{"id":5764,"date":"2011-03-14T08:14:10","date_gmt":"2011-03-14T12:14:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/?p=5764"},"modified":"2011-03-14T08:14:10","modified_gmt":"2011-03-14T12:14:10","slug":"chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/","title":{"rendered":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright size-full wp-image-5765\" title=\"overdiagnosis314\" src=\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\" alt=\"overdiagnosis314\" width=\"278\" height=\"146\" \/>A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard &#8212; \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention.<\/p>\n<p>In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal.<\/p>\n<p>So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5764","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.2 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade.  British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence.  \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence.  The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements.  A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade.  British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence.  \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence.  The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements.  A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Smart Tan News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/SmartTan\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"smarttan\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@SmartTan\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@SmartTan\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"smarttan\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"smarttan\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/person\/4191f4b1131c0a37b4fd39f876771e7b\"},\"headline\":\"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\"},\"wordCount\":549,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\",\"name\":\"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00\",\"description\":\"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade. British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence. \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence. The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements. A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/\",\"name\":\"Smart Tan News\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Smart Tan\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Smart-Tan.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Smart-Tan.png\",\"width\":500,\"height\":164,\"caption\":\"Smart Tan\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/SmartTan\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/SmartTan\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/person\/4191f4b1131c0a37b4fd39f876771e7b\",\"name\":\"smarttan\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"smarttan\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/author\/smarttan\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News","description":"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade.  British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence.  \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence.  The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements.  A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News","og_description":"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade.  British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence.  \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence.  The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements.  A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.","og_url":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/","og_site_name":"Smart Tan News","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/SmartTan","article_published_time":"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"smarttan","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@SmartTan","twitter_site":"@SmartTan","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"smarttan","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/"},"author":{"name":"smarttan","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/person\/4191f4b1131c0a37b4fd39f876771e7b"},"headline":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error","datePublished":"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/"},"wordCount":549,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg","articleSection":["News"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/","url":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/","name":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error - Smart Tan News","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg","datePublished":"2011-03-14T12:14:10+00:00","description":"The Chicago Tribune authored an editorial on Friday slamming indoor tanning but misstated facts in an attempt to dissuade readers from using indoor tanning equipment. \u201cThe use of tanning beds by people under age 30 is associated with melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cResearchers cannot explain the rising incidence of the disease for any reason except the increased popularity of indoor tanning over the past two decades.\u201d In fact, independent researchers HAVE offered several reasons \u2013 in peer-reviewed journals \u2013 in the past 12 months, bolstering peer-reviewed explanations about melanoma\u2019s complex relationship with UV that have been promoted for more than a decade. British dermatology leaders conduced a study of melanoma incidence titled, \u201cMelanoma Epidemic: A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream\u201d in the British Journal of Dermatology last year, showing that the alleged increase in melanoma incidence is, in fact, merely an increase in the diagnosis of thin melanoma lesions without a corresponding increase in diagnosis of thicker lesions or an increase in the mortality rate. Because thick lesions and mortality aren\u2019t increasing, it\u2019s nearly impossible to state that actual melanoma incidence is increasing. This study bolstered a similar paper written at Emory University more than a decade ago about U.S. Melanoma incidence. \u201cOverdiagnosis in Cancer\u201d published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute supported the same point \u2014 that melanoma overdiagnosis \u201cis simply the detection of pseudo-disease\u201d because doctors are removing more thin lesions today and calling them melanomas, which is falsely inflating incidence numbers. The main point: There is a difference between incidence and reported incidence. The government\u2019s own data support these two papers, showing actual increases in melanoma in men over age 50, but not in women under age 50. Dermatology lobbyists have skewed data to make their statements. A commentary in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings written by a melanoma researcher right in the Tribune\u2019s back yard -- \u201cMelanoma\u2019s Public Message\u201d by Dr. Arthur Rhodes of Chicago \u2014 points the fingers at the fact that the vilification of UV as the cause of melanoma is killing older men who don\u2019t tan, who get melanoma but who never get lesions checked out because dermatology\u2019s message about UV is archaic. On top of that, the Tribune\u2019s main point \u2014 that those under 18 should be kept out of sunbed centers \u2014 will drive teenagers to unregulated home-garage sunbeds and back to the beaches and blacktops to get overexposed instead of non-burning exposure in regulated sunbed studios. We can supply PLENTY of evidence supporting this contention. In 20 minutes we could have explained all of this and how dermatology industry lobbying groups have not told the whole story to editorial boards nationwide to the Tribune. But the Tribune elected simply to pen an editorial based on the talking points of anti-UV lobbying groups who are lobbying to provide UV to millions of teens themselves with their own sunbeds for cosmetic skin conditions at $85-$100 a session while making $6 indoor sunbed sessions illegal. So here\u2019s an open invitation to the Chicago Tribune\u2019s editorial board: We\u2019re willing to sit down with you and show you why your \u201cresearchers cannot explain\u201d editorial was wrong and why you will WANT to change your position. We hope you return our call.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/overdiagnosis314.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/chicago-tribune-needs-to-correct-error\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chicago Tribune Needs To Correct Error"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/","name":"Smart Tan News","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#organization","name":"Smart Tan","url":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Smart-Tan.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/smarttan.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Smart-Tan.png","width":500,"height":164,"caption":"Smart Tan"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/SmartTan","https:\/\/x.com\/SmartTan"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/#\/schema\/person\/4191f4b1131c0a37b4fd39f876771e7b","name":"smarttan","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60bebff64d4c62315967b9126de927b81d5a9d9511fd52f9dbe9e8b344149182?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"smarttan"},"url":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/author\/smarttan\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5764","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5764"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5764\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10007,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5764\/revisions\/10007"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5764"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5764"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.smarttan.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5764"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}