Sun, melanoma link not clear

It is time to sit back and fully evaluate over-the-top reports in the news recently suggesting that getting a suntan is now in the same risk category as cigarettes, arsenic and even plutonium.

That's ridiculous. Cigarettes, arsenic and plutonium all undermine our body's natural functions. But getting a suntan is different - it is a part of our body's natural design. Humans need sun exposure to survive and thrive. Ignored in much of that reporting were the very important nuances that define humanity's very important relationship with UV light and sunshine. Specifically:

n Not one study exists implicating tanning in a non-burning fashion as a significant risk factor for permanent skin damage.

n Melanoma is more common in people who work indoors than in those who work outdoors. Because of this, the relationship between melanoma and sunlight cannot possibly be clear-cut. If it were a clear-cut relationship, outside workers would have higher incidence than inside workers.

n Melanoma most commonly appears on parts of the body that do not receive regular exposure to sunlight. Again, the relationship between melanoma and sunlight isn't clear-cut. If it were, melanomas would appear most often on parts of the body that receive the most sunlight.

n The sum of data do not substantively link indoor tanning equipment with an increased risk of melanoma. Indeed, 18 of 22 epidemiological studies conducted show no significant association.

Saying that UV exposure is harmful and should be avoided is as wrong as saying that water causes drowning, and, therefore, we should avoid water.

My indoor tanning business provides a valuable service in this community - teaching people the concepts of moderation and sunburn prevention as part of a practical lifelong skin care regimen that respects their intelligence.