Don Smith

FYI:

~~Sheila, in response to some perceptive questions "over there", lamented that there is not the “cooperation” in the indoor tanning industry (especially between the various websites) that she believes is necessary. So, in the spirit of cooperation, I will answer her questions.

Perhaps I should ask the participants on each board ~

1~ What positive changes have occurred within the Tanning Industry in the last 5 years.

1. IMHO, the most positive change is the fact that a small “core” group of people now attend the meetings of importance to the indoor tanning industry. In the past, NO ONE attended these meetings and presented our side of the issues of importance. Credit must go to Joe Levy who was the first (at a 1995 meeting) one who had the “courage” (read cojones) to “stand up” to the bullies of the anti-tanning segment of the dermatology community.

2. There has been a plethora of articles published in the 4 trade publications pointing out that the benefits of sensible, moderate and responsible exposure to UVR outweigh the minimal and manageable risks involved.

3. More tanning salon owners are “aware” of the fact that they SHOULD become more involved. This “awareness” has not yet resulted in them “becoming active” but it is a start!

2~ What negative changes have occurred within the Tanning Industry in the last 5 years.

1. The “Karagas” acticle has to be right up there at the head of the list.

2. The “Whitmore” article is a close second.

3. The fact, IMHO, that tanning salon owners are still inclined to leave the decisions of importance to the manufacturers shows that our segment of the industry still has not “come of age” in the industry.

4. The fact that only 5 tanning salon owners attended the past two FDA/Indoor Tanning Industry meetings shows how far we have to go if we are to be “equal partners” with the manufacturing community.

3~ Name 2 situations where the Collective Segments worked together to solve a problem or create good things for the industry.

1. A large group of individuals met in LV two years ago in an abortive attempt to form a “united front” to address regulatory matters. The meeting did not result in either a “consensus” or a “united front”.

2. The “core” of the LV group met again the following February in Washington, DC to discuss regulatory (and other) issues and, once again, the meeting did not result in either a “consensus” or a “united front”.

[Note: I decided not to participate after attending both of the above meetings because I became convinced during the long meetings that (as opposed to what I was told before we met) the “group” had to be under the control and auspices of the ITA. I believed then, as I believe today, that one organization (or individual?) MUST have as their primary “focus” the best interests of tanning salon owners. Thus, I decided to forego the obvious benefits of being part of a well-funded group and walk alone.]

3. The “core” group has attended all of the past 5 TEPRSSC meetings (and it is likely that they will all be there on 5/2/02).

[Note: At the 5/99 TEPRSSC meeting, my presentation was instrumental in causing the committee to vote 11-0 AGAINST the FDA proposal for Amendments 1 (mandatory exposure schedules) and 2 (adopting the cancer action spectrum) and, if I never make another contribution, I am proud of making this one!]

4. The “core” group attended the September, 2001 FDA/Indoor Tanning Industry meeting.

5. The “core” group attended the September, 1998 FDA meeting and a number of us participated.

6. The “core” group attended the February 7 & 8, 2002 FDA/Indoor Tanning Industry meeting.

7. Three of us (Michael Stepp, Joe Schuster and I) were invited by FDA to present scientific papers at the June, 2001 American Society of Photobiology meeting in Chicago.

8. The June, 2001 “Biological Effects Of Light” symposium was attended by many of the “core” group (including yours truly) and we heard the “who’s who” of photobiology present two days of FAVORABLE papers.

9. A number of us (who do not always agree!) remain in constant “contact” with each other and, rest assured that we continue to discuss the issues of importance to the indoor tanning industry. We often disagree but we are seldom disagreeable (the most “prickly”, as you might expect, is yours truly but you must consider the fact that I am the ONLY one of the "core" group who ALWAYS takes the tanning salon owners' side and this inevitably puts me into “conflict” with the goals and objectives of the manufacturing community – I guess it comes with the territory!).

10. The “core” players met with state regulators in April, 2001 at the Looking Fit 2nd Annual Regulatory Meeting. This meeting was very productive and helped each “side” better understand the problems of the other side.

11. The "internet revolution" has made it possible for enhanced and timely communications within and between the various industry segments.

[Note: Although the industry cannot take credit, the fact that there are a large number of scientific articles supportive of our position being published in scientific journals is ENORMOUSLY helpful.]

There are probably many other examples I could give you, ~~Sheila, but perhaps this “recital” will reassure you (and those reading these words) that a “core” group of us has been trying to work together on the issues of importance to the indoor tanning industry and we will undoubtedly continue to do so.

I hope this helps.

Don

Rich C

Don,

You and your core group are to be commended for the time you've taken. I can only say that perhaps if there was more awareness for those meetings you might get more takers? I know it's probably posted here on the boards, but if you don't come here then you don't know. Is there a regular communication that goes out to members or any organization to alert them to these meetings and ask for their assistance by attending?

Or maybe some are intimidated? Your core group could recite your forumlas for photons this and that all night, but it's still greek to some of us. Some might consider themselves more of a hinderance than a help. Having not attended such meetings, is such a thing even possible? If not, is there a way to communicate that to make them more comfortable and to make them understand that their presence alone speaks for them?

Just random thoughts.....

Don Smith

Rich:

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to respond and share your thoughts. It may help if I set forth the relatively small number of individuals who made up the "core" group that is ALWAYS there.

1. Joe Levy - Smart Tan
2. Jerry Devaney - Sun Ergoline
3. Steve Doty - Sun Ergoline
4. Joe Schuster - Light Sources (Formerly w/ Wolff) and SAE
5. Bob Wagner - Aegis
6. Dan Humiston - Salon Owner & ITA
7. Bill Pipp - ETS & ITA
8. Yours Truly - Salon Owner & TSO

Also, the following individuals attended one or more of the meetings.

1. Rick Mattoon - Looking Fit & Virgo
2. Jim Shepard - Sperti & ITA
3. Michael Stepp - Wolff
4. Jerry Frank - Cosmedico
5. Dave Meyer - Light Sources
6. Frank Vierling - Salon Owner
7. Gene Brenner - Salon Owner
8. Robbie Segler - Salon Owner
9. Shari Jones - Salon Owner & Ultrabronz (now w/Barclay)
10. Bruce Schoenfelder - Salon Owner & TanToday

And a few others that I appologize to in advance for forgetting to mention them.

What is, IMHO, the "common denominator" between these diverse individuals? All of them care deeply about the welfare of the indoor tanning industry; all of them are willing to make whatever sacrifice is necessary in order to attend the various meetings that I described; and, IMHO, all of them enjoy (I believe) the "feeling" that comes from "giving back" to the industry (we all need to do something to give our life "meaning"!).

Why have I made most of the "scientific presentations" for the industry? There are three reasons. First of all, I spent 35 years "learning" the terminology that is used by the scientific community and so it is not a "strange language" to me. Secondly, I ALWAYS do my homework; I spend an enormous amount of time preparing for these meeings. And finally, I enjoy the "give and take" that is part and parcel of making a presentation at these meetings.

Is there "room at the inn" for others who want to participate? Absolutely! For instance, Lonn Dugan (of Suntanning.com) came to the 2/7 & 2/8 FDA meeting and gave a very well received presentation.

Why don't more people participate? Because, IMHO, the FDA is a "scientific" entity and they ONLY respond to an argument that is "science" based. Running a busy salon organization (or company) may not allow the time that is required to get "up to date" on the issues being discussed. That is why I have sent many of the individuals (but not all) listed some of my "thoughts" BEFORE the various meetings so they will know where I am coming from and why I "post" my comments in the "Regulatory" section of www.naatso.org so that ANYONE can read and print them out if they so desire.

What do we (tanning salon owners) need to do? Very simply, we need to develop an "activist core group" of our own that would first number 10, then 100 and (hopefully) then 1000 strong! We must also learn to "vote with our checkbooks" and let the manufacturer "community" know that we will not be amused at any action they take that does not consider our best interests (in summary, we must quit acting like second class citizens!).

In summary, Rich, people like YOU need to "get involved" in the "process" in order to make sure that the indoor tanning industry grows and prospers!

Don

Don Smith

~~Sheila:

You said: "Perhaps I should ask the participants on each board ~" and I answered your questions.

Do you intend to respond? Or did my answer take the wind (hot air) out of your sails? LOL

Don

fungirlz

Excellent information..
Thanks Rich C for your input..

Lets try to keep this thread going in a strong positive direction.

Thanks to both you and RichC Don..

Love, Chris