Practices of Unregulated Tanning Facilities in Missouri: Implications for Statewide Legislation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The incidence of skin cancer has increased in the United States, concomitant with increased UV radiation (UVR) exposure among young adults. We examined whether tanning facilities in Missouri, a state without indoor-tanning regulations, acted in accordance with the Food and Drug Administration’s recommendations and consistently imparted information to potential clients about the known risks of UVR. METHODS: We conducted a statewide telephone survey of randomly selected tanning facilities in Missouri. Each tanning facility was surveyed twice, in the morning (7 am–3 pm) and evening (3–10 pm), on different days, to determine intrasalon consistency of information provided to potential clients at different times. RESULTS: On average, 65% of 243 tanning-facility operators would allow children as young as 10 or 12 years old to use indoor-tanning devices, 80% claimed that indoor tanning would prevent future sunburns, and 43% claimed that there were no risks associated with indoor tanning. Intrasalon inconsistencies involved allowable age of use, and UVR exposure type and duration. Morning tanning-facility employees were more likely to allow consumers to start with maximum exposure times and UV-A–emitting devices (P < .001), whereas evening employees were more likely to allow 10- or 12-year-old children to use indoor-tanning devices (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing evidence that UVR exposure in indoor-tanning devices is associated with skin cancer, ocular damage, and premature photoaging, tanning facilities in Missouri often misinformed consumers regarding these risks and lack of health benefits and inconsistently provided information about the Food and Drug Administration’s guidelines for tanning devices.

Recall of indoor tanning salon warnings and safety guidelines among a national sample of tanners

“…Prior research indicates a lack of regulatory compliance by IT salon staff. Researchers utilizing confederates posing as IT users via telephone survey found that IT salon staff provided inconsistent information about the potential risks of overexposure to UV light, allowable age for IT use, and recommendations on IT frequency [e.g., [20][21][22][23]]. Furthermore, researchers reported instances where misleading information was provided by IT salon staff, including denial of skin cancer risk for fair-skinned individuals with use IT and provision of unsolicited information about supposed benefits of IT [21,22].…”

Forekomsten av føflekkreft øker igjen

“…358 However, compliance with existing regulations and recommendations varies. 136,341,359,360 A study of tanning salons in North Carolina found that 95% of patrons exceeded FDA exposure recommendations, and 33% of patrons began tanning at maximum doses recommended for maintenance tanning. 136 Indoor tanning salons often use promotional pricing packages that promote frequent indoor tanning.…”

“…State regulation of indoor tanning devices, including restrictions on youth access, also varies considerably across the country, and studies examining state indoor tanning laws and regulations in the United States demonstrate that compliance with these laws is low and not adequately enforced. 262,360 The study of tanning salons in San Diego found low compliance with some state and federal regulations, including posting of warning signs. 341…”

“…Evidence suggests that tanning industry members, including salon chains and individual salons, continue to make statements about indoor tanning that may be inconsistent with the available scientific evidence. 260,360 For example, according to a 2013 report of the results of a telephone survey of 338 indoor tanning salons in California, 61% denied harms of UV exposure, and many made claims of health benefits from indoor tanning exposure. 338 A 2012 report of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, Minority Committee, described the response of randomly selected tanning salons to calls from individuals posing as teenaged girls.…”

Effects of Ultraviolet Exposure Behaviors on Skin Pigmentation and Melanoma

“…This study is limited by the nature of phone interviews and does not provide evidence of denial of tanning services when a minor presents to an indoor tanning facility in person. A 2013 telephone-based cross sectional survey of Missouri tanning facilities, where there was no state legislation to restrict tanning access, found that 43% of salons claimed that there are no risks associated with indoor tanning [19].…”