To Tan or Not to Tan?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 10, 2008 11:51 PM GMT
    What do you guys think of tanning? In or out? Since I moved to Seattle, I've become a pale pale guy. I don't normally tan, but I do not find my skin appealing. Should I worry about it or not?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 12:07 AM GMT
    Unless you are one of those ethnic groups that just doesn't tan, go ahead and tan.

    It is actually a good preventive action to take if you intend to be outdoors this summer. By tanning, you can control exposure of your skin, do it safely, and have the tan to protect you later outdoors.

    BUT...DO IT SLOWLY...give the skin a chance to develop the melanin producing cellular machinery to protect your skin.

    I started out this year at just 2 minutes per session for the first 3 sessions. The people at the front desk laughed at me. I didn't care. It's my skin. Then I went up to 4, 6, and 8 minutes.

    I also let the skin be my guide. If it got red, I gave it time to heal completely...a couple, 3 days.

    Oh you might want to put some chap stick on your lips with some SP in it. But be careful not to smear it on the skin around your lips. It will block the tanning rays there, too....and boy, will you come out looking funny.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 12:38 AM GMT
    Go tan for a bit, just play around with it for awhile, see if you like it. Probably start off similar to what Calson says... although I'd like to say you'd be fine at 7 minutes starting off.

    Speak with the sales person at the counter after you've purchased minutes, or a package or whatever. They're usually quite helpful, and while usually foreign orange, they are quite contentious to us white folk.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    May 11, 2008 12:41 AM GMT
    I love to strip to my jean cut offs and mow without a shirt... did it today.. but if you are out in the sun, use sunscreen and tan smartly.. meaning no major burning. So important.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 1:01 AM GMT
    LOL, I'd love to mow shirtless. I did it when I was back in Iowa growing up. Seattle though, so over cast and cloudy....not worth it. Plus I have no lawn to mow...well except for my naughty spot lol.

    So I'm guessing Pasty white is out?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 1:08 AM GMT
    caslon saidUnless you are one of those ethnic groups that just doesn't tan, go ahead and tan.

    It is actually a good preventive action to take if you intend to be outdoors this summer. By tanning, you can control exposure of your skin, do it safely, and have the tan to protect you later outdoors.

    BUT...DO IT SLOWLY...give the skin a chance to develop the melanin producing cellular machinery to protect your skin.

    I started out this year at just 2 minutes per session for the first 3 sessions. The people at the front desk laughed at me. I didn't care. It's my skin. Then I went up to 4, 6, and 8 minutes.

    I also let the skin be my guide. If it got red, I gave it time to heal completely...a couple, 3 days.

    Oh you might want to put some chap stick on your lips with some SP in it. But be careful not to smear it on the skin around your lips. It will block the tanning rays there, too....and boy, will you come out looking funny.


    If my dermatologist read this he would probably choke!

    NO TANNING IS GOOD! It causes cancer.

    Sad to make this point but it is true, a woman I work with just burried her mother who died of SKIN cancer. Its possible. I hate that gay men are so obsessed with being good looking and tan that they risk their lives to do it.

    Tanning cause premature aging, skin spots, and increases chances of melanoma.

    I am proud to be pale and sexy!

  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    May 11, 2008 1:21 AM GMT
    danielryan said[quote][cite]caslon said[/cite]Unless you are one of those ethnic groups that just doesn't tan, go ahead and tan.

    It is actually a good preventive action to take if you intend to be outdoors this summer. By tanning, you can control exposure of your skin, do it safely, and have the tan to protect you later outdoors.

    BUT...DO IT SLOWLY...give the skin a chance to develop the melanin producing cellular machinery to protect your skin.

    I started out this year at just 2 minutes per session for the first 3 sessions. The people at the front desk laughed at me. I didn't care. It's my skin. Then I went up to 4, 6, and 8 minutes.

    I also let the skin be my guide. If it got red, I gave it time to heal completely...a couple, 3 days.

    Oh you might want to put some chap stick on your lips with some SP in it. But be careful not to smear it on the skin around your lips. It will block the tanning rays there, too....and boy, will you come out looking funny.


    If my dermatologist read this he would probably choke!

    NO TANNING IS GOOD! It causes cancer.

    Sad to make this point but it is true, a woman I work with just burried her mother who died of SKIN cancer. Its possible. I hate that gay men are so obsessed with being good looking and tan that they risk their lives to do it.

    Tanning cause premature aging, skin spots, and increases chances of melanoma.

    I am proud to be pale and sexy!

    [/quote]


    he's totally right on this one guys. Tanning is never good. tanning beds especially have been proven to more than double your risks of skin cancer (check out the national cancer institute statistics on this). Tanning is actually the the body's response to skin damaged by UV light.

    getting sun is important for the sake of vit D and all that good stuff.. but it has to be in moderation. and definitely use a good sun block.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 1:21 AM GMT
    danielryan said
    NO TANNING IS GOOD!


    I am with him. No tanning at all. No. I think it damages your skin.

    I will admit I'm not even remotely tempted, because I am naturally whitewhitewhite and going out in the sun without heavy sunscreen means a burn. Also, living the first 24 years of my life in Seattle guaranteed that I didn't see the sun for ... the first 24 years of my life.

    I always had the impression it was just fine to be pale in Seattle. Everyone knows it's not your fault.

    When I go out in the summer, I try to wear a sun hat, dark sunglasses, and sunscreen--usually you can see the chalky residue on my face. I feel like the ensemble would be completed by a walker, but I'm not quite there yet.
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    May 11, 2008 1:38 AM GMT
    Try a body lotion that has a small amount of self tanner built in.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 11, 2008 1:43 AM GMT
    To get melanoma or to not get melanoma?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 1:47 AM GMT


    Tanning is to skin as cigarettes are to the lungs.

    BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD

    Pale and pink is SEXY & HEALTHY.

    And remember, it can be cloudy outside during the warmer summer months and the sun can still burn your skin.

    B787
  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    May 11, 2008 1:48 AM GMT
    ShawnTO saidTo get melanoma or to not get melanoma?


    don't forget the non-melanoma type skin cancers like basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma... yum
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 2:37 AM GMT
    Could we try to put this into perspective? Instead of reciting one of horror-stories.

    As to this friends mother passed away, and the other countless tanning horror stories. You have to understand how people lived back then. They were very very stupid. So while it sucks that they die, its what happens when you spend all that time out at the beach without sunscreen and all you do is try to get tan because at that time, no one thought anything was wrong with it.

    Essentially all these deaths that have been taking place over the past twenty years are a result of improper tanning methods gone unchecked. They will slowly but surely decrease as time goes on as a result of knowledge gained.

    Thinking further, you would really have to bake bake bake, for a long time, to have issues with tanning. Humans weren't born in houses or 8-5 white collar jobs (like most of us gays are... damn we're smart) So a little sun (or concentrated fake sun) is something our bodies can handle. I don't get out during the high 'natural tanning' periods ever because of my job, so I have to look for that somewhere else.

    Tanning is a purely superficial thing, I get that, but I was really getting sick of seeing pictures of my incredible northern European heritage shown brightly to all those who witnessed me. That really got old. I don't want to be that dark, but I just don't want to be glowing. I don't want people commenting on the fact that I am really really white, just like onetoughguy probably is experiencing.

    The end?
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 11, 2008 3:16 AM GMT
    Improper tanning methods as opposed to proper tanning methods?

    So, if you only tan a little bit, you'll be ok, like if you only smoke a half pack of cigarettes (or only breathe in second-hand smoke) you'll be fine? Is this your professional opinion as a doctor?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 3:39 AM GMT
    I'm sorry, you must never talk to people over 45?

    There's a joke on futurama, or family guy? where theres some jingle that goes.

    "You're only healthy when you tan,
    So soak up all the sun you can."

    Its done in a 50's era riff.

    The joke is that, this is actually what people thought. Not everyone practiced it of course, but a lot of them did. The idea carried on into the 60's and 70's of course, which is why we see the deaths of our friend's mothers to things like melanoma.

    My old boss used to talk about how it was a wonder he hasn't gotten any sort of skin cancer, because of the amount of tanning he would do when he was younger. It wasn't just him who did this. Many, many people did it.

    As far as my professional opinion as a doctor, I would never recommend tanning of more than twice a week.. and even that might be poor. But the hard-line don't-ever-do-it-or-you'll-get-cancer line thing is bullshit, and thats what I'm trying to say.

    If tanning and melanoma were proven causal, instead of just correlative, don't you think someone might have done something about it?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 3:49 AM GMT
    I think if you take it slowly and give the skin the time to adjust, the danger is greatly reduced.

    Actually, some sun is good for you because it allows the body to make vitamin D.

    Also as I have said above, having some tan is good if you might be outside and exposed to the sun...like gooding out for a day with friends.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 11, 2008 3:55 AM GMT
    No, I've never spoken to someone over the age 45, and I don't watch cartoons so I missed the joke.

    Exposure to UV radiation is the leading cause of all skin cancers, including melanoma. That fact is undebatable. There is no 'safe' tanning, or recommended maximum number of weekly sessions. Considering tanning is for vanity only, it seems a bit ridiculous to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:01 AM GMT
    winningeleven saidI'm sorry, you must never talk to people over 45?

    There's a joke on futurama, or family guy? where theres some jingle that goes.

    "You're only healthy when you tan,
    So soak up all the sun you can."

    Its done in a 50's era riff.

    The joke is that, this is actually what people thought. Not everyone practiced it of course, but a lot of them did. The idea carried on into the 60's and 70's of course, which is why we see the deaths of our friend's mothers to things like melanoma.

    My old boss used to talk about how it was a wonder he hasn't gotten any sort of skin cancer, because of the amount of tanning he would do when he was younger. It wasn't just him who did this. Many, many people did it.

    As far as my professional opinion as a doctor, I would never recommend tanning of more than twice a week.. and even that might be poor. But the hard-line don't-ever-do-it-or-you'll-get-cancer line thing is bullshit, and thats what I'm trying to say.

    If tanning and melanoma were proven causal, instead of just correlative, don't you think someone might have done something about it?


    Yeah...sunscreen!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:05 AM GMT
    winningeleven saidThe joke is that, this is actually what people thought. Not everyone practiced it of course, but a lot of them did. The idea carried on into the 60's and 70's of course, which is why we see the deaths of our friend's mothers to things like melanoma.


    I understood your point. And certainly now a lot of people are more aware of the dangers of getting sunburned or too tan. I have wondered if rates of skin cancer will level off because of this, too.

    I've heard people say that having a small degree of tan can protect you against sunburn. But then if you're out in the sun all day with your baseline tan, wouldn't you just get even tanner? And isn't your goal to avoid getting really tan?

    I don't think getting a low degree of a tan is fantastically dangerous, but very tan skin does look unhealthy to me now. You can do what you want, but I'm bringing my parasol.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:07 AM GMT
    well, you could avoid tanning all your life and still die of ....oh, say.....prostate cancer.

    The clue is moderation in all things.

    Sun Tanning

    Health benefits


    The skin produces vitamin D in response to sun exposure (in particular, UVB waves in the 285nm to 287nm range), which can be a health benefit for those with vitamin D deficiency. In 2002, Dr. William B. Grant published an article claiming that 23,800 premature deaths occur in the US annually from cancer due to insufficient UVB exposures (apparently via vitamin D deficiency).[1] This is higher than 8,800 deaths occurred from melanoma or squamous cell carcinoma, so the overall effect of sun tanning might be beneficial. Another research[2][3] estimates that 50,000–63,000 individuals in the United States and 19,000 - 25,000 in the UK die prematurely from cancer annually due to insufficient vitamin D.

    However 10 to 15 minutes of sun exposure two times per week will provide adequate vitamin D, while minimizing risks from UV exposure. Further, sun exposure and tanning will not produce vitamin D when the sun is too low in the sky.[4]

    Another effect of vitamin D deficiency is osteomalacia, which can result in bone pain, difficulty in weight bearing and sometimes fractures. This work has been updated in Grant et al. 2005[5] and Grant and Garland, 2006[6] In addition, it was reported that in Spain, risk of non-melanoma skin cancer is balanced by reduced risk of 16 types of cancer [Grant, 2006][7]

    According to a 2007 research of Islam, Gauderman, Cozen, and Mack [8] [9], sun exposure during childhood prevents multiple sclerosis later in life.

    Ultraviolet radiation has other medical applications, in the treatment of skin conditions such as psoriasis and vitiligo. Sunshine is informally used as a short term way to treat or hide acne, but research shows that in the long term, acne worsens with sunlight exposure and safer treatments now exist (see phototherapy).
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 11, 2008 4:11 AM GMT
    caslon said

    However 10 to 15 minutes of sun exposure two times per week will provide adequate vitamin D, while minimizing risks from UV exposure. Further, sun exposure and tanning will not produce vitamin D when the sun is too low in the sky.


    And that only requires a square inch of exposed skin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:12 AM GMT
    ShawnTO said[quote][cite]caslon said[/cite]

    However 10 to 15 minutes of sun exposure two times per week will provide adequate vitamin D, while minimizing risks from UV exposure. Further, sun exposure and tanning will not produce vitamin D when the sun is too low in the sky.

    And that only requires a square inch of exposed skin.


    Supporting citation, please.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 11, 2008 4:16 AM GMT
    I didn't go on wikipedia for that bit of info Caslon, that came from my pathology, anatomy & physiology, and natural nutritional symptomatology courses.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:20 AM GMT
    ShawnTO saidI didn't go on wikipedia for that bit of info Caslon, that came from my pathology, anatomy & physiology, and natural nutritional symptomatology courses.


    well, go find it....do you think I had that wikipedia info and link just sitting here?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2008 4:34 AM GMT
    ha...check this article out:
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/136310