Where It All Started 17 years ago!

Don Smith · 10-12-2002, 10:21 AM

FYI To Ask Don's Army:

[Note: This is part of the "intel" briefing (intelligence briefing) for the attendees of my Nashville talk. Those of you who aren't attending (and you are in the majority - LOL) can't read this. This is REQUIRED reading for those hardy few of you (looks like about 20 - 25 of you brave souls right now) who ARE attending.]

Ever wonder how the medical profession's "anti-tanning" crusade got started?

Ever wonder if their "message" was based upon fact or fiction?

This series will provide you with some historical perspective of how our industry has been persecuted.

Where it all started 17 years ago!

Title: "Harmful effects of indoor tanning."

Authors: Lichtenstein and Sherertz

Publication: American Family Physician

Date: September, 1985

Abstract: "The new indoor tanning units use predominantly ultraviolet A radiation which has less potential than ultraviolet B for causing acute sunburn but more potential for photosensitivity reactions. Effects of long-term exposure to ultraviolet A may include dermal degenerative changes and predisposition to skin cancer."

Was this article based upon factual information?

NO! In fact if you read carefully, you will not that the authors say the words "MAY INCLUDE" before the words "dermal degenerative changes and predisposition to skin cancer" and the full article contains no data to support their contention.

Is their evidence to support their contention that UVA may cause (1) dermal degenerative changes, and (2) predisposition to skin cancer?

NO! There wasn't evidence then and, 17 years later, there still isn't any evidence to support their contention!

As a matter of fact, we now know that while UVB (280 nm - 320 nm)and UVA2 (320 nm - 340 nm) are immunosuppressive, UVA1 (340 nm - 400 nm) are immunostimulatory.

Is there any "truth" in this article?

YES! UVA does have "less potential than UVB for causing acute sunburn." FYI, 365 nm is "weighted" 1/2000th of 296 nm in the FDA/cdrh Erythemal Action Spectrum.

So, folks, right from the "get go" our enemies have used speculation and unproven "myths" to demonize our industry!

Wouldn't it have been great if SOMEONE in the industry at that time would have "challenged" this article when it was first published?

More "history" later. We must understand what happened to our industry in order to prepare for the battles ahead.

Don "Generalisimo Ask Don" Smith

BooBop · 10-12-2002, 10:40 AM

Yeah, to bad you were not on their heels with the facts then Don. Wouldn't it have been wonderful to have the Email Campaign 17 yrs. ago.

Don Smith · 10-12-2002, 10:43 AM

Mitzi:

The "mystery" to me is why so few people are willing to take the few seconds that it takes to participate.

The most we have had is 42 and usually only the same 15 - 20 people participate.

Discouraging!

Don

BooBop · 10-12-2002, 10:45 AM

I know, I know. But at least it is a start. Maybe they will get the lead out soon. Thanks Don for all you do to help us. I appreciate you more than you will ever know.

BooBop · 10-13-2002, 08:47 AM

bsmart · 10-15-2002, 01:11 PM

Don, Mitzi makes a good point. Once upon a time about 2000 years ago, there was a radical young man that came along asking people to live a different lifestyle. He challenged the people in power at that time for their hypocritical actions and demonstrated a better way live. Eventually, he trained 12 common men to follow his lifestyle and share his message with others. Those 12 men eventually took the message to their whole known world, and turned it upside down. Soooo... don't dispair over small numbers. A small dedicated contengant can accomplish marvelous things!!

billable · 03-12-2007, 08:44 AM

Hmmmm. Interesting.

(Not sure about comparing Don to Jesus, but interesting none the less.)

Gidget · 03-12-2007, 08:56 AM

Pfffffffffffffft, I started to tan inside 30 years ago. By the way, yesterday nite we had a show talking about how dangerous the tanning salons are, so many people with melanomas because of it, a bride who tanned to look good in her wedding dress and now she needed to get skin cancer removed, mind you she spent two weeks in Cuba for her honeymoon probably burning her whole body during that trip.

PEOPLE ARE STUPID!:evil:

James Johnston · 03-12-2007, 03:40 PM

I must have started tanning over 20 years ago with the Doctors blessings. Makes my skin better!

Neon Beach · 03-12-2007, 04:14 PM

Quote:

PEOPLE ARE STUPID!:evil:

say what?

03-12-2007, 08:44 AM	#7 (permalink)
billable I'm Banned Join Date: Feb 1 2006 Location: Tennessee Age: 47 Posts: 4,181 Rep Power: 0	Re: Where It All Started 17 years ago! Hmmmm. Interesting. (Not sure about comparing Don to Jesus, but interesting none the less.)

03-12-2007, 08:56 AM	#8 (permalink)
Gidget I'm Banned Join Date: Jul 26 2005 Location: Québec, Canada Posts: 8,651 Rep Power: 0	Re: Where It All Started 17 years ago! Pfffffffffffffft, I started to tan inside 30 years ago. By the way, yesterday nite we had a show talking about how dangerous the tanning salons are, so many people with melanomas because of it, a bride who tanned to look good in her wedding dress and now she needed to get skin cancer removed, mind you she spent two weeks in Cuba for her honeymoon probably burning her whole body during that trip. PEOPLE ARE STUPID!:evil:

03-12-2007, 03:40 PM	#9 (permalink)
James Johnston I Love Derf!! Join Date: Dec 26 2006 Location: Heart of Sand Mountain Posts: 343 Rep Power: 3	Re: Where It All Started 17 years ago! I must have started tanning over 20 years ago with the Doctors blessings. Makes my skin better!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Need suggestions for getting started	chaimFL	Open Forum	4	04-23-2004 03:35 PM
Original Electronic Solar Starters In Sunbeds For Over 4 Years!	Bob Wagner	Equipment	2	12-11-2002 12:47 AM
80% In The First 18 Years? BALONEY!	Don Smith	Salon Management	3	05-07-2002 10:11 AM

10-12-2002, 10:21 AM	#1 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,619 Rep Power: 10	FYI To Ask Don's Army: [Note: This is part of the "intel" briefing (intelligence briefing) for the attendees of my Nashville talk. Those of you who aren't attending (and you are in the majority - LOL) can't read this. This is REQUIRED reading for those hardy few of you (looks like about 20 - 25 of you brave souls right now) who ARE attending.] Ever wonder how the medical profession's "anti-tanning" crusade got started? Ever wonder if their "message" was based upon fact or fiction? This series will provide you with some historical perspective of how our industry has been persecuted. Where it all started 17 years ago! Title: "Harmful effects of indoor tanning." Authors: Lichtenstein and Sherertz Publication: American Family Physician Date: September, 1985 Abstract: "The new indoor tanning units use predominantly ultraviolet A radiation which has less potential than ultraviolet B for causing acute sunburn but more potential for photosensitivity reactions. Effects of long-term exposure to ultraviolet A may include dermal degenerative changes and predisposition to skin cancer." Was this article based upon factual information? NO! In fact if you read carefully, you will not that the authors say the words "MAY INCLUDE" before the words "dermal degenerative changes and predisposition to skin cancer" and the full article contains no data to support their contention. Is their evidence to support their contention that UVA may cause (1) dermal degenerative changes, and (2) predisposition to skin cancer? NO! There wasn't evidence then and, 17 years later, there still isn't any evidence to support their contention! As a matter of fact, we now know that while UVB (280 nm - 320 nm)and UVA2 (320 nm - 340 nm) are immunosuppressive, UVA1 (340 nm - 400 nm) are immunostimulatory. Is there any "truth" in this article? YES! UVA does have "less potential than UVB for causing acute sunburn." FYI, 365 nm is "weighted" 1/2000th of 296 nm in the FDA/cdrh Erythemal Action Spectrum. So, folks, right from the "get go" our enemies have used speculation and unproven "myths" to demonize our industry! Wouldn't it have been great if SOMEONE in the industry at that time would have "challenged" this article when it was first published? More "history" later. We must understand what happened to our industry in order to prepare for the battles ahead. Don "Generalisimo Ask Don" Smith

10-12-2002, 10:40 AM	#2 (permalink)
BooBop I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Posts: 9,497 Rep Power: 13	Yeah, to bad you were not on their heels with the facts then Don. Wouldn't it have been wonderful to have the Email Campaign 17 yrs. ago.

10-12-2002, 10:43 AM	#3 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,619 Rep Power: 10	Mitzi: The "mystery" to me is why so few people are willing to take the few seconds that it takes to participate. The most we have had is 42 and usually only the same 15 - 20 people participate. Discouraging! Don

10-12-2002, 10:45 AM	#4 (permalink)
BooBop I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Posts: 9,497 Rep Power: 13	I know, I know. But at least it is a start. Maybe they will get the lead out soon. Thanks Don for all you do to help us. I appreciate you more than you will ever know.

10-13-2002, 08:47 AM	#5 (permalink)
BooBop I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Posts: 9,497 Rep Power: 13	..

10-15-2002, 01:11 PM	#6 (permalink)
bsmart Join Date: May 2 2002 Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9 Posts: 769 Rep Power: 7	Don, Mitzi makes a good point. Once upon a time about 2000 years ago, there was a radical young man that came along asking people to live a different lifestyle. He challenged the people in power at that time for their hypocritical actions and demonstrated a better way live. Eventually, he trained 12 common men to follow his lifestyle and share his message with others. Those 12 men eventually took the message to their whole known world, and turned it upside down. Soooo... don't dispair over small numbers. A small dedicated contengant can accomplish marvelous things!!

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