Pale is the New Tan

From the Associated Press (via Perez Hilton, but no matter): After years of describing tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation as "probable carcinogens", cancer experts have now moved both into the top cancer risk category, deeming them as deadly as arsenic and mustard gas. The new classification means tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation are definite causes of cancer, alongside tobacco, the hepatitis B virus and chimney sweeping, among others.

The classification of tanning beds as carcinogenic was disputed by a big wig from The Sunbed Association (of course). "The fact that is continuously ignored is that there is no proven link between the responsible use of sunbeds and skin cancer," the big wig said in a statement. She said most users of tanning beds use them less than 20 times a year.

But as use of tanning beds has increased among people under 30, doctors have seen a parallel rise in the numbers of young people with skin cancer. A new analysis of about 20 studies concludes the risk of skin cancer jumps by 75 percent when people start using tanning beds before age 30. In Great Britain, melanoma, the deadliest kind of skin cancer, is now the leading cancer diagnosed in women in their 20s. Normally, skin cancer rates are highest in people over 75.

Previous studies found younger people who regularly use tanning beds are eight times more likely to get melanoma than people who have never used them. In the past, World Health Organization has warned people younger than 18 to stay away from tanning beds.

Scary stuff, eh?

And it's true, more people are using "fake bake" than ever before, and it's starting at a younger age. It's the girls preparing to graduate from high school who spend hours working on their tan for the prom. It's the special event tanners, who get a package before a wedding or a trip down South. It's tanning addicts whose skin is now an eerie shade of burnt orange and looks a bit like a leather boot, but who feel the need to get darker and darker. I've even heard of doctors recommending tanning sessions to patients with bad acne.

I'm guilty of it myself, as I said last week. First it was for my sister's wedding, then it was trying to get ready for summer, but for people who think tanned skin looks better than untanned skin, there will always be an excuse. I regret encouraging anyone to do it, so I thought I'd present an alternative.

A few months ago, I found a lady in the area who does "spray tanning", a sugar based dye that is airbrushed onto the skin to simulate the perfect tan. This method is widely available in larger cities and I've known several people who have had it done, but it's not something you can get around every corner in Port Hawkesbury. I've heard both horror stories and glowing testimonials about spray tanning, but I decided to be a sport and give it a try.

It's really quite simple. Shower before you leave, but don't use any moisturizers or lotions, as the spray solution won't adhere as well. You stand on a towel in the middle of a private room (in your bathing suit, birthday suit, or whatever will allow the coverage you want), and she sprays you with this fine mist. You can get a few more coats on your legs, a few less on your face, whichever combination you feel looks best. You stand in this room for a few minutes afterwards to dry thoroughly, and voila: you're tanned for up to ten days.

No, it didn't come off on my clothes or drip or fade or turn orange, none of the terrible tales I had heard. It develops slightly over a few hours, but only a shade or two darker than you were when you left the salon. It looks just as natural as any tan other method I've tried, perhaps even more so.

But, not only are you tanned with a completely harmless sugar solution and no harsh chemicals, you've avoided the cancerous rays, you've saved countless hours of time at a tanning salon, and it costs about half the price of a package of tanning sessions.

Statistics and medical research are hard to argue with. It's fine for us to forge ahead with our vanity thinking "it won't happen to me", but evidence suggests otherwise and it's about time we take our health into account before superficial nonsense like tanning. Magazines and television shows make us think that only select, flawless beauties look good with pale skin, and that the rest of us should darken things up. True or false, is any measure of beauty worth getting cancer for? Not for me, thanks. Pale or spray, and that's it.