Friday (2/8/02) Afternoon Bombs: # 1 - Annual Limits - tanTALK

Don Smith · 04-05-2002, 11:15 AM

MJ:

This post will cover one of the major "stink bombs" that FDA dropped on us at 3:15 pm on Friday, (2/8/02) afternoon (the meeting ended at 4:00 pm) after a lot of the attendees had already left to go home.

1. Annual Limits. A maximum annual dose of 15 kJ was proposed by FDA to "match" the IEC recommendation for Europe.

- 15 kJ means a "limit" of 15,000 J/m2 (75 MED) per client per year.

- 75 MED divided by 4.0 MED = 18.75 "full" sessions per client per year.

- Since it takes approximately 25 "cumulative" MED to take a new client from 0.75 MED to 4.0 MED in approximately 12 - 15 sessions, it means that only 50 MED (12.5 sessions at 4.0 MED per session) would be available for "maintaining" a tan for the rest of the year.

Thus, the "impact" of a 15 kJ "annual limit" would be to prohibit an indoor tanning salon from letting any client accumulate more than a 75 MED per year which would mean "limiting" your clients to approximately 25-28 "realistic" sessions per year!

How do you like "them" apples?

Don

MJ · 04-05-2002, 11:27 AM

Proud to be an American..after reading that... OMG!!!, that has to really be upseting the European Salon Chains.
OHH and thanks again Don, I actually understood the UV lingo ..only had to read it once!!
Mj

MJ · 04-05-2002, 11:31 AM

This is just an after thought:
Whats stoping the customer from going to another Salon and getting thier tanning fix after they reach thier limit in of UV exposure "mandated" by the regulators??
I don't think, the regulators thought that through. Or if the salon owner wants to keep then in "store" putting them under another name..
Too many loop holes.. I will never have the effect they intended.
Just my opinion.
mj

_________________
TanTalk Moderator
TanTalk Rocks!!!
"And now back to tanning"--ChippMeet "Little Chunn Chunn!!"[ This Message was edited by: MJ on 2002-04-05 11:33 ]

njchica · 04-05-2002, 04:32 PM

Quote:
On 2002-04-05 11:27, MJ wrote:
Proud to be an American..after reading that... OMG!!!, that has to really be upseting the European Salon Chains.

But didn't Don say that the FDA (which **is** American) is proposing the same limits for salons here???

MJ · 04-05-2002, 04:51 PM

That will not happen here... there is no way.
I have in many cases been Naive about politics ..however. I don't see what the FDA/gov plans to gain from imposing this on us.
That why we have lobbist. To protect us.
Mj

_________________
TanTalk Moderator
TanTalk Rocks!!!
"And now back to tanning"--ChippMeet "Little Chunn Chunn!!"[ This Message was edited by: MJ on 2002-04-05 16:58 ]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Friday (2/8/02) Afternoon Bombs: # 3 - Initial Session Times	Don Smith	Tanning Salon Management	2	04-19-2002 11:51 AM
Friday (2/8/02) Afternoon Bombs: # 2 - Irradiance Caps	Don Smith	Tanning Salon Management	2	04-05-2002 09:31 PM

04-05-2002, 11:15 AM	#1 (permalink)
Don Smith Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 1,643 Rep Power: 26	MJ: This post will cover one of the major "stink bombs" that FDA dropped on us at 3:15 pm on Friday, (2/8/02) afternoon (the meeting ended at 4:00 pm) after a lot of the attendees had already left to go home. 1. Annual Limits. A maximum annual dose of 15 kJ was proposed by FDA to "match" the IEC recommendation for Europe. - 15 kJ means a "limit" of 15,000 J/m2 (75 MED) per client per year. - 75 MED divided by 4.0 MED = 18.75 "full" sessions per client per year. - Since it takes approximately 25 "cumulative" MED to take a new client from 0.75 MED to 4.0 MED in approximately 12 - 15 sessions, it means that only 50 MED (12.5 sessions at 4.0 MED per session) would be available for "maintaining" a tan for the rest of the year. Thus, the "impact" of a 15 kJ "annual limit" would be to prohibit an indoor tanning salon from letting any client accumulate more than a 75 MED per year which would mean "limiting" your clients to approximately 25-28 "realistic" sessions per year! How do you like "them" apples? Don

04-05-2002, 11:27 AM	#2 (permalink)
MJ Join Date: Jan 21 2002 Posts: 2,709 Rep Power: 23	Proud to be an American..after reading that... OMG!!!, that has to really be upseting the European Salon Chains. OHH and thanks again Don, I actually understood the UV lingo ..only had to read it once!! Mj

04-05-2002, 11:31 AM	#3 (permalink)
MJ Join Date: Jan 21 2002 Posts: 2,709 Rep Power: 23	This is just an after thought: Whats stoping the customer from going to another Salon and getting thier tanning fix after they reach thier limit in of UV exposure "mandated" by the regulators?? I don't think, the regulators thought that through. Or if the salon owner wants to keep then in "store" putting them under another name.. Too many loop holes.. I will never have the effect they intended. Just my opinion. mj _________________ TanTalk Moderator TanTalk Rocks!!! "And now back to tanning"--ChippMeet "Little Chunn Chunn!!"[ This Message was edited by: MJ on 2002-04-05 11:33 ]

04-05-2002, 04:32 PM	#4 (permalink)
njchica Join Date: Mar 17 2002 Posts: 674 Rep Power: 23	Quote: On 2002-04-05 11:27, MJ wrote: Proud to be an American..after reading that... OMG!!!, that has to really be upseting the European Salon Chains. But didn't Don say that the FDA (which is American) is proposing the same limits for salons here???

04-05-2002, 04:51 PM	#5 (permalink)
MJ Join Date: Jan 21 2002 Posts: 2,709 Rep Power: 23	That will not happen here... there is no way. I have in many cases been Naive about politics ..however. I don't see what the FDA/gov plans to gain from imposing this on us. That why we have lobbist. To protect us. Mj _________________ TanTalk Moderator TanTalk Rocks!!! "And now back to tanning"--ChippMeet "Little Chunn Chunn!!"[ This Message was edited by: MJ on 2002-04-05 16:58 ]

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