What are your thoughts on...

PaigeMcC · November 2010

banning tanning beds/booths for people under 19? They're working on legislation here to ban people under 19 (which is the legal age for booze and smokes as well) from using artificial tanning beds. They're doing it because NS has the highest rate of melanoma (skin) cancer in Canada and they *think* it might have something to do with all the teenagers playing in tanning booths.

Personally I think it's a good idea. Why do KIDS need to be tanning? Seriously, if you want sun that badly go outside. It makes me nervous that we have 16 year olds going tanning several times a month. Sometimes several times a week. I don't think it can be healthy for skin (young or old!) especially since tanning beds can have 10-15 times higher UV than the midday sun. Anywho, here's the LINK to the article. What do you think?

MLekathLEEN · November 2010

I'm on the fence about tanning. I tanned through high school and worked at a salon for two years. I'm not going to say that it's awful when I knew what the effects were and did it anyways.

What I will say is that something should be done. My bosses would never admit that tanning caused cancer. If you used the correct products and whatnot, you are just as safe as tanning outside (Their words, not mine). It is probably comparable to the damages of smoking so there probably should be some legal age limit and restrictions on tanning. If your tanning policy is no one under 15 and a 14 year old comes in to buy a package and a $50 bottle of lotion, what do you think an owner will do, tell her no or ignore their rules?

...crap....I completely lost my train of thought. Tanning probably should be government regulated.

calindi · November 2010

Yeah, as someone who has had several skin cancer scares at the ripe old age of 24, I'm fully aware of the dangers of the sun. I don't understand why ANYONE would want to willingly do that to themselves.

I'm all for having it banned for people under 17/18, whatever. I'm also for having it taxed, as the recent health care legislation in the US set up to help cover costs. They also tried to tax fast food, but the lobbiests from McDonalds and Burger King were too strong for that. But really, it's hard not to tie a direct line between skin cancer and tanning beds, and obescity and low-cost high calorie fat food. And there's a direct link between skin cancer and obescity to public health costs.

SeaTea02 · November 2010

Here goes:

I think the government should stay the eff out of everyone's business. Parental permission, which is required in the US should be enough.

It is only when you have universal piece-o-shyt health care that the government has an argument and a vested interest (monetary) in the health of the public. Universal health care gives the government power to tell you what to do with your body because they are paying for your health care. The government gives you an entitlement which allows them to infringe upon your individual choices. In order to receive you have to give up rights.

In short: DON'T TOUCH MY JUNK

mana8503 · November 2010

I might get flamed, but my thoughts are - I'd rather tan for a month or so before vacation (I start at like 3 mins thanks to my irish skin, and rarely get up to 10-12 mins) then get sun poisoning using SPF 50 and under an umbrella during peak sun hours. I got a good base tan proir to Key West in March and was the ONLY one not to burn. They were all Italian and "oh I tan". I still wore my SPF 50, reapply 3 times in 3 hours and was FINE. I get a derm check every year since my uncle died of skin cancer so I feel like I'd be able to catch any signs early.

That said, I had friends in HS that went to a couple places for 20 mins each a day. That's REDICULOUS! I don't think teenagers understand moderation and have that "it won't happen to me" train of thought. So maybe an age cap would be better...

CASK85 · November 2010

Here are my thoughts on this and stuff like this. . .

Lots of people are too stupid to know better when it comes to what is best for their health (tanning, drinking sugary sodas, smoking). Those stupid people spend their lives destroying their bodies and then we end up paying for it when they're on medicaid or medicare (or in Canada's case, just all the time with the way the healthcare system is set up). So I say that taxing or banning those things is beneficial to the majority. Yeah, I want a Coke sometimes and have enjoyed a drunken cigarette and even gone tanning, but not to the extent that my health was jeopardized significantly . . . taxing or banning these things would make it harder for me (a "smart" person) to get those "guilty pleasures" but in the long run would keep people who are too "stupid" to know what is good for them from doing it and making me pay for their heart surgery and high blood pressure pills and cancer treatments down the line.

Also, my mother had a low grade skin cancer that I am pretty sure she got from all the years she spent in a tanning booth.

loves2shop4shoes · November 2010

That's a tough one. I mean, I really see nothing wrong with going tanning OCCASIONALLY right before a big event (like prom, a wedding, etc.) I did about a month of tanning before prom where I went a few times a week and it was no big deal.

Where I think the line becomes blurry is those women who go tanning EVERY single day with no end in sight...you know, the ones that are orange and whose skin looks like they've been smoking for 35 years, even though they're only 19.

However, I don't know how one would attempt to regulate how OFTEN someone can go tanning.

I guess after thinking about it, I'd have to say that it's their bodies and if they choose to engage in cosmetic practices that could adversely affect their helath, it's their own business. Perhaps they should simply have a parental permission slip for those under 19.

PaigeMcC · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:550d7639-8302-4f16-8159-9e81232d7ad3">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]Here goes: I think the government should stay the eff out of everyone's business. <strong>Parental permission, which is required in the US should be enough.</strong> It is only when you have universal piece-o-shyt health care that the government has an argument and a vested interest (monetary) in the health of the public. Universal health care gives the government power to tell you what to do with your body because they are paying for your health care. The government gives you an entitlement which allows them to infringe upon your individual choices. In order to receive you have to give up rights. In short: DON'T TOUCH MY JUNK :)
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]

<div>If parental permission was required then I might agree. But nothing is required here. You can just walk in and do it. A 5 year old could walk in a get a tan. No restrictions.</div><div>
</div><div>And I don't agree with universal health care = the government infringing on your rights. Where does my government tell me that because they pay for *some* of my healthcare that I cannot do X? They don't. They may tell me that they won't pay for it but there is no where that tells me I can't do it. </div><div>
</div><div>This new law is basically like a smoking law - if you're under X years old, you shouldn't do Y because it's harmful. Same principle is being applied to tanning. Tanning has been linked to higher rates of melanoma, much like smoking has been linked to higher rates of lung cancer, therefore they are putting in protective measures for the public. Not really sure what this has to do with universal healthcare.</div>

calindi · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:550d7639-8302-4f16-8159-9e81232d7ad3">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]Here goes: I think the government should stay the eff out of everyone's business. Parental permission, which is required in the US should be enough. It is only when you have universal piece-o-shyt health care that the government has an argument and a vested interest (monetary) in the health of the public. Universal health care gives the government power to tell you what to do with your body because they are paying for your health care. The government gives you an entitlement which allows them to infringe upon your individual choices. In order to receive you have to give up rights. In short: DON'T TOUCH MY JUNK :)
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]

If you don't want it banned, what are your opinions on taxing things that are directly linked to higher health costs? Because regardless of whether there's a public health care option or not, the public bears these costs because hospitals are REQUIRED to treat people - and if they can't pay (or don't pay), then those costs are deferred into someone else's treatment. It's why they can bill $100 for a box of tissues - because 99 other people couldn't pay the $1.

So hypothetically, they don't dictate at all what you can or can't do, but put a 10% tax on things that have a direct correlation with higher health costs - like fake tanning, smoking, and fast food with X% caloric fat ratio? That way, people have the option to keep killing themselves, but at least there's money in the system to cover their increased costs.

SeaTea02 · November 2010

Chiano- I'm not saying tanning beds don't cause cancer, but the type your mom tanned in probably what in the 70s? They had way more radiation. Now, you can tan is beds with no burning rays and you chance of skin cancer is lowered. These beds are more expensive though.

Shoes- In the US parents already do have to sign, idk about Canada. Also they already DO regulate how often you can tan, once every 24 hours (at least in NC). People have accounts and the computer will not let you turn on a bed for an individual who tanned less than 24 hours ago, to the minute. (I worked at a tanning bed in high school)

PaigeMcC · November 2010

And I agree that tanning OCCASIONALLY is not a horrible thing. My Irish skin doesn't believe in tans (only burns) but if it did then I would consider it before the wedding/a big event. I also agree that no, we cannot regulate how often people go - and this is really part of the problem BUT I also stand by my point that if we were to regulate how young people can go we will reduce the incidents of melanoma in young people..and maybe hit some older people too.

CASK85 · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:2bf30977-995b-4da3-a3ff-76c365a01605">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]Chiano- I'm not saying tanning beds don't cause cancer, but the type your mom tanned in probably what in the 70s? They had way more radiation. Now, you can tan is beds with no burning rays and you chance of skin cancer is lowered. These beds are more expensive though. Shoes- In the US parents already do have to sign, idk about Canada. Also they already DO regulate how often you can tan, once every 24 hours (at least in NC). People have accounts and the computer will not let you turn on a bed for an individual who tanned less than 24 hours ago, to the minute. (I worked at a tanning bed in high school)
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]
<div>No, my mom tanned in the 80's and 90's . .. and regardless of whether or not the "new beds are safer" you still get UV rays and I don't think that fact will ever change. </div><div>
</div><div>Also, I agree with what Cate said. Thanks for being more articulate than I am :) </div>

MLekathLEEN · November 2010

Many states have no regulations on tanning. Even if they did, there is no real way to regulate how often a person can tan in one day. Sure YOUR salon won't let Sally tan twice but there's no way of know how many other salons Sally is tanning at once a day. If there was an extra tax on tanning, maybe Sally would think twice or at least help bring some tax revenue.

PaigeMcC · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:ab70d337-b5a7-4eef-81ec-158a811bae1f">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]Many states have no regulations on tanning. Even if they did, there is no real way to regulate how often a person can tan in one day. Sure YOUR salon won't let Sally tan twice but there's no way of know how many other salons Sally is tanning at once a day. If there was an extra tax on tanning, maybe Sally would think twice or at least help bring some tax revenue.
Posted by MLekathLEEN[/QUOTE]

<div>Well said, EKath.</div>

SeaTea02 · November 2010

So I am the only pro tanner? Eh, alright.

I wasn't saying there was no risk or UV exposure. It is more like adding a filter of cigarettes. Technology has changed so much since the 80s and 90s, and tanning beds are no exception.

My salon didn't do it just to do it. It was state regulated and we could be shut down if we failed to limit the number of visits each person has. Our computer system MADE us do this. You add the number of sessions someone has to their account that is linked to their finger print. Yup, finger print. They can only access that account once every 24hours for UV procedures. This was not a popular practise with out customers so believe me, if we could have stopped it we would have. Also since i worked there I have tanned a few places in town and they all do the same thing.

Note: I haven't tanned indoors in over three years.

PaigeMcC · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:347e1ecd-be6a-4d63-aec0-0e68ec857ab0">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]So I am the only pro tanner? Eh, alright. I wasn't saying there was no risk or UV exposure. It is more like adding a filter of cigarettes. Technology has changed so much since the 80s and 90s, and tanning beds are no exception. My salon didn't do it just to do it. It was state regulated and we could be shut down if we failed to limit the number of visits each person has. Our computer system MADE us do this. You add the number of sessions someone has to their account that is linked to their finger print. Yup, finger print. They can only access that account once every 24hours for UV procedures. This was not a popular practise with out customers so believe me, if we could have stopped it we would have. Also since i worked there I have tanned a few places in town and they all do the same thing. Note: I haven't tanned indoors in over three years.
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>It's not that I'm anti-tanning. I like a good tan as much as the next person - it makes me less pale. However, just because those are the regulations in your state doesn't mean that they are applicable everywhere. Many states and provinces do not have ANY regulations at all. And this is why I posted this topic - I want to discuss regulations and people's reactions. Your state sounds like it has some good ideas on the tanning front...my province is just getting into them.
</div>

MLekathLEEN · November 2010

It's not that your the only pro tanner. I am pro-tan but moderation is key. The majority of 15-18 year olds have no sense of moderation and they're going to be "the exception" to getting skin cancer, just like the 18 and 19 y/o who come on here saying they're going to be together forever because they are in love and know better.

There is no way to regulate how often a person tans per day unless every salon's customer databases are all connected, which I highly doubt they are. Just because someone is tanning at your salon once a day doesn't mean that she's not tanning at some other salon once a day also. If someone wants to tan twice in one day and your salon won't let them, they'll get their second tan of the day somewhere else.
I know that the state has rules for each salon but it's can't be regulated as well as they would like it to be by says "only one tan per day!" How can't truly regulate how often someone will tan just like you can't regulate how many cigarettes a person can smoke in a day. Higher taxes on such things may make a person think twice about doing it so much.

mana8503 · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:659e01ab-93d9-4ba3-9ed4-3dadcc3919f5">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]It's not that your the only pro tanner. I am pro-tan but moderation is key. The majority of 15-18 year olds have no sense of moderation and they're going to be "the exception" to getting skin cancer, just like the 18 and 19 y/o who come on here saying they're going to be together forever because they are in love and know better. <strong>There is no way to regulate how often a person tans per day unless every salon's customer databases are all connected, which I highly doubt they are. Just because someone is tanning at your salon once a day doesn't mean that she's not tanning at some other salon once a day also.</strong> If someone wants to tan twice in one day and your salon won't let them, they'll get their second tan of the day somewhere else. I know that the state has rules for each salon but it's can't be regulated as well as they would like it to be by says "only one tan per day!" How can't truly regulate how often someone will tan just like you can't regulate how many cigarettes a person can smoke in a day. Higher taxes on such things may make a person think twice about doing it so much.
Posted by MLekathLEEN[/QUOTE]

This is how my friends in HS got around it. They had different accounts in different salons... no way to regulate until all salons are connected.

heyimbren · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:550d7639-8302-4f16-8159-9e81232d7ad3">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]Here goes: I think the government should stay the eff out of everyone's business. Parental permission, which is required in the US should be enough. It is only when you have universal piece-o-shyt health care that the government has an argument and a vested interest (monetary) in the health of the public. Universal health care gives the government power to tell you what to do with your body because they are paying for your health care. The government gives you an entitlement which allows them to infringe upon your individual choices. In order to receive you have to give up rights. In short: DON'T TOUCH MY JUNK :)
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]

I agree with this kind of liberality, except you're right about our health care system in Canada. Plus, the age of majority is 18, so I think that's fair to say that minors should need parental permission, and maybe if they're under 16 they're banned completely. I don't think minors have the same right to liberality as adults do.

But SeaTea, I think you make an excellent point with regards to healthcare.

CASK85 · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:ea1fa1df-f301-4595-9b61-07a4e75a6e8d">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: What are your thoughts on... : I agree with this kind of liberality, except you're right about our health care system in Canada. Plus, the age of majority is 18, so I think that's fair to say that minors should need parental permission, and maybe if they're under 16 they're banned completely. I don't think minors have the same right to liberality as adults do. But SeaTea, I think you make an excellent point with regards to healthcare.
Posted by heyimbren[/QUOTE]
I think that SeaTea's opinions would be considered "conservative" in the US. . . maybe liberality means something different in Canada.

marleylikeair · November 2010

Tanning scares me. Elevated skin cancer risk? No thanks. I'm as pale as anything, and I've learned to love my skin tone. Agree that tanning should be regulated and taxed. Like Kath and mana point out, it'd take a lot to regulate frequency of tanning, though!

heyimbren · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:19747a36-2539-41e5-aefd-9c6c849ce914">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: What are your thoughts on... : I think that SeaTea's opinions would be considered "conservative" in the US. . . maybe liberality means something different in Canada.
Posted by cschiano[/QUOTE]

Liberality isn't a political spectrum view, and it isn't the same thing as being liberal. It's the difference between (big "L) Liberalism and (small "l") liberalism. Liberality refers to individual freedom.

CASK85 · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:6056b75d-c0cf-4930-9c06-1190685c006c">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: What are your thoughts on... : Liberality isn't a political spectrum view, and it isn't the same thing as being liberal. It's the difference between (big "L) Liberalism and (small "l") liberalism. Liberality refers to individual freedom.
Posted by heyimbren[/QUOTE]
Ahh, well thanks :) I feel a little dumb now. . . but I'm in biology, not pol sci, so maybe I get a free pass for being off on that one?

heyimbren · November 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_thoughts-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:298b9735-b797-4c9c-84e3-ad3b93c1a432Post:67299f49-9d45-4635-8667-1bf5798e5139">Re: What are your thoughts on...</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: What are your thoughts on... : Ahh, well thanks :) I feel a little dumb now. . . but I'm in biology, not pol sci, so maybe I get a free pass for being off on that one?
Posted by cschiano[/QUOTE]

Haha you definitely get a free pass ;) But don't feel dumb. It's very confusing since it's the exact same word (in the same area of study) that means two different things.

jemmini6 · November 2010

I think the only thing that 'under agers' should be allowed to do in a tanning salon is the spray tans. I honestly don't know why people expose themselves to UV rays, when sunless tans are quicker, easier and look just as good (when done right).

I am natrually pale (German & Irish) and don't tan very well anyways. My grandpa had skin cancer and one of my cousins already had a cancerous mole removed. I don't want to take any chances so I stick to sunless tanning. I've used this <link> for a few years now and it works great for me.

As for the government regulation of it, i think taxing the hell out of it is fair. People do things that harm their body, then complain about paying for their healthcare when it finally catches up to them. No one under 18 should be allowed to tan (not even with parental consent). Outside of that though, it's just like the other unhealthy vises people have, after that point, you have to let people make their own decisions.

Blue & White · November 2010

My thoughts are that tanning beds are a waste of time and money. However, if people want to tan with tanning beds and put their lives at risk....it's just natural selection, ya know?

But that's the bitchy side of me. In real life, I'm nice and would probably go for parental consent. But as a parent, I wouldn't give consent.

Then again, I'm the most albino person in the world that isn't technically albino

Plumbb2 · November 2010

I’ll touch on a couple notes, which are just opinions and more for US not Canada

1. When are we going to stop acting like teenagers are stupid and can’t make decisions (please don’t quote any developmental brain growth facts I know them all I was a psyc major for 2 years). I feel like we shelter kids so much now a days that when they do turn 18 they go crazy with all the new freedoms they have never had and have never had to regulate. We need to teach teens moderation and do this when we can watch over them and they are young enough to regulate if they do go crazy. I truly believe it falls on the parents to regulate these things!

2. So, if we tax fast food what about food in grocery stores. Have you ever looked at what is in a Toney’s pizza (which is $1) or Ramon Noodles? It is just as bad as what you can find in the fast food line. Don’t forget what we give our food pantries, canned vegetables loaded with sodium and boxed Mac and cheese.

3. People who don’t have a lot of money go for cheap food, unfortunately these foods tend to be fatty, fat is cheaper then fresh veggies. These same people then have issues with health which they are unable to pay for and are on Medicare and we end up paying for them. The people, who are choosing to eat badly, not just because this is all they can afford, most likely have health insurance and so let them kill themselves that is their problem. For those we are paying Medicare for why not go to the problem and instead of having a tax of unhealthy food let’s make healthy food more readily available and affordable.

4. I don’t know anyone who is on Medicare but is going to a tanning bed. In Canada yes it is different health care system so I understand, but in the US if we don’t get Socialized Health Care then I don’t think government needs to regulate tanning beds, food, or any type of heath.

Hence why I am against Socialized Health Care, but for Health Care reform!

loopy82 · November 2010

I don't think that government needs to get their hands in it. They get their hands in that, then the next step they need to do is to make sure these teen girls aren't laying out all day everyday in the sun, because really the effects can be the same. Then they need to start limiting the amount of alcohol each person is allowed to consume, then how many cigarettes someone can buy (which cigarettes can be banned for all I care.) Then they can regulate that every person must check into a gym for 30 minutes everyday. That every person drinks 64 oz of water each day. Really, where does it end?

As far as the taxing on "unhealthy" things, I wish it could be selectively used on those people that abuse it. I so rarely eat fast food, but every once in a while (like every other month) I need me a good greasy breakfast sandwich. If there were to ever be a "fast food" tax, I really think that all restaurants would need to have that extra tax. Just because the food isn't served quickly does not make it any more healthy for you. I try to limit the amount that I eat out because I don't really know what I am eating and have learned that just because something appears healthy it probably isn't due to how it is prepared. It just sucks that there are irresponsible people that "ruin" things for those who are responsible.

SeaTea02 · November 2010

Bren is right. Technically the US founding fathers were liberal, but that is now what current republicans associate their beliefs with. It is confusing.

Let's think about abortion. Some want abortion because it is telling women what to do with their bodies. If the government tells women what to do with their bodies they are infringing upon our freedoms. Right?

I agree that the government should stay out of food, tanning, and tobacco the same way they are currently staying out of abortion.

If we go with y'all's mentality and as a whole we agree that abortion is bad for babies and even though people have this freedom we are going to discourage it. Let's tax abortion then. Heavily. See what I mean?

deburnin · November 2010

I don't get tanning beds. It was the big thing to do at my high school. In my opinion all of the girls bragging about their "tans" just looked orange. *shrug* My dad's Native and I inherited his coloring instead of my mom's. I guess "white" people tanning also rubs me the wrong way because of certain things I was called growing up by those same people.

I'd probably lean more toward the parental permission, but then again it seems like a growing number of parents really don't care what their kids do. I wonder how much of a drop there really would be if teens had to get their parents permission.

lindsayrae1986 · November 2010

SUMMARY:
1. underage young adults should have parental consent before being allowed to tan.
2. society needs to change its attitude about what beauty really is.
3. every tan damages your skin, even if you don't see the effects now.
4. parents and mentors need to scare the heck out of kids/young adults concerning tanning and the risks/effects of tanning and skin cancer.

SKIN CANCER KILLS. is it worth the risk?

my personal opinion:

i used to be a frequent, stupid tanner. i was never ID'd, so i went as soon as i could drive myself. no parental consent required for a 16 year old.

i wasn't as bad as SOME, but i was really, really stupid. i would go EVERY DAY for the maximum time. no protective glasses, no sunscreen, NOTHING.

nobody warned me about anything at any of the salons i went to. i burned all the time, and only skipped when i couldn't handle the burn anymore.

i really regret it. i have to go to the derm every 4-6 months because i have many pre-cancerous moles and spots all over my body. instead of helping my eczema, in the long run it made it MUCH WORSE by drying out my skin and natural oils. skin cancer, especially melanoma, runs in my family.

although i sometimes feel downright ugly because i am so pale, especially when i'm with my FI and family (all very dark-skinned, hispanic people) i would NEVER tan again. not for my wedding, not for ANYTHING.

i slather on sunscreen when i go outside. i buy regular lotion with sunscreen in it for everyday.

i was a teenager and i was STUPID and nobody stopped me. and i'm going to be paying for it physically for the rest of my life. it was all because i was ashamed that i was pale and blonde. i wanted to fit in with my friends and all the beautiful women i saw who were tanned.

we need to change our mentality as a society. we need to quit chasing youth and beauty to such an extent that we literally FRY our skin to try to be beautiful. who you ARE is beautiful. my FI loves my pale skin. to him, it's exotic and beautiful.

i personally feel, based on my experiences alone, that tanning should be tightly regulated for minors. in my experience, i was not mature enough to make such an important decision about my body. i know for a fact that my parents would not have signed for me to tan if parental consent was required, because they understood the risk that i was taking with my body. i generally side with a Libertarian point of view concerning government regulation, but for something like this i think that underage young adults still need parental consent... just like they can't buy cigarettes, drink, or drive until a certain age, they probably shouldn't be able to bake themselves until they reach a certain age... and hopefully once they do reach that age limit, they will be better equipped with knowledge about their body and the risks of tanning.

also, i think people take the risks of tanning, even outdoors, way too lightly. as long as people keep making comments (like, "just a month won't hurt!" or "it's only a few times!"), we're going to have a problem. EVERY TAN COUNTS. you may think that because you don't see harsh effects on your body NOW, that you aren't hurting yourself. in my experience, when i told myself that it was because i was trying to JUSTIFY what i was doing. and i struggled with that until i had a slap in the face with my dad being diagnosed with serious melanoma and then a couple months later, i had quite a scare. and then i stopped completely... and haven't been tanning (indoor OR outdoor) since.

that was really long. sorry.

i'm off my soapbox now. i'm sorry if i offended anyone, it was NOT my intent. however, due to personal experiences, this is one subject that i feel very strongly about.

What are your thoughts on...

Re: What are your thoughts on...

Choose Another Board

Search Boards