Teens, owners object to tanning-bed ban for minors

[alp227]

Source: SF Chronicle

Under legislation signed by Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday that is now the nation's most restrictive, boys and girls under 18 are banned from using tanning beds as of Jan. 1.

Current law allows minors who are at least 14 to use an ultraviolet tanning device with written permission from their parents.

But state Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, the bill's sponsor, said the higher age limit is necessary because the type of radiation used in tanning beds can lead to skin damage and melanoma, a potentially fatal form of skin cancer.

"Skin damage is cumulative, so the more exposure one gets younger in life, the worse the harmful effects will be," Lieu said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/09/BA3V1LFH78.DTL

[pnwmom]

1. Good law. I know a teen who died of melanoma.

Tanning beds are a real health risk, and even more so to teens. It makes sense to require people to be adults before they can choose to take that risk.

[YvonneCa]

44. Here's another good law...

...signed by Brown:
http://www.dailycal.org/2011/10/08/gov-brown-signs-second-part-of-california-dream-act/

California Dream Act. :)

[YvonneCa]

45. And here's another...

...one, signed today:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2011/10/gov-jerry-brown-makes-it-illegal-to-openly-carry-a-handgun-in-public.html

NRA not going to like this one... ;)

[pnwmom]

52. Yes -- very sensible. n/t

[pnwmom]

53. Kudos to Brown & the state of California. n/t

[plumbob]

2. In other news, addicts, pushers object to heroin ban.

News?

[ButterflyBlood]

3. Seems kind of unnecesarily nanny-statist to me

Sure excessive tanning bed use is obviously not healthy, but it's not like the day one turns 18 they magically develop some resistance to it that makes it less of a threat. Probably would be better to set up some system rather to limit use of them to avoid dangerous levels.

[pnwmom]

6. Nanny state might apply if this affected adults.

But it doesn't. It only affects teens, who aren't old enough to sign contracts and shouldn't be old enough to sign up for tanning treatments that threaten their health.

[TorchTheWitch]

11. it's nanny-state bullshit

Tanning beds are no more unhealthy for teens or adults than the actual sun is. But nobody is trying to pass a law that teens not be allowed to tan in the actual sun, are they? It's already stupid nanny-state bullshit that they need a permission slip from their parents to use a tanning bed as it is.

[greiner3]

14. "it's nanny-state bullshit"

And at what age would you suggest the 'state' stop/begin protecting those who's common sense are unable to make personal decisions that negate caveat emptor?

Using the ad ruducto absurdum method your argument fails; sorry.

Your argument says that either a child of say 5, or someone of diminished capacity-senility, mental retardation?-is capable of making a decision that has proven detrimental/deadly consequences to their health.

The state already protects this class of the population from many other harmful acts, whether or not a legal guardian gives permission or not. Teens have a lot of restrictions already; driving, drinking, curfews, ability to sign legal documents, etc...

Again, at what age or particular activity does the state fail at the protection of this class of people if that activity is harmful?

[pnwmom]

22. Wrong. Tanning beds pose a higher risk than the sun does,

because the dose of exposure is more concentrated.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/05/27/127208539/tanning-beds-pose-substantial-cancer-risks

Cancer epidemiologist and lead researcher DeAnn Lazovich of the University of Minnesota says melanoma risk was 74 percent higher for the people who tanned indoors compared with those who didn't.

SNIP

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center's Dr. Allan Halpern, chief of dermatology, says these findings are an important addition to evidence about tanning beds and melanoma risk. Tanning is unsafe no matter how people do it, he says. "What tanning beds are doing is concentrating the same kind of rays that we get from the sun; so, you're getting a much bigger dose" than you would from the same amount of time outdoors, he says.

SNIP

World Health Organization has classified tanning beds as carcinogenic and recommends banning them for kids under 18.

[CreekDog]

39. Nanny State = Republican terminology

congrats on getting it into the DU lexicon though.

[Chan790]

72. Re: unhealthy? Untrue per the evening news.

One has a 75% greater risk of melanoma from an equal period of exposure to UVA/UVB from a tanning bed than from direct sunlight "according to multiple studies" according to the FDA.

That's what they said on the news...I don't care to go find the studies myself. That corresponds to what I've heard elsewhere so I'm taking it at face-value.

[SemperEadem]

15. it's nanny state because they usurp the parents in the final decision

they already aren't old enough to sign the contracts: their parents sign it and give permission.

the air in Ca is more dangerous than a tanning bed.

[pnwmom]

23. Tanning beds provide a more concentrated dose and so are more dangerous

than laying out in the sun.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=5021419&mesg_id=5021656

[ehrnst]

35. Child safety seat laws, and laws that state how old a child can be before being left alone

usurp the parents' wishes in those decisions, as do age of consent laws.

[ehrnst]

36. The parents cannot legally give permission for their minor kids to smoke or drink.

[ButterflyBlood]

47. Actually, parents can let their kids drink in most states

You've seriously never been to a wedding that had teens drinking?

[ehrnst]

59. I worked in restaurants in three states - and I was told

If I served a minor, even with their parent's blessing, we would be fined at best, shut down at worst.

If a caterer at a private function wants to look the other way and serve minors, then that's their risk.

[CreekDog]

40. one more ignorant, uninformed post arguing for free access to tanning beds by minors

unencumbered by the thought process.

[ButterflyBlood]

48. Actually I don't think anyone is arguing for free access

The current law requires parental consent.

[hughee99]

55. Teen are only old enough to consent to STD treatments, apparently

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2011/10/gov-the-governor-also-signed-a-measure-allowing-minors-who-are-12-years-of-age-or-older-to-consent-without-their-parents-kn.html

The previous law on tanning beds allowed 14-18 year olds to tan with parental consent. Now it's illegal regardless of consent, so even before this law was passed it wasn't left up to the teen to decide whether it was okay or not.

Yes, Nanny state does apply in this case.

[pnwmom]

56. Tanning beds aren't treatment and they carry health risks.

Adults consent for medical treatment for their children, but this is a whole different thing.

I know a 16 year old who forged her mother's name on the consent form. (Her mother noticed the tanning but didn't find out till much later that her consent was required.) It probably happens all the time.

[hughee99]

57. In this case, adults DO NOT have to consent for treatment for children 12 and over

and the treatment (depending on what is done, HPV vaccine for example) can carry risks.

[pnwmom]

64. Treatments also involve health benefits. Tanning beds don't. n/t

[hughee99]

66. So it's not the risks aren't really that important, then?

It seems to me that people wouldn't tan it if it didn't involve some benefit (even if it's just self-esteem).

In any case, if there are risks involved, shouldn't people old enough to be responsible be involved in the decision, regardless if there are benefits or not.

I'm sorry, but you're arguing that a 12 year old IS old enough to consent to vaccines and medical treatment without a parent being involved at all, but a 17 year old isn't old enough to consent to 15 minutes in a tanning bed even WITH a parent also consenting. I'm certain this all makes sense to you, but I'm skeptical that you're going to be able to convince me this is okay.

[pnwmom]

69. According to medical ethicists, it's a matter of weighing risks versus benefits.

In the case of tanning beds, the calculation comes down firmly on the risk side.

If a teen wants browner skin as a matter of self-esteem, tanning sprays are the better, safer option.

[hughee99]

77. When discussing risk vs. benefit, even among medical ethicists

isn't it usual to inform the patient of the risks and let them decide? In one case, the patient isn't considered old enough to decide for themselves, in the other the patient is. The patient is either capable of making their own decisions or they are not. If they are, let them decide on both issues for themselves. If they are not, let a parent or guardian decide on both issues. The state has determined when the patient is mature enough to make an informed decision, but not base on anything related to the patients ability to actually make one.

[harmonicon]

17. This is why we have a distinction between adults and children though.

Is it "nanny-statist" to not allow kids to smoke, drink, etc.?

[ButterflyBlood]

46. The thing with tobacco is almost all adult users get addicted as teens

For alcohol I don't care if teens drink with the permission and supervision of their parents, which most states allow. And was basically the situation in California prior to this (requiring parental permission).

[harmonicon]

73. I didn't smoke until I was an adult. (nt)

[ehrnst]

21. Same with tobacco and alcohol. You need to draw the line at some age.

Yes, it has been determined that the younger you start using tobacco, alcohol and tanning beds, the greater the damage to your health will be.

I agree with this law, just as I agree with child safety seat laws.

[shanti]

32. if you've had skin cancers

(which people mainly get as youth), you'd be for this bill. i'm for it and glad jerry signed it!

[RebelOne]

65. My mother developed skin cancer on her face

when she was in her 60s. The doctor told her it was because she used to bake in the sun when she was in her 20s. When we first moved to Florida, we lived on Miami Beach, just a few steps from the ocean. My mother baked in the sun. She was a bathing suit model had to keep a tan. Well, she paid the price 40 years later.

[shanti]

70. i'm sorry to hear that

and totally understand because me and my siblings have also had basal cell carcinomas of the face and tons of pre-cancerous spots all over. we grew up in southern california and spent summers on the beach from age 10 and up. i have the lightest skin and have had 3 bcc's removed and i'm 55. i remember a few particularly bad blistering sunburns which no doubt had much to do with the bcc's. it never occurred to me not to try and tan - we even used baby oil with iodine for tanning oil - yikes!

my mother, 80, spent just as much time on the beach too, but her olive complexion didn't keep her from getting bcc's on her face too, just not as many as me.

the days of baking on the beach were over years ago, yet some young people still think they are invincible.

[CreekDog]

38. Nanny State is a Republican term

why you're using it here is anyone's guess.

and laws that apply to children, you're calling "Nanny" statish?

:wtf:

[alp227]

60. you're only confirming my and our opinion that libertarianism is an adolescent POV n/t

[ButterflyBlood]

61. I'm 27

I've also never used a tanning bed in my life. But I am young enough to remember how frustrating most of these type of laws and still oppose them. It'd be kind of hypocritical for me not too. I also oppose teen curfews and the ridiculously high drinking age.

[alp227]

62. Drinking age i agree with you,

(and I'm 20 btw), but I'd support curfews for under-18s still. Explain your stance on curfews please? You can argue that yes some teens wanna have some fun but considering how in some areas teens use nights to start trouble and mug people, that has added to how adults distrust youth.

[ButterflyBlood]

63. If you were near me, I'd buy you some booze. ;)

Something I've done for underage people many times. I still go to parties with a large underage contingent in attendance. Never something to worry about where I live, underage drinking probably ranks around marijuana use on the police's priority list, meaning you are more likely to be cited for pissing in an alleyway.

The thing about teen curfews is the people I see ever causing trouble late at night are basically never teens. Really our age group, especially in college is FAR worse as far as this goes, maybe it's due to the abuse of newfound freedom, but I've never seen troublesome teenagers out at night. Now as for college kids and young adults...My hometown passed a curfew when I was in high school and I remember when it became kind of controversial because most of the teens picked up under it were coming back from things like youth groups and church events, it was a very conservative and religious town. Wasn't a big deal to me personally because I was rarely out late at night anyway (unless I was working late and coming back but there was an exception for that) but still opposed it on principle. They ended up kind of not enforcing it and there was no affect whatsoever on crime, mostly because the little crime there was wasn't by teens in the first place. Makes you wonder why they even bothered with it in the first place, probably because of a few isolated and blown out of proportion incidents.

[alp227]

67. maybe not in Minnesota,

but I'm from California and I could tell you all sorts of stories of juvenile delinquency from where I'm from especially due to street gangs and generally kids from broken homes. and have you heard about the violent flash mobs in Philadelphia and Chicago last summer? that's why the mayor of Phila. (a Democrat) created a youth curfew.

PS: Have you/your friends ever crossed the border to Canada to drink there, since the drinking age there is 18?

[ButterflyBlood]

68. It's a 6-hour drive at least where I'm from

and it's 19 in the border provinces here. From where I went to college it was at least an 8-hour drive, and booze was so easily available anyway it wasn't much of an issue.

[alp227]

76. cool story. point is, how much should the law have role in protecting children?

every state bans kids from buying tobacco, alcohol, and pornography. based on MPAA rating system most movie theatres require adult supervision for under-17's to see rated R movies. and then states like CA ban kids from using tanning beds, based on a compelling health issue (and of course the tanning bed industry will make empty dispute about skin cancer just like Big Tobacco fought scientists for years about smoking/lung cancer).

and then controversially some cities in CA (like San Francisco) passed laws banning toys from fast food restaurant meals yet some brainless fools overreact and oversimplify it as a "Happy Meal Ban" and make excuses to hate Democratic politicians as totalitarians. in fact, we've got poor and often nutritionally ignorant parents feeding junk food to their kids all the damn time especially with those made-in-China cheap plastic trinkets as an incentive.

[petronius]

4. Lazy-ass teens! I got my melanoma the natural way; why the heck can't they!?

:o

Seriously, I like this law. Adults can make their own decisions, and salons can market to them, but this is right in line with all the other child-protective laws that help kids reach that point...

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

5. Like O.M.F.G, I like need to like tan and shit

Cause like between like school and working at the mall and shit I get like really pale and shit. I don't like care if it is bad for me and shit 'cause like if it takes like five years off my life or shit I don't care cause those years would probably like suck and shit.

Like c'mon and shit, we look fierce!

[ronnie624]

7. Tanned skin is, by definition, burned skin.

Everyone who does it, will one day regret it. Even if they don't develop skin cancer, it will gradually make their skin saggy, wrinkly and ugly.

[MADem]

8. They can lay out in the sun, the old fashioned way--or get that spray crap and look

like Bonehead the Speaker.

Good for Jerry Brown.

[tannersrights]

9. Crazy law

What will be the next step? Police on the beaches checking for ID's?
Tanning, if done correctly, is only healthy (vitamin D).
To get a tan is not a skin-damage (just as little as growing your muscles while working out is a muscle damage).
Burning, in the open sun and in tanning beds, is not good.
Drowning in a swimming-pool is also possible, but would anybody think about outlawing teenagers from swimming-pools?
Look for the commercial interests among the sun-scare lobby that are behind this campaign against tanning and who base their arguments upon flawed statistics.
Find out more

[Kolesar]

10. I quit sunbathing because sun causes wrinkles by destroying the elastin in our skin...

...ultimately. It shows up in 20 years.

Welcome to our forum!

[TorchTheWitch]

12. it's also a huge benefit for those of us with seasonal depression

and a hell of a lot cheaper than a prescription light-box especially for those of us without medical insurance.

I use tanning beds in the winter and occasionally when we get a long string of cloudy days not for the tan but for the light. And now that I'm at an age when wrinkles are a worry I use the tanning bed with skin sun screen. It's the only way I can get through fall and winter without dragging my ass out of bed every day and periodically contemplating either hibernation or slitting my wrists in the bathtub.

[ehrnst]

28. But are you seventeen - with no such medical prescription? (nt)

[eilen]

30. I hardly think lack of sunny days is a problem in California. nt

[shanti]

34. we're talking kids here, not adults

if you want to bbq yourself as an adult, be my guest.

[hedgehog]

43. There's a lot of evidence out there that it's not the light per se

but rather that the body uses the light to manufacture Vitamin D. Check it out - a month's supply is pretty cheap and no cancer worries!

http://biopsychiatry.com/dvit.htm

not everyone agrees, of course. Good luck to you - SAD is serious!

[pnwmom]

24. You wouldn't say that if you knew a 15 year old that died of melanoma.

Tanning beds concentrate the exposure and are more dangerous than laying out in the sun -- though that isn't good for fair skinned people either, especially children and teens.

[ehrnst]

25. Yes, that Journal of Investigative Dermatology and the AAP have such a HUGE lobby in California...

"New research published online Oct. 6 in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology suggests that the main type of ultraviolet rays used in tanning beds -- UVA1 -- may penetrate to a deep layer of skin that is most vulnerable to the cancer-causing changes caused by UV rays."

The American Academy of Pediatrics is also behind the ban. Tell me - what commercial interest do they have in this?

One might also ask what commercial interests are behind "Tanners Rights"

[shanti]

33. no, it's not "only healthy"

good grief :eyes:

[CreekDog]

41. what about lobbyists for tanning beds?

seems like they are popping up here and there too. :shrug:

[iamthebandfanman]

13. Good.

when i was a teeanger i knew girls who went every day for the longest time ur allowed to be in one ..
we are almost 30 now and her skin looks terrible!

tanning beds do terrible things to your skin.
and beyond that, most people tell me its like an addiction... that going actually lightens their mood (i assume because of the type of light) ..


do i think they should outlaw tanning beds? nah. we let people smoke and drink after all. maybe make minors have to have permission? sounds okay to me.

[lildreamer316]

18. I started tanning in a tanning bed when I was 20.

I am 38 now.
Several people here are on my facebook friends list; and I will swear on an affadavit that I have recent pictures there of me.

My skin is fine. In fact, people regularly think I am younger than 38. I used to be an exotic dancer and would still bare as much skin as I did then without embarrassment.

Everyone's health is individual in many ways. What is horrible for one person can be fine for someone else.

[iamthebandfanman]

20. trust me,

the person that im specifically talking about would agree with my statement. infact she complains about it often n says she should have listened to my warnings about skin cancer (i used to shake my head everytime i asked where she was going after school n shed reply 'tanning duh, i have to get my fix or ill be in a bad mood all day').

her skins peels randomly , and she cant stay out in the sun very long in the summer without terrible burning (so bad she even has to take off work and get a docs appointment).

she started when she was 14.

guess it effects people differently eh ?


again, you were 20 when you decided to start. this isnt about people over 18. you have every right as an adult to do whatever the hell you want to your own skin.

maybe we should let 14 year olds be able to buy cigarettes again too? i mean, NOT EVERYONE who smokes gets cancer after all.


EDIT: just thought id add that everything is better for you in moderation.. something my friend should have practiced instead of going every day without fail

[eilen]

31. Different skin types have higher risk of developing melanoma nt.

[CreekDog]

42. does your experience mean they are safe?

i know smokers who don't have cancer.

does that mean smoking isn't dangerous?

are you really arguing this? why bother having scientists when all you have to do is decide that it didn't hurt you so none of that stuff matters.

:shrug:

[Cool Logic]

16. How can individuals be free to choose, without running the risk of making bad choices?

Having said that, this is state legislation and the Constitution does give the states power to legislate in this sphere. Obviously, some states enjoy more freedom than do others.

[lildreamer316]

19. Wish I could rec this post.

This really is the point...

[iamthebandfanman]

26. mind you we are talking about minors,

not adults.

we already tell them what they can and can not purchase through law.

whats so different about this?

[ehrnst]

27. Minors are different than adults, and are subject to protection from making some 'bad choices"

A 12 year old does not have the "freedom to choose" to get drunk and learn the "hard way" about alcohol abuse. Not legally.

Toddlers do not have the freedom to make the "bad choice" of not riding in a car seat - because the potential negative consequences are unacceptable.

There is a line that we draw legally for protecting minors from the permanent ill effects of bad judgement. In some instances it's 18, in other's it's 21.

[JoeyT]

29. Yeah, stupid nanny state.

We should let kids buy cigarettes too. If the kids want to get cancer later, it's their choice!

FREEEEDOOOM!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

51. The problem is people who persistently make bad choices become a burden on the state

For example I would expect the number of people with tattoo's on their face who are also on public assistance is pretty high.

[Cool Logic]

54. Actually, the problem is that the state insulates people from the consequences of their bad choices,

at the expense of responsible individuals. And in so doing, it deprives irresponsible people of the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

75. My experience working on consumer bankruptcies taught me,

those prone to repeatedly making mistakes rarely learn from them no matter what the consequences.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. we mostly ban tattoos under 18, and those are not life threatening

we ban cigs. drinking.


the ability to tan in tanning beds is not a constitutional right afforded to minors :)

[ButterflyBlood]

49. You can get a tattoo with parental permission

And minors can drink under parental supervision in most states.

[haele]

50. Some states you can't. Especially states where there are high concentration of gangs.

Unless you have parental permission, you can't legally purchase tattoo services in California until you're 18. Even then, Family Services can get involved to investigate the reasons why a minor would even want a tattoo.
That's not to say 14 - 17 year olds don't con tattoo parlors or friends to tattoo them with various tribal, tramp stamps, "asian character", and Pacheco lettering tattoos, for whatever reason (wanting to be "cool", hip, or to piss off their parents, or to fit in with peers). But a tattoo parlor can lose their license if they are caught selling a minor a tattoo without parental permission, and are supposed to report evidence of possible gang activity or abusive behaviour even if the parent does give permission.

Sell is the operative word. If no money, goods, or services passed between the parties, there's not much the state will do. Except investigate the tattoo parlor for affiliation with gang activity.

Haele

[Taverner]

58. Yet another overreaching law that will do absolutely no good

[BiggJawn]

71. Sure, Buffy, go ahead and hit the FakeBake.

You'll really have the guys lining up for you when you're 40 and look like a worn-out Coach purse...

[npk]

74. I think they should have made it 17 YOA but...

All this is going to do is move all this tanning underground. Teens, who have friends that own tanning beds in their homes, are going to go there instead.

Personally I think people should just use that spray on tan shit anyway. I know it doesn't last as long, but at least it's not harmful or less harmful.

[hunter]

78. I'm a Southern California blond who was always tan as a kid.

My old skin isn't nice. I've had a few nasty things cut out of it.

Someone ought to make a software app that takes a photograph of a kid who wants a tan and then maps fifty year old sun-scarred skin onto them. Maybe include a few videos of bcc excision procedures and such.

We don't allow shops to sell cigarettes to kids, and we shouldn't allow shops to sell UV tanning services to kids for the same reason.