If we put some faith into the results of a recent study from the Department of Dermatology at the University of Minnesota this is a fatal error. "Toasting" yourselves on a tanning bed increases your risk of developing skin cancer by 287%! Or, if you like that better, it almost quadruples (4x) it!
The results Rachel Isaksson Vogel and her colleagues from the University of New Mexico Cancer Center and the Brown University present in their latest paper in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI) will probably be quite shocking for some of you who relied on the ability of the UV-filters in tanning beds to reduce the increase in cancer risk (Vogel. 2014).
If you look at the data that's based on an analysis of the tanning practices of 1852 subjects, it becomes pretty obvious: The protection the filters appear to offer against sunburns does not translate into cancer protection! On the contrary!
Figure 1: Risk of melanoma by ever use of indoor tanning among individuals who tanned indoors without burning and never users stratified by lifetime burns from sun as estimated using logistic regression (n = 1852; cf. Vogel 2014).
If you scrutinize the data in Figure 1 you will have to admit that it is obvious that those of the subjects who were cautious enough not to expose themselves to "real sun" to avoid getting burned, were the ones with the highest melanoma risk due to tanning bed radiation! Those who avoid the sun like a plague have a 4x higher risk even after adjustment for
What else can protect you? Peer reviewed evidence for skin cancer protective effects exist from:
milk thistle (Katiyar. 2005)
melatonin (Janjetovic, 2014)
calcium (1g) + 400IU vitamin D3 (-37% in women with increased risk; Tang. 2011)
retinol (25,000IU/day; cf. Moon. 1997)
retinol and zinc + riboflavin and niacin + vitamin C and molybdenum (at 1-2x the RDA; cf. Blot. 1993)
Too much antioxidants, on the other hand have been shown to increase cancer risk in women (#68%; cf. Hercberg. 2007). Against that background, a reasonable amount of controlled sun exposure and a coretene rich diet offer probably the best protection. sex, age at reference date (in years),
eye color (gray/blue, green, hazel, or brown),
hair color (red, blond, light brown, or dark brown/black),
skin color (very fair, fair, light olive, vs dark olive, brown, very dark brown, or black),
freckles (none, very few, few, some/many),
moles (none, very few, few, some/many),
income (≤$60,000, >$60,000, missing),
education (completed college, did not complete college),
family history of melanoma (yes, no, missing),
lifetime routine sun exposure (continuous),
lifetime sun exposure from outdoor activities (continuous),
lifetime sun exposure from outdoor jobs (continuous), and
lifetime sunscreen use (continuous)
using propensity score methods in two-sided statistical tests. In other words, while the raw data on the left hand side is confounded by being at high risk and avoiding the real sun, the data on the right hand side (orange bars) is not!
Now you want a supplemental alternative / adjunct, right?
Against that background the promised "supplemental tanning formula" which consists of pretty ordinary supplements, you can find on the shelves of every larger Internet-retailer will probably become even more interesting, right?
Table 1: Tanning of different body regions before and after treatment with the supplement combo ()
I have to admit, the results scientists from the Laboratoire OENOBIOL in Paris recorded are not very impressive (see Table 1), but the difference was significant and - and this may be even more important - the ingredients, i.e. 3mg beta carotene, 3mg lycopene. 5mg vitamin E (alpha tocopherol), and 30mg vitamin C (ascorbic acid) were ingested in a no-tanning scenario.
You want to kill two birds with one stone? Try "Tomatorade(R)" and get your daily tanning (Postaire. 1997) and cancer protective (Aust. 2005) dose of lycopene right from nature.
Bottom line: The fact that the "supplemental tanner" worked even in a no-sun-exposure scenario is interesting, because lycopene, in particular has been shown to be preferentially destroyed by UV radiation, in the course of the tanning process. The slight tan the subjects developed upon it's supplement restoration is thus only the cosmetic side of the benefits one can derive from this combo. What makes it really interesting, though, is that it will simultaneously build the skins defenses against UV-radiation and could thus be used in conjunction with reasonable (=partial shade) sun exposure to develop a beautiful and healthy tan without havin' to resort to the aforementioned "Asitoaster" and/or drugs like melanotan.
Go here : suppversity.blogspot.com/2014/06/sun-burn-free-tanning-bed-tan-but-4x.html