|09-24-2013, 08:24 AM||#1 (permalink)|
Join Date: Aug 27 2002
Location: East Coast
Rep Power: 15
ITA Update 9/23/13
Indoor Tanning Association, Inc., 2025 M St, NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 ∑ Phone: 888-377-0477 ∑ Fax: 202-367-2142
Member Update 09/23/2013:
With the advent of the Centers for Disease Controlís recent efforts to gather information from the public on ways to reduce UV exposure, I have to give our enemies grudging credit. They could write the book on how to use phony science, scare tactics and a well-oiled PR machine to get a willing government to do oneís bidding.
Can you imagine? The CDC, the nationís premier public health institute is working on a policy that will further encourage Americans to turn away from the only natural way our bodies can produce Vitamin D and take pills instead. Even when report after report indicates vitamin D deficiency is rampant in the population. We have always known that the FDA is susceptible to politics and pressure but I have always given the CDC more credit. I am afraid they donít deserve it.
Right now, our old friends the Derms have a lot of the one thing we donít haveÖ.money. They have used it to influence the media, they have used it with the Congress and they have used it with the regulatory agencies. The CDC is just the most recent target. Unfortunately it is an important target.
Only one thing will change this, we as an industry have to step up. We have to work together. We have to show unity and pool our resources and we have to work towards common goals. The political climate is right for our enemies and they are emboldened. If the industry doesnít change, nothing else will.
A New Battle?
ITA Vs. CDC
By John P. Ribner
After wrapping up its correspondences to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Indoor Tanning Association could find itself defending our industry against the U.S. Centers for Disease Control!
On August 5, 2013, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) requested information from the public on "preventing skin cancer through the reduction of UV exposure.Ē Though it is unclear as to the CDCís motivation for seeking this input, members of the Indoor Tanning Association (ITA) are alarmed because the language used in the Federal organizationís call for comment automatically links UV exposure with illness. Needless to say, the ITA responded to the CDC on this issue, and the tanning organization plans to continue monitoring the situation and reporting on its developments.
Although the CDC doesnít have specific regulatory powers over indoor tanning, the organizationís duty is to protect public health and safety through the control and prevention of disease, injury and disability. "Itís unfortunate that the CDC opened this issue for comment late in the summer,Ē said John Overstreet, ITA Executive Director. "This gave us little time to marshal the scientists and researchers who support a balanced UV-exposure policy from our government. From the nature and wording of this request for information, it seems the organization has already made up its mind, and we can only assume our political enemies have a role in this.Ē
Working with the organizationís Ultraviolet Light Research and Education Foundation, Overstreet says the ITA responded to the CDCís request for comment with two extensive scientific literature reviews. "Since the 2009 IARC Report has been the driving force behind most Federal and state policy makersí proposed restrictions,Ē Overstreet said, "much of our review focused on the limitations and questionable findings within that report. It also illustrates the ways the reportís conclusions are inappropriate for policy-making in the U.S.Ē
In its comments, the ITA argued that the public health will be served best if CDC assures balanced communications to the public regarding the risks and benefits of UV exposure. "Given the nature and issues of the currently available studies,Ē Overstreet said, "the question is whether the existing body of research adequately captures the nuance of this complex biological mechanism. Based on the state of the science and absence of real consensus, any definitive risk statement by the CDC is essentially the declaration of a consensus where none yet exists.Ē
The ITAís letter to the CDC comes on the heels of the tanning organizationís correspondence with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. On May 6, the FDA announced its intention to reclassify tanning equipment and sunlamps to Class II medical devices, and is also considering other safety control measures. If the order is finalized, tanning unit manufacturers will have to submit a pre-market notification (510(k)) showing their products have met certain performance testing requirements, address certain product design characteristics and provide comprehensive labeling regarding risks of use. If approved, the tanning industry will have one year to comply with the new requirements.
In response to the FDAís announcement, the ITA listed and submitted its questions regarding what it believes are inaccuracies in the reclassification recommendation. Among the ITAís many concerns, the organizationís members are convinced that the FDAís 510(k) process will be expensive and time consuming for tanning equipment and sunlamp manufacturers to complete.
The ITA firmly believes the CDCís request for public comment is a significant issue facing the tanning industry today. The organization urges all salon owners to contact the ITA to help support our industry. Salon owners wishing to do so can call 888.377.0477. To review the ITAís comments to the CDC, use this link. Click Here.
http://www.theita.com/members/EmailOptPreferences.aspx?id=9187891&e=ro firstname.lastname@example.org&h=bdd8c30f3ff5d6a09 2d7de690fe3284ba80ba505
Superior UV Technologies
(888) 526-7712 x77
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|ITA Update 5/11/12||Robert K||General Tanning Industry Discussions||13||05-14-2012 06:49 PM|
|RAI update||lil_missfit||Tanning Lotion Buzz||3||11-10-2004 05:16 PM|
|HRT Update:||Don Smith||Tanning Salon Management||2||07-22-2002 06:06 PM|