Stay With Me...#2: How Did We Get Where We Are?

Don Smith · 09-03-2002, 10:15 PM

FYI To Ask Don's Army:

[Note: Please read "Stay With Me...#1" before reading this post.]

Now that we have agreed that the "public image" of the word "tanning" is negative, it is time to take a hard look at how this sad state of affairs came to be.

Question 2: What caused the word "tanning" to have negative connotations in the mind of the American public?

Stay with me folks, you'll be glad you did!

Don "Waiting For Your Answers Again" Smith

Tan Friendly · 09-03-2002, 10:18 PM

I'm thinking it was the invention called "Sun-block". Am I right don?

BooBop · 09-03-2002, 10:28 PM

Overexposure and the derms negativity??? along with our own stupidity and non education

_________________
Proud supporter of Don's Army
Mitzi Soakin up the Sun, Tell everybody to lighten up. Rock On!
[ This Message was edited by: Mitzi on 2002-09-03 22:29 ]

neon · 09-03-2002, 10:33 PM

I think it was mostly the "C" word and the sunscrean manufacts pushing constant use of sunscreen. We know that sunscreen is important but they make UV light sound so dangerous. Even people I've tried to help educate still think they are sacrificing their safety to be beautiful.

Don Smith · 09-03-2002, 11:34 PM

WOW!

Great answers!

Terri correctly said that the start of the negative connotation of the word "tanning" was when the use of sunscreens came into vogue about 15 years ago. Until then, there had been a lot of research done showing the benefits of tanning by the dermatology community.

MItzi was "on target" with her comments about the "negative comments" about tanning by the dermatology community and "our own stupidity" being the main reasons why the word "tanning" became negative in the eyes of the American public.

But it was Neon who really hit the nail on the head with the astute observation that "tanning" has become synomomous with "skin cancer" in the minds of the public.

So there we have it. The dermatology community and the sunscreen industry, for their own vested financial interests, have successfully "linked" the "C-Word" (skin cancer) with the word "tanning" and once that "linkage" became accepted, tanning became a "dangerous" pastime in the eyes of a large segment of the American public.

However, and this is something to keep in mind as this discussion continues, the American public DID NOT lose their desire to BE TAN (just look at the success of the "spray tan" industry this past two years!); rather, too many of them felt that the risks of "traditional" UVR tanning outweighed the rewards.

Let's go on to #3.

Don "Who Is VERY Impressed With The Answers So Far" Smith

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
WHICH TO STAY AWAY FROM?	kdv722	Tanning Biz Newbies	73	11-02-2005 06:09 PM
Stay With Me...#3: What Is This Thing Called A \"Tan\"?	Don Smith	Salon Management	7	09-04-2002 03:38 PM
Come Early stay Longer????	fungirlz	Open Forum	6	05-01-2002 02:50 PM

09-03-2002, 10:15 PM	#1 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,597 Rep Power: 10	FYI To Ask Don's Army: [Note: Please read "Stay With Me...#1" before reading this post.] Now that we have agreed that the "public image" of the word "tanning" is negative, it is time to take a hard look at how this sad state of affairs came to be. Question 2: What caused the word "tanning" to have negative connotations in the mind of the American public? Stay with me folks, you'll be glad you did! Don "Waiting For Your Answers Again" Smith

09-03-2002, 10:18 PM	#2 (permalink)
Tan Friendly Join Date: Jul 18 2002 Posts: 1 Rep Power: 0	I'm thinking it was the invention called "Sun-block". Am I right don?

09-03-2002, 10:28 PM	#3 (permalink)
BooBop I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Posts: 9,496 Rep Power: 13	Overexposure and the derms negativity??? along with our own stupidity and non education _________________ Proud supporter of Don's Army Mitzi Soakin up the Sun, Tell everybody to lighten up. Rock On! [ This Message was edited by: Mitzi on 2002-09-03 22:29 ]

09-03-2002, 10:33 PM	#4 (permalink)
neon Join Date: Oct 21 2001 Posts: 801 Rep Power: 7	I think it was mostly the "C" word and the sunscrean manufacts pushing constant use of sunscreen. We know that sunscreen is important but they make UV light sound so dangerous. Even people I've tried to help educate still think they are sacrificing their safety to be beautiful.

09-03-2002, 11:34 PM	#5 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,597 Rep Power: 10	WOW! Great answers! Terri correctly said that the start of the negative connotation of the word "tanning" was when the use of sunscreens came into vogue about 15 years ago. Until then, there had been a lot of research done showing the benefits of tanning by the dermatology community. MItzi was "on target" with her comments about the "negative comments" about tanning by the dermatology community and "our own stupidity" being the main reasons why the word "tanning" became negative in the eyes of the American public. But it was Neon who really hit the nail on the head with the astute observation that "tanning" has become synomomous with "skin cancer" in the minds of the public. So there we have it. The dermatology community and the sunscreen industry, for their own vested financial interests, have successfully "linked" the "C-Word" (skin cancer) with the word "tanning" and once that "linkage" became accepted, tanning became a "dangerous" pastime in the eyes of a large segment of the American public. However, and this is something to keep in mind as this discussion continues, the American public DID NOT lose their desire to BE TAN (just look at the success of the "spray tan" industry this past two years!); rather, too many of them felt that the risks of "traditional" UVR tanning outweighed the rewards. Let's go on to #3. Don "Who Is VERY Impressed With The Answers So Far" Smith

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)