December 2008 report to Congress, the FDA acknowledged that these standards are in need of a contemporary assessment. Rep. Maloney’s legislation will empower the FDA to act upon its own report's suggestion to review and update these performance standards in the interest of consumer health.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Bank Overdraft Fees

This July, new regulations will go into effect that will reduce the ways in which consumers fall prey to rising bank overdraft charges. It is interesting to read the reaction to these changes. Many talk about the responsibility of the consumer to better manage their finances. However, I still think there is something wrong when someone can opt out of overdraft protection and still be charged an insufficient fee fund fee.

A good read on this subject is a blog by Bob Sullivan. Not only is his article interesting but the comments are illuminating.

Check it out at http://redtape.msnbc.com/2010/01/new-overdraft-rules-worst-of-both-worlds.html

Miep Gies, who helped hide Anne Frank, dies


Office secretary provided food, other necessities to the Jewish family
The Associated Press
updated 4:27 a.m. ET, Tues., Jan. 12, 2010

AMSTERDAM - Miep Gies, the office secretary who defied the Nazi occupiers to hide Anne Frank and her family for two years and saved the teenager's diary, has died, the Anne Frank Museum said Tuesday. She was 100.

Gies' Web site reported that she died Monday after a brief illness. The report was confirmed by museum spokeswoman Maatje Mostar, but she gave no details. The British Broadcasting Corp. said she died in a nursing home after suffering a fall last month.

Gies was the last of the few non-Jews who supplied food, books and good cheer to the secret annex behind the canal warehouse where Anne, her parents, sister and four other Jews hid for 25 months during World War II.

After the apartment was raided by the German police, Gies gathered up Anne's scattered notebooks and papers and locked them in a drawer for her return after the war. The diary, which Anne Frank was given on her 13th birthday, chronicles her life in hiding from June 12, 1942 until August 1, 1944.

'Helpers'
Gies refused to read the papers, saying even a teenager's privacy was sacred. Later, she said if she had read them she would have had to burn them because they incriminated the "helpers."

Anne Frank died of typhus at age 15 in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in March 1945, just two weeks before the camp was liberated. Gies gave the diary to Anne's father Otto, the only survivor, who published it in 1947.

After the diary was published, Gies tirelessly promoted causes of tolerance. She brushed aside the accolades for helping hide the Frank family as more than she deserved — as if, she said, she had tried to save all the Jews of occupied Holland.

"This is very unfair. So many others have done the same or even far more dangerous work," she wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press days before her 100th birthday last February.

"The Diary of Anne Frank" was the first popular book about the Holocaust, and has been read by millions of children and adults around the world in some 65 languages.

For her courage, Gies was bestowed with the "Righteous Gentile" title by the Israeli Holocaust museum Yad Vashem. She has also been honored by the German Government, Dutch monarchy and educational institutions.

Nevertheless, Gies resisted being made a character study of heroism for the young.

"I don't want to be considered a hero," she said in a 1997 online chat with schoolchildren.

"Imagine young people would grow up with the feeling that you have to be a hero to do your human duty. I am afraid nobody would ever help other people, because who is a hero? I was not. I was just an ordinary housewife and secretary."

Born Hermine Santrouschitz on Feb. 15, 1909 in Vienna, Gies moved to Amsterdam in 1922 to escape food shortages in Austria. She lived with a host family who gave her the nickname Miep.

In 1933, Gies took a job as an office assistant in the spice business of Otto Frank. After refusing to join a Nazi organization in 1941, she avoided deportation to Austria by marrying her Dutch boyfriend, Jan Gies.

As the Nazis ramped up their arrests and deportations of Dutch Jews, Otto Frank asked Gies in July 1942 to help hide his family in the annex above the company's canal-side warehouse on Prinsengracht 263 and to bring them food and supplies.

"I answered, 'Yes, of course.' It seemed perfectly natural to me. I could help these people. They were powerless, they didn't know where to turn," she said years later.

Jan and Miep Gies worked with four other employees in the firm to sustain the Franks and four other Jews sharing the annex. Jan secured extra food ration cards from the underground resistance. Miep cycled around the city, alternating grocers to ward off suspicions from this highly dangerous activity.

Books and newspapers for Anne
In her e-mail to the AP last February, Gies remembered her husband, who died in 1993, as one of Holland's unsung war heroes. "He was a resistance man who said nothing but did a lot. During the war he refused to say anything about his work, only that he might not come back one night. People like him existed in thousands but were never heard," she wrote.

Touched by Anne's precocious intelligence and loneliness, Miep also brought Anne books and newspapers while remembering everybody's birthdays and special days with gifts.

"It seems as if we are never far from Miep's thoughts," Anne wrote.

In her own book, "Anne Frank Remembered," Gies recalled being in the office when the German police, acting on a tip that historians have failed to trace, raided the hide-out in August 1944.

A policeman opened the door to the main office and pointed a revolver at the three employees, telling them to sit quietly. "Bep, we've had it," Gies whispered to Bep Voskuijl.

After the arrests, she went to the police station to offer a bribe for the Franks' release, but it was too late. On Aug. 8, they were sent to Westerbork, a concentration camp in eastern Holland from where they were later packed into cattle cars and deported to Auschwitz. A few months later, Anne and her sister Margot were transported to Bergen-Belsen.

Two of the helpers, Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman, were sent to labor camps, but survived the war.

Around 140,000 Jews lived in the Netherlands before the 1940-45 Nazi occupation. Of those, 107,000 were deported to Germany and only 5,200 survived. Some 24,000 Jews went into hiding, of which 8,000 were hunted down or turned in.

After the war, Otto Frank returned to Amsterdam and lived with the Gies family until he remarried in 1952. Miep worked for him as he compiled the diary, then devoted herself to talking about the diary and answering piles of letters with questions from around the world.

After Otto Frank's death in 1980, Gies continued to campaign against Holocaust-deniers and to refute allegations that the diary was a forgery.

She suffered a stroke in 1997 which slightly affected her speech, but she remained generally in good health as she approached her 100th birthday.

Her son Paul Gies said last year she was still receiving "a sizable amount of mail" which she handled with the help of a family friend. She spent her days at the apartment where she lived since 2000 reading two daily newspapers and following television news and talk shows.

Her husband died in 1993. She is survived by her son and three grandchildren.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34814027/ns/world_news-europe/

Monday, January 11, 2010

Backroads Broadband

We ARE going to get there from here. The Backroads Broadband Program, which was proposed by Governor Jim Douglas in his State of the State address to the legislature last week, is aimed at making broadband available to the last most-difficult 5% or so of Vermont residences, which are sparsely scattered along remote dirt roads or on the wrong side of signal-blocking hills and mountains. The proposed plan helps the economics of telecom providers that serve the very difficult to serve by accelerating the signup rate so that these providers can get a faster return on their investment than they would otherwise and so Vermonters get the advantage of being online sooner rather than later.

Read more.... http://blog.tomevslin.com/2010/01/backroads-broadband.html

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

What some people will do for a tan



Mom Charged with Leaving Kids in Car while Tanning



Enfield (Connecticut) Police have charged a local woman with leaving her two children in a vehicle Tuesday morning while she was getting a tan. Police say a customer at the Sun Capsule tanning salon on Route 190 notified an employee, who in-turn alerted police of the situation around 9:30 a.m.

The children, ages six years and nearly a year, were not injured. Police say it was 28° at the time of the incident.

Candy Rock, 28, of Enfield is charged with first-degree reckless endangerment and leaving a child under the age of 12 unattended in a motor vehicle.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

http://www.wtic.com/Mom-Charged-with-Leaving-Kids-in-Car-while-Tanning/6051126

Copyright 2010 WTIC News/Talk 1080, CBS Radio. All Rights Reserved.

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Projections on tanning-parlor tax appear to be far too high

Sunday's Washington Post had an analysis of the proposed tax on indoor tanning included in the Senate's Health Care Reform bill. If a tanning session costs $6, the 10% tax would be 60¢. Is this enough to bankrupt tanning salons if they absorb the tax (as the Indoor Tanning Association claims) or will it stop tanning addicts from endangering their health (as the AADA claims)? I would rather side with the AADA.

Projections on tanning-parlor tax appear to be far too high

By Caitlin McDevitt
The Big Money
Sunday, January 3, 2010; G01

Just before leaving Washington, lawmakers cut a controversial cosmetic-surgery tax from the Senate version of the health-care bill and, in its place, tucked in a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning services. The new tax, proposed by the American Academy of Dermatology Association, is meant to discourage the practice of indoor tanning, which studies have shown can lead to skin cancer. Plenty of people are fired up about the issue. Some say the government shouldn't tax things that it deems bad for you -- whether fake suntans, cigarettes or soft drinks. Others argue that the tax unfairly targets young women and small businesses. But the real trouble with the tan tax is in the math.

While the "bo-tax" was supposed to bring in an estimated $5.8 billion over 10 years, the tan tax -- according to the Joint Committee on Taxation -- would bring in $2.7 billion. Industry groups representing the tanning salons say that number is way off. International Smart Tan Network, a Jackson, Miss.-based industry group, said in a statement that the proposal "overestimates tanning revenues by 40 to 50 percent."

John Overstreet, executive director of the Indoor Tanning Association, sounded equally confused about the $2.7 billion figure. "I don't know where that number came from," he says. "I just don't think it could be that high." Of course, the tanning lobbies are aiming to paint the tax proponents as dumb and out of the loop while there's still a chance to scrap the tax when the Senate bill is reconciled with the House version. But while their claims that cooking your skin is actually healthy sound contrived, this argument -- that the proposal can't generate as much revenue as is being touted -- may be worth considering.

The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that, under the new proposal, taxable revenue from tanning salons will remain steady or rise slightly year over year for the next decade. Yet the $5 billion business of bronzing -- especially by means of the conventional tanning bed -- is currently struggling. Over the past year, Hollywood Tans has closed one-fifth of its franchised salons because of sluggish sales. Revenue for the industry as a whole will fall an estimated 5.1 percent in 2009 and sink even further in 2010, according to research firm IBISWorld. Salons have been hit hard by the recession, as an artificial suntan is an easily disposed luxury; a single tanning-bed session costs $6 on average, and devoted tanners tend to go twice or more each week.

As the economy improves, will demand for indoor tanning warm up again? That's unclear; the tanning industry had its heyday 30 years ago. Since the mid-1980s, the industry has been battered by a rising tide of critical medical studies and anti-tanning legislation. At least 31 states regulate indoor tanning for minors, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Just last month, the country's first local ban on indoor tanning for those under the age of 18 was passed in Howard County. And in July, the World Health Organization broadcasted one of its most damning warnings yet about tanning beds, declaring them "carcinogenic," and placed them in the same category as cigarettes and arsenic.

Over the years, such health warnings have gone heard but unheeded by many. But that may have been because tan seekers once saw no worthy alternative. Increasingly, they have another option on the table -- or in the booth, that is. Spray-on tan -- when the face and body are misted with nontoxic colored chemicals -- is the bright spot for the future of the tanning industry. Even though the service can cost more than three times as much as baking under bulbs, it's considered much safer. "Growing awareness about the high cancer risk associated with UV tanning beds will invariably diminish market share," George Van Horn, an IBISWorld senior analyst, said in a statement. He estimates that sunless tanning accounted for roughly 11 percent of tanning-salon revenue two years ago and may reach as high as 17 percent for 2009. And as technology improves for the spray tan (read: customers exit looking less orange), most industry insiders predict that it will continue to lure customers away from traditional tanning beds.

So what does the rise of the sunless-tanning trend mean for the tan tax? Very little when it comes to money. The proposed tax won't cover non-ultraviolet, artificial tanning because it doesn't have the proven negative health effects of the beds. That means that even if tanning revenue does grow, as expected, the tax still won't bring in nearly as much money as has been projected. The Joint Committee on Taxation has not responded to a query asking whether it had considered the likely possibility that the industry's future revenue streams would increasingly come from the sunless category.

Paradoxically, as with all sin taxes, those who propose the tan tax should be happy if it generates less revenue, right? That would suggest the tax was a successful deterrent and had contributed to the decline of indoor tanning. Still, jumping to that conclusion may be giving the tax proposal credit for something that it's not actually responsible for. The conventional fake suntan seems to be fading out all on its own.

Caitlin McDevitt is an editorial assistant at The Big Money.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/31/AR2009123103489.html