|
Tanning Salon Management Salon management help here. |
| LinkBack | Thread Tools |
07-02-2002, 08:30 AM | #1 (permalink) |
Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,643
Rep Power: 26 | Just got to thinking...... FDA requires the ENTIRE indoor tanning industry to refer to "cosmetic" tanning. However, only the "spray" booths provide a "cosmetic" tan. The "tan" created by sensible, moderate and responsible exposure to UVR provides both (a) photoprotection, and, (b) thermoprotection. Thus, shouldn't FDA only require the spray booth tan to be called "cosmetic" and allow the normal, natural tan created by exposure to UVR to be called the development of acquired (or adaptive) pigmentation? FDA is, in essence, forcing the indoor tanning industry to make a false, deceptive, misleading and scientifically unsubstantiated (FDMSU) statements to the American public! And furthermore, shouldn't FDA mandate that the salons providing "cosmetic" tanning using the "spray" technology warn their clients IN WRITING that the "cosmetic tan" provided DOES NOT provide protection from sunburning? Think about it. Don |
07-02-2002, 11:29 AM | #2 (permalink) |
Join Date: Nov 13 2001 Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 | There's a new infomercial on the radio today hawking spray-on cure for psosiasis. It's called Skin Zinc. FDA approved. So, which mist or express company will be first to add ZINC to their formula, and patent it? |
07-04-2002, 07:53 AM | #4 (permalink) |
Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,643
Rep Power: 26 | Robbie: I examined some old FDA documents gong back to 1975 and I can find absolutely no discussion about the issue of limiting the indoor tanning industry to stating that we only provide a "cosmetic" tan. Obviously, our enemies worked behind to scenes to get this accomplished. Notwithstanding this, it is an indisputable fact that facultative pigmentation (better known as a "tan") provides both photoprotection and thermoprotection. FDA has, therefore, forced us to disseminate false, deceptive, misleading and scientifically unsubstantiated information to the American public. And we can no longer tolerate this outrage to continue! Don |
07-04-2002, 09:01 AM | #5 (permalink) |
Join Date: Jan 17 2002
Posts: 4,339
Rep Power: 24 | Don: Just yesterday afternoon we brought aboard a "Body Art Artist".. She will be doing the spray on tanning along with temp tattoos.. She is licensed to do permanent make-up but we will not offer the permanent make-up in our studio as I have high insurance as it is covering the medical treatments we already offer. I am working on a information package explaining the process... If the guest is under 18 we are going to require a parents signature..and parent be there during the scheduled appointment. I am right now working on a release for guests who will use the spray on tanning as well as temp. tattoos. My question is this.......It is NOT a law that someone signs a release for this application.. though the spray has DHA.. which causes a chemical reaction in the skin.. some are allergic to DHA..and side effects can cause break-out of Acne.. Most important this process DOES NOT prepare the skin for going into natural sunlight.......so they must be told how this process works and exactly the kind of results they can expect. Appications must be scheduled in a package of 4-6 sessions.. This is not a one shot deal. I called around about getting insurance coverage on this "spray on tanning".. the ONLY company I could find was a company who covers clowns,jugglers,face painters... If anyone is thinking of adding this service to their facility.. I suggest they really look into it.. and cover themselves as much as they would with their machines, and other services. C |
07-04-2002, 11:14 AM | #6 (permalink) |
Waiting Confirmation Join Date: Apr 23 2002
Posts: 242
Rep Power: 0 | Don, I hope that you're being rhetorical. The FDA has, as I understand, a gag law that prevents Tanning salons from advertising their services in any manner that could be construed as inferring to helth benefits. With this law in effect it would be illeagal to position ouselves as anything but cosmetic. This is how we have gotten ourselves into this mess of tanning beds that are sold because they look nice enough to charge double over "plain" tanning beds that actually tan better. It is also how we have been bombarded by lotions that really all do as well as the next but come in pretty bottles and claim fancy-named ingredients so they charge 3 and 4 times as much. All this because we are more now into the esthetics than the health end. On the surface there are a great many business minded salons out there that really feel that the ability to charge infinitely more is the road to success and that lies in the lucrative end of esthetics. What I've been saying for years is that this is not the way to go. What we're missing is the 100's of thousands of potential customers who would flock to salons IF we could be recognized as offering healthy beneficial effects through moderate exposure of UV. To do this we must BREAK THE GAG LAW !!! The only way to do this is to either sue the FDA or do something that causes them to sue us. We must break out of the esthics only department and see the light of our healthy beneficial offerings. |
07-04-2002, 05:28 PM | #7 (permalink) |
Join Date: Mar 27 2002
Posts: 73
Rep Power: 0 | Hi Everyone!! I'm replying to all of the comments on UV Tanning compared with SPRAY TANNING ".At this time I'm at Chris's Home and we are talking about our new endeavors with me joining the staff with spray on Tanning This is a very "Open Market at this time "NO RULES" but we feel that there should be! So we are making provisions for this to protect the studio. I myself am a certified permanent makeup artist and have reserched airbrush Tanning to the best of my abilities, and from what I have found "nothing governs this process". right down to the fact of Insurance. Chris wants Insurance Coverage. What a joke!! The only one out there is Clown Insurance. Many states offer nothing, no options, we have to go through Missouri.(covers only $200,000.)cheap cheap.what happens if something really comes of a law suit? There are risks with allergic reactions to DHA that do react with the skins amino acids. Yes they offer a spray with NO DHA but unless a patch test is done for 24 hours, "who knows" what would you suggest? wish us luck. We are flying by the seat of our thongs. . Dusty |
07-04-2002, 11:00 PM | #8 (permalink) |
Join Date: Feb 25 2000 Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,643
Rep Power: 26 | No, I'm not against spray booths! The above was in answer to an anonymous "message" left on my phone today asking why I am "against" spray booths. Not only am I not "against" spray booths, we plan to put one in this fall. Properly marketed and, assuming that the client is "forewarned" that the "cosmetic" tan provided ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT provide photoprotection, I believe that the spray booths provide a valuable service. However, I have heard the radio commercial provided by Mystic Tan and it DOES NOT warn the client that the "fake" tan is not photoprotective and it should. Furthermore, the Mystic Tan radio "spot" stresses the fact that it is " UV Free " and is, therefore, anti-tanning. I am going to "organize" an "Ask Don" e-mail campaign to let Troy Cooper of Mystic Tan and Dr. Laughlin of Mist On know that we are not amused by the way they are "implying" that UV systems are "bad" in their promotional activities. They need to just promote their product/service to the 35,000,000 people who the anti-tanning zealots have frightened about tanning and quit "badmouthing" conventional tanning. I don't know about you, but I think that the spray booth people have "crossed the line" and have become yet another "anti-taning" voice! Don |
07-05-2002, 11:20 PM | #9 (permalink) |
Join Date: Jan 17 2002
Posts: 4,339
Rep Power: 24 | Don: They market it as indoor/otdoor tanning is bad.. you are right.. (harsh, harmful, bad, dry, longterm damage.....) I am making our own information package.. and getting rid of their terms.. you are very right..they hate the ultra-violet..this is their message. |
Bookmarks |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FREE & CLEAR: How to Liberate Your Pores | ElectricSunFreak | Skin Care | 11 | 04-14-2003 02:42 PM |
Staining? | Don Smith | Tanning Salon Management | 1 | 09-16-2002 09:24 AM |
A Festering Problem! | Don Smith | Tanning Salon Management | 8 | 09-14-2002 10:49 AM |
Stay With Me...#5: Lesson 1 | Don Smith | Tanning Salon Management | 3 | 09-05-2002 11:27 AM |
Cosmetic Procedures Soar | fungirlz | Skin Care | 20 | 07-15-2002 07:17 AM |