1.0Smart Tan Newshttps://news.smarttan.comrich600338<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="BZgIDHvbSn"><a href="https://news.smarttan.com/index.php/headline-story-dermatology-2/">HEADLINE STORY: Dermatology</a></blockquote><iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://news.smarttan.com/index.php/headline-story-dermatology-2/embed/#?secret=BZgIDHvbSn" width="600" height="338" title="“HEADLINE STORY: Dermatology” — Smart Tan News" data-secret="BZgIDHvbSn" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"></iframe><script type="text/javascript"> /* <![CDATA[ */ /*! This file is auto-generated */ !function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document); //# sourceURL=https://news.smarttan.com/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js /* ]]> */ </script> Cosmetic Dermatology's misguided statement that UV exposure is like a cigarette for your skin — a comparison that defies nature and science in order to peddle chemical sunscreen and cosmetic dermatology's sun abstinence agenda — is being puffed out more than ever into the marketplace, a SmartTan.com poll revealed. According to the SmartTan.com poll, conducted in early October, 68 percent of salon owners say they've seen the mis-statement in the press in the past two months in their markets. "The comparison of sunlight to tobacco is misleading — almost criminal — on the part of cosmetic dermatology," Smart Tan Vice President Joseph Levy said. "The fact that they're making this comparison more and more shows just how desperate they are to stop the tide of pro-UV material making its way into the marketplace." Consider: Sun exposure is natural and intended. Chemicals in tobacco products are not. Smokers have 14-22 times the risk of lung cancer compared to non-smokers, according to the American Cancer Society. In contrast, suntanners have no statistically different risk of melanoma as compared to non-tanners, according to the sum of research on this topic. What's more, many studies show that people who get regular UV exposure have less risk of melanoma as compared to non-tanners. "Smart Tan believes bringing smoking into the debate cheapens the effectiveness of the very important anti-tobacco efforts — which should not be compromised," Levy said. "Ultimately those in cosmetic dermatology will only destroy their own credibility by continuing to make this comparison."https://smarttan.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/2009-10-15-smoking-gun-copy.thumbnail.jpg