Don Smith

The article below refers to the new 0.3 W.m^2 MEIL (Maximum Effective Irradiance Limit) adopted June 23, 2007 by the European Union. It shows that 83% of the sunbeds surveyed in Scotland exceeded this level (but failed to mention that they were in compliance with the regs before this date which is when the survey was conducted).

The unfortunate thing about the MEIL regulation is that it doesn't take skin type/subtype, level of tan or session time into account. The "bottom line" is that 160w sunbeds with a 12-15 minute session times will require 25-30 minutes in Europe. [Note: Can you imagine telling your clients that are used to tanning for 12 minutes that they will have to go for 25-30 minutes to get the same tan?]

Is this (i.e., the 0.3 W/^2 MEIL) coming to America?



Br. J. Dermatol. 2007 Aug;157(2):350-6.

Quantitative risk assessment of sunbeds: impact of new high power lamps.

Oliver H, Ferguson J, Moseley H.

The Photobiology Unit, University of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School,
Dundee DD1 9SY, U.K.

Background

A survey of all sunbeds in a local authority area was carried out in
1998. Since then, there have been technological developments leading to new
'fast-tan' sunlamps which have become increasingly popular, along with unmanned
sun parlours. In addition, new British and European sunbed standards have been
set.

Objectives

To discover the commercial uptake of new high power sunlamps and
to determine the impact on carcinogenic risk from sunbeds. Methods Onsite
spectral measurements, traceable to national standards, were conducted at all
commercial sunbed premises within two local authorities and a quantitative risk
assessment applied to the findings using a skin cancer model. Sunbed users were
asked to complete a questionnaire regarding their reasons for using a sunbed and
the risk associated with its use.

Results: We found a 30% increase in the number of privately operated sunbeds
since our 1998 survey. The median cancer-weighted exposure of all 133 sunbeds
was comparable to that of Mediterranean sunlight. This was a significant increase compared to 1998. Moreover, 83% of sunbeds produced ultraviolet (UV) B radiation
levels that exceeded the European standard. Fifteen per cent of respondents
thought that there were no risks from use of sunbeds.

Conclusions: Sunbeds in current use carry a cancer risk comparable to
Mediterranean sunlight. This is due to the use of new high power lamps. New
British and European standards are being largely ignored with more than four out
of five sunbeds exceeding the limit specified in the standard. There is a strong
case for regulation of sunbed operators coupled to improved public education.

BooBop

I think this industry is in for big changes. Maybe not on this account,but WE better get prepared.

I will start using light bulbs ;) lol

Marca

It's a real 'problem' here, people are not sure what to do, salon owners want to keep the beds they have, manufacturers are rushing to put out new beds. This means we will have NO HP beds here...!

Don Smith

I find it disturbing that some of the European manufacturers have tried to "spin" the 0.3 W/m^2 MEIL as an "advantage" for the industry. My guess is that they see this as a way to sell new lamps/sunbeds.

The fact of the matter is that the manufacturers "rolled over" and allowed this "silly" directive to become effective.

You are correct in your concern about what the MEIL directive will do for HID/hp systems because a system that complies will be so "weak" that clients won't be satisfied.

Marca

You're right and it was accepted SO quick, all the heads of the salon owners are spinning right now.

As I've understood, we're allowed to keep the beds we have, but when we have to replace/buy new... we're 'screwed'...

parrot head

When this comes to America, you can bet the FDA won't let us salon owners be grandfathered in. There will be no such thing as being able to keep our old equipment and we'll pay through the nose to get rid of it. Like someone said, "this won't take long, did it". It's coming-it's here.

JOHN @ URI

The new 0.3 W/m² directive isn't all that bad.

Many lamp companies have had lamps that meet these requirements for years. Also lamp manufacturers are forced to make "safer" tanning lamps for the Euro market.

Many of the new lamps 160W lamps developed can produce great color in 12-15 minutes still. Lighttech, SLI & Philips have many new versions of lamps that can produce great results under these new regs. With less UVB, less UVA² & more UVA¹, they are almost forced into using "new era" lamps almost exclusively.

SLI Sylvania: New line of NormMax & A-Max lamps
Philips: Consistancy lamps
Lightech: Sol Glass Range & others.

The rule is currently only for OEM bed manufacturers. There is no after market enforcement in many of the countries. So basically you can still buy a bed & just pull the lamps & put in what you want. (Spain is the toughest on regs)

Accepted so quick? I was in Germany 3 years ago & we discussed this at one of the seminars I was at. It has been in discussion for some time. Now the implementation of it was swift, but it's not like you were blind sided by it.

eileen

but we won't be able to advertise them as safer lamps i bet! ;)

JOHN @ URI

Eileen, your correct the FTC & FDA will never allow that anytime soon.

Some info for those who like to read:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/elect...ides/index.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/c...ccp_o_031b.pdf

What are the main conditions now?
· From July 23rd, 2007 new sunbeds inside EC may reach a maximum erythemally weighted irradiance as strong as tropical midday sun near the equator.
(0.3 W/m² defined by WHO).
· Minimum tanning time has to be 10 minutes.
· People under age of 18 may not tan.
Sunbeds bought before July 23rd, 2007 are not covered by this declaration yet.


One good note:
Tanning salons may change the marketing now to publish how healthy UV-tanning is

Don Smith

"The new 0.3 W/m² directive isn't all that bad."

Not if you are a sunlamp manufacturer or distributor. For salon owners who are out where the rubber meets the road, the MEIL directive is an unmitigated disaster!

"Many of the new 160W lamps developed can produce great color in 12-15 minutes."

I hope you aren't implying that the new lamps will have as much tanning power in 12 minutes as the old lamps. A study of 20 common LP and HID/hp lamps showed that the average "effective" W/m^2 was 0.562 and reducing the "output" to 0.3 is not a step that will benefit the European indoor tanning industry.

And I certainly hope you don't think that the new lamps will have the same number of vitamin D-effective photons.

"There is no after market enforcement in many of the countries. So basically you can still buy a bed & just pull the lamps & put in what you want."

Let's hope and pray that this - ignore the regs - advice that is being given by manufacturers/distributors in Europe isn't being followed by salon owners. The first article I posted shows that the anti-tanning coalition are now and will continue to be conducting surveys to monitor compliance and if European salons are following this advice, their "image" will be tarnished beyond repair (and will result in more regulations and enforcement).

In summary, the 0.3 W/m^2 will result in a short term gain for sunlamp/sunbed manufacturers and distributors and a long term loss for the European indoor tanning industry. Let's hope that salon owners here in the USA will realize the folly of letting the manufacturers represent the industry at regulatory meetings. If we do, we will find ourselves in the same position - screwed - as salon owners are now in Europe.

The "bottom line" is that the 0.3 W/m^2 MEIL was a huge "win" for the anti-tanning coalition and no amount of "spinning" by the manufacturers/distributors will change that sad fact of life.