The Corporate Observer Blog : Consumer Protection, Corporate Abuse : Class Action Lawyer & Attorney : Steven Berk Law Firm

The Johnson City Press reports that the NIH’s grant is intended to facilitate Professor Hillhouse and ETSU’s  efforts to get the word out to teenage girls about the risks and dangers of indoor tanning. Hillhouse’s messages will highlight the physical appearance-related risks associated with indoor tanning. Chief among these risks: sunspots and skin wrinkling.

As discussed here on many occasions, the World Health Organization has added indoor tanning to its top carcinogen risk group, joining poisons like tobacco, arsenic, and formaldehyde. Despite all of this, young women are still not heeding the warnings – even though they grow louder and clearer.

Perhaps grants like this one can serve as a grass roots model for starting to change attitudes towards indoor tanning.  Maybe the best way to go at this health risk is to appeal to vanity (the same reason many people tan).   “Indoor tanning can be ugly”.  Our hats are off to the NIH, to professor Hillhouse, and to ETSU for their creative efforts.

Assisted by Zachary Kady

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The dangers of indoor tanning have been undeniably proven.

 A recent study at the University of Minnesota adds to the ever growing wealth of research connecting indoor tanning to skin cancer. According to a CNN article published today, the Minnesota study found that using a tanning bed just once increases the risk of contracting melanoma by 75%. One time, just one time.  Those who regularly use tanning beds run the risk of doubling, or even tripling their risk of developing melanoma.

·          1 time = 75% greater risk of skin cancer

·          Regular use = 200%-300% greater risk of skin cancer

The CNN article claims these new studies recently presented to the FDA are likely to bolster efforts to regulate indoor tanning. We have written on this subject numerous times in the past. We sure sure hope they are right. 

Click here for a link to our post on the status of indoor tanning with the FDA. Click here for a link to all of our past posts on indoor tanning.

This growing body of evidence linking tanning to cancer cannot be ignored. The dangers of indoor tanning have been undeniably proven.  It is no longer debatable whether or not indoor tanning causes cancer – it does. Important issues like this do not come around every day. If you would like to help us pursue this matter please contact us at info@berklawdc.com.

Assisted by Zachary Kady

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

First, the FDA is considering changing its stance on indoor tanning. An FDA expert panel recommended last Thursday that the FDA reclassify indoor tanning equipment.

Sun lamps and U-V lights are currently classified as “low-risk devices”, in the same category as tongue depressors and nail clippers.

Last time I checked my nail clipper did not emit cancer-causing levels of radiation.

MSNBC reported that increasing the classification level to Class II would allow the FDA to monitor and control the levels of radiation emitted from these dangerous products.

Second, the FTC recently entered into litigation with the Indoor tanning Agency (ITA) in a dispute over the agency’s health claims in advertisements. The ITA’s ads included the following false, misleading and plain old outrageous claims:

• Indoor tanning is approved by the government;
• Indoor tanning is safer than outdoor tanning because the UV light in indoor tanning can be monitored and controlled;
• Research shows that vitamin D supplements may harm the body’s ability to fight disease;
• A National Academy of Sciences study determined that “the risks of not getting enough ultraviolet light far outweigh the hypothetical risk of skin cancer”

The two parties agreed to a settlement wherein the ITA agreed to retract many of its ads that praise the false benefits of indoor tanning. All future ads must contain the following notice: “NOTICE: Exposure to ultraviolet radiation may increase the likelihood of developing skin cancer and can cause serious eye injury.”

At Berk Law we’ve been sounding the alarm for months about the dangers of indoor tanning. Millions of American consumers are subjecting themselves to unnecessary cancer risks, generally at an age – under 30 – when they are most at risk to develop skin cancers. We certainly agree that indoor tanning should be absolutely barred for those under 18. We also support the view of the FDA’s panel of experts that the equipment used in indoor tanning should be reclassified to reflect the true danger that it represents. Come on folks, tongue depressors and nail clippers. 

So we say charge on! It is refreshing to see the FDA and Congress heeding national and international concern over this insidious and dangerous practice.

Stay tuned for future developments.

Assisted by Zachary Kady

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

“My role is not to tell you what the risk is.  My role is to give you the other side of the story about the benefits of UV exposure.”

-        Dan Humiston, President of the ITA

The above quote from a recent Time article is the Indoor Tanning Association’s response to new research that once and for all condemns indoor tanning as perilously carcinogenic.  Just as Joe the Camel’s role is to depict the “cool” side of cigarettes, Mr. Humiston and his Association have but one goal—defending the practice of indoor tanning.  Refuting sound science and willfully deceiving and endangering consumers, especially teen girls—these present no obstacle to the ITA.

However, this quotation represents an uncharacteristically candid thought from the Association.  In essence, the quote reads: “the ITA has a stated agenda of advocating under any circumstances for the indoor tanning industry.”  They stand to gain nothing by telling the truth about the risks of UV radiation.  Instead they focus on the relatively insignificant benefits, such as curing Vitamin D deficiency.  Although Vitamin D deficiency is not a trivial health risk, it is eminently curable.  Is it worth subjecting one’s skin to unnatural, intensified and carcinogenic UV radiation when there are numerous safer ways to avoid the problem?

With this logic, if the Association represented surgeons, they would have us amputating arms to fix broken fingers.  The ITA “give[s] you the other side of the story” all right. Rather than merely spending more time outside in mild sunlight or taking Vitamin D supplements, the ITA would have you risk melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.  If that’s the other side of the story, I think I’ll stick to this side.

(Post was prepared with the assistance of David Martin, University of North Carolina 2010)

• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The risk of cutaneous melanoma is increased by 75% when use of tanning devices starts before 30 years of age [emphasis added].

For months, we have been warning parents and teens about the risks of indoor tanning and the shameless conduct of the Indoor Tanning Association.  Contrary to mounting evidence, the Association has consistently turned the truth on its head making unabashed claims that indoor tanning is not only safe but has health benefits.

If evidence already available to the public was not enough, the online release today of The Lancet Oncology should end any debate.

INDOOR TANNING CAUSES CANCER

The report stems from a conference of 20 leading scientists from nine different countries, who met at the International Agency for Research on Cancer.  The report, based on recent research, raises the classification of UV-emitting tanning devices into Group 1 – “carcinogenic to humans” – the most severe level of risk.  This should come as no surprise. The report cites a 75% increase in melanoma risk for those who use tanning beds before the age of 30. The scientists also reference the correlation between use of tanning beds and ocular melanoma, or melanoma of the eye.

It is time to put an end to the lies of the Indoor Tanning Association and the conduct of an industry that blithely ignores the health and safety of teens, particularly young women.  If the state and federal government attorneys are too busy, or do not have the resources, private attorneys must once again fill the breach.  Litigation can:

- Seek an end to indoor tanning for teens;
- Force better disclosure of risk for all, particularly those under 30;
- Pursue damages for those directly harmed; and
- Open up salons and their supporters to the public glare of scrutiny.

All of these outcomes are necessary in order to protect the American public from the money-over-morals attitude of the Association and the tanning industry.

(Post was prepared with the assistance of David Martin, University of North Carolina 2010)

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Let’s hope this effort will embolden groups across the country with similar ambitions—namely limiting future victims of the ruthless tanning business.

Kudos to the Melanoma Foundation of New England: a dedicated, thoughtful organization advocating for the innocent (mostly teen) victims of the indoor tanning industry.  The Foundation hosts an informative and supportive website.  I recommend the informational summary of a recent study on melanoma awareness and indoor tanning.

On the legislative front: the Foundation has paired with the Massachussetts Academy of Dermatology in support of Senate Bill 903.  The Bill would strengthen permit requirements, oversight and most importantly, age restrictions on tanning bed usage in Massachussetts.  The Committee on Public Health heard testimony on the legislation on Tuesday, July 21^st.  A vote is expected soon.  Let’s hope this effort will embolden groups across the country with similar ambitions—namely limiting future victims of the ruthless tanning business.  Heightened disclosure is critical in that battle.

(Post was prepared with the assistance of David Martin, University of North Carolina 2010)

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

By all means let’s rethink our attitude towards UV radiation, but not by succumbing to the out of context, manipulated half-truths promulgated by [the ITA].

The Indoor Tanning Association (ITA) once again finds itself reaching into its shameful bag of tricks to defend the indefensible, the safety of indoor tanning.  This time, the ITA twists and spins the findings of a recent research paper published in the British Journal of Dermatology to conclude… big surprise… indoor tanning is safer than ever.  To convince minors and unsuspecting consumers that UV radiation isn’t so dangerous after all, the ITA takes hold of and distorts a recent British study of melanoma patients from 1991 to 2004.

To be fair, the study does conclude that reports of escalating rates of melanoma may be overstated, but it hardly endorses indoor tanning, particularly for minors.  The researchers find a stark contrast between: (1) a 48% increase in melanoma diagnosis and (2) a 17.5% increase in mortality rate due to melanoma.  Instead of focusing on the significant rise in mortality, the researchers’ main conclusion is that much of the purported increase in melanomas is actually due to overcautious misdiagnosis of benign lesions.

What catches my eye – and is ignored by the ITA – is the rise in mortality.  The study finds a 17.5% increase in mortality rate over a mere fourteen years.  A frightening result to be sure.  How can that be when the research indicates doctors and patients are becoming far more cautious with regard to melanoma treatment and diagnosis?  Common sense tells us this dual vigilance ought to lower melanoma mortality rate, right?  And yet it has still risen 17.5% (through 2004), not to mention the five years of growth since 2004?!  But does the ITA share this concern?  Hardly, because it wouldn’t make business sense; the ITA has nothing to gain by providing consumers honest information about the danger of UV rays.  Its consistent goal for decades consists of persuading mostly women and teens, through any means necessary, to expose themselves to dangerous – cancer causing – UV rays.

Taking the study’s conclusions out of context, the Executive Director of the ITA John Overstreet shamelessly declares:

This information should make people rethink their fear of UV light.

John, you’re right for once, but not in the ‘forget everything dermatologists say and sacrifice health for a tan’ way you intend.  People should rethink their fear of UV light.  They should question whether we consider the risks enough.  Alarm bells should ring when overall melanoma mortality rate increases significantly despite enhanced doctor and patient diligence.  By all means let’s rethink our attitude towards UV radiation, but not by succumbing to the out of context, manipulated half-truths promulgated by your association.

(Post was prepared with the assistance of David Martin, University of North Carolina 2010)

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

"We must do better to protect our teenagers from Cancer"

In a culture that worships everything beautiful, from pencil thin models to starlets strolling down the red carpet, it is no surprise that many teenage girls across the country are drawn to indoor tanning.

This $5 billion dollar a year industry draws them in with sophisticated and targeted advertising. Once in the door, they are barraged by insidious package deals (incentivizing them to bake everyday). Are they warned of the risk of skin cancer, including its deadliest form: melanoma?

Not a chance.

“The Indoor Tanning Association (ITA) has turned the truth on its head”.

They accuse the American Academy of Dermatologists (AAD) and its members of being liars and grossly overstating the risk of cancer to scare patients to their offices. The ITA prepares and distributes literature directed at teens extolling the health benefits of indoor tanning. (Why care about cancer when you can get a little Vitamin D). That position is completely contrary to decades of peer reviewed and respected medical studies linking indoor tanning to skin cancer. Indeed, the World Health Organization has called for a complete prohibition against minors engaging in indoor tanning.

Diana Schafer, 24 was one of those targeted teens. She started indoor tanning at age 14. She was told it was safe as long as she wore protective glasses and waited 24 hours between visits. She soon began going everyday, despite warnings from her mother to stop. “I always thought I was not tan enough”. After eight years of using tanning beds Diana was diagnosed with melanoma.

Where is the government? Who is going to protect the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of Dianas across the country? The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general have been silenced and outmaneuvered by the powerful and politically savvy ITA.

Enough is enough. We are talking about the health of our teens. Protection requires that victims and potential victims come forward and with experienced counsel file lawsuits to put an end to the shameless practices of this industry.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link