A number of dermatology industry lobbying groups are ramping up public health campaigns this spring arguing that sunbeds are an “inefficient” source of vitamin D production because they emit mainly UVA — a statement so inaccurate that it appears to be intentionally misleading.

Natural sunlight is mostly UVA, just like sunbeds. Both contain UVB and are the most efficient sources of vitamin D. Vitamin D is almost non-existent in diet.

Dermatology industry lobbying groups — in calling for a ban on teenage use of sunbed centers in California — testified to state legislators that sunbeds are an “inefficient” source of vitamin D production and that their own use of sunbeds to treat psoriasis should be preserved because no studies show any risk of that procedure — statements that are factually inaccurate.

The World Health Organization considers dermatology phototherapy — most typically prescribed as sunbed usage in combination with the drug Methoxalen — a Class 1 carcinogen.

So are dermatology lobbying groups lying to promote their agenda?

In 2011 California passed the nation’s first under-18 statewide ban of commercial tanning bed usage into law — legislation that passed the Democratically controlled California House and Senate on largely partisan votes this summer. Senator Ted Lieu, D-Redondo Beach, sponsored the bill, which took effect Jan. 1.

Added to the bill Aug. 23 was an amendment stating, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, nothing shall preclude a physician or surgeon from prescribing a phototherapy device to a patient of any age.” That was already clear in the bill’s original language — so why the redundancy?

Epidemiologist Dr. Mia Papas in June presented data at the World Congress of Epidemiology showing that the World Health Organization data that Lieu used to promote his bill actually indicts medical phototherapy units and not commercial sunbeds. In the WHO report, medical usage of sunbeds doubled melanoma risk for users and that commercial tanning beds, when analyzed without data from home tanning units and medical sunbeds, had no statistically significant increase in risk at all.

“How can a legislator and dermatology groups deny that this data exists — somebody needs to answer that question because their denial was used to pass this bill,” Smart Tan Vice President Joseph Levy said. “So not only did they conceal or deny that that data exists, but they added an amendment to the bill to protect phototherapy business.”

An estimated 150,000 Californians use commercial sunbeds primarily as a cost-effective substitute for medical phototherapy (used primarily to treat the cosmetic disorder psoriasis), according to Smart Tan surveys. The insurance co-pay for a phototherapy session is, in most cases, greater than the cost of a tanning salon visit.

Dermatology also alleged that sunbeds were an “inefficient” source of vitamin D production because they emit mainly UVA and UVB is what is needed to produce vitamin D.

“That is either photo biologically ignorant or intentionally misleading,” Levy said. “Sunlight is mostly UVA too. And it is without question that sunlight and sunbeds that mimic sunlight are the most efficient vitamin D sources on the planet. Peer-reviewed research has confirmed that. And sunbed users, as a group, have 90 percent higher vitamin D levels as compared to non-tanners. So why do derms have to mislead to make their case? That question also needs to be asked.”

Dermatology alleges that melanoma is the fastest growing cancer for women 25-29 — a statistic they always offer without pointing out that no cancer is common in that age group and that it is still incredibly rare in that age group.

Dermatology has also masked the fact that melanoma is increasing most-significantly in men over age 50 — a group they virtually ignore in public education campaigns.