The University of Minnesota study published this week in the Archives of Dermatology attempts to build a case that no one is getting the message that too much UV is a bad thing and that indoor tanning is to blame for all this confusion. They also attempt to paint the picture that millions of indoor tanning clients are being duped into seeing any value for their tanning experience.

About 12 percent of the population has ever visited a sunbed center — this is nothing new. But the Minnesota group is clearly reverse-engineering the nature of their questions to make it appear that sunbed users don’t understand that there are risks of overexposure. Of course they do. Consider:

1. The Minnesota group alleges “only 13.3% of women and 4.2% of men suggested that avoidance of tanning bed use could reduce their risks of skin cancer in an “open-response format” (the subject has to VOLUNTEER an answer in his/her own words). This is COMPLETELY misleading. Check with any polling group you want about the “open-response format” (or Google it). “Open-response” can be used to manipulate data — to make it appear that subjects don’t know the answer because they didn’t offer it themselves, as opposed to being asked a true-or-false answer.
2. Our data show the exact opposite. International Smart Tan Network (the educational institute for the North American professional sunbed community) conducted a survey of nearly 3,000 tanning clients, when asked specifically if they believed “that any tanning may cause skin damage and skin cancer” fully 85.4 percent said yes, it can. Only 12.4 percent said that they believed tanning will not cause skin damage and skin cancer.

Bottom line: It is clear that tanning clients understand that overexposure to UV carries risks — we teach them to practice moderation and sunburn prevention and to properly understand the risks of overexposure. To suggest otherwise — after 15 years of marketing by “Sun Scare” groups to vilify any/all UV exposure — doesn’t make any sense.