I just got the PP book and I jumped right to the chapter on suntanning. Does anyone know if the UV exposure recommendation applies to indoor tanning booths? Or, does it have to be real sunlight?

I'm thinking about trying indoor tanning at a VERY gradual rate, like maybe only 5 minutes a day, then GRADUALLY adjusting slightly up until I have a moderate tan. Then, maybe continuing indefinitely. (If it is safe)

The advice in the book about outdoor tanning sounds very sensible to me. I have always been skeptical of SPF products. Especially when I see people slathering themselves at the swimming pool when they are INTENTIONALLY trying to get a tan. Seems counter-productive.

Has anyone tried the book's advice and/or booths?

what does it say about suntanning?
im not on PP but just curious...

I remember reading somewhere on Dr Eades blog that the tanning beds are not beneficial b/c they don't provide the right spectrum of UV light or something like that, and not to bother with them. He said natural sunlight is the best.

Unfortunately, it was in the comments section where he answered someone, and not in his actual blog, so a search didn't bring up anything. But I definitely remember reading it.

It depends on the type of bulbs in the bed. There are newer bulbs out there designed to stimulate Vitamin D production.

Very interesting q&a - thanks for bringing it up Mr. Bond! Seriously, I have always liked 'sun therapy' despite being so very fair (not a "tanner"). I have had good days (felt sunkissed with extra freckles and a glow) and bad ones (major burns) and do use SPF for certain situations. But I always felt that the better point was to be careful with my TIME out in the sun...exactly the point made in PP. 007, your question also makes me wonder about those sunlamps they have for season affective disorder...something to consider anyhow!

As I recall from PPLP, he said that most beds provide UVB rays, the dangerous kind. As someone else said, now there are places that are using full spectrum bulbs which are better. Make sure you know what kind they have.

I've always thought sunscreen was ridiculous. My kids build up a great base tan in their a.m. swim practices, so we never use sunscreen unless we're going to be out at the pool at noon, which I avoid anyway. If we're going to the pool at 3, we don't use anything.

Even if the sun isn't causing cancer, isn't it still causing wrinkles??

I guess the real question isn't "is a tanning bed as good as natural sunlight" but rather "is a tanning bed a good enough substitute to be worth the time and money during the wintertime?" I don't know the answer to that, as I've never had any desire to use a tanning bed so I've never researched it.

As for the real sun, I dress my kids and myself in clothes that protect most of our bodies from the sun. Even for the pool they wear SPF protective clothing that protects their backs and shoulders. I dont' use anything on hands, legs, or lower arms. When we're going to get much more sun exposure than our bodies are used to, I use some zinc oxide cream (sold as diaper rash ointment) as a sunscreen- it doesnt' do anything wacky chemically in sunlight, it physically deflects the rays, like clothing does- but I put it on thin enough so that it doesn't look like they're wearing cream cheese on their ears. I only cover body parts that are REALLY exposed to the sun and likely to burn- ears, back of neck (if hair or a hat won't cover it), sometimes the nose and cheeks, and sometimes the tops of my feed if I'm wearing sandals and I don't have a base tan because I'd been wearing shoes with socks.

February Is Vitamin D Deficiency Month
01/28/2008
In recent years, several groups have launched smear campaigns against the sun and tanning, blurring the line between overexposure—a very real threat to our heath—and any exposure at all. The sunscreen industry constantly warns the public to “cover up” before venturing outside. Store shelves are flooded with products promising increasingly higher sun protection factors (SPFs), and the latest children’s swim trunks cover more skin than a nun’s habit.

As a result, the Centers for Disease Control estimates that more than 180 million Americans—60 percent of the population—are not getting enough vitamin D.

The National Institutes of Health lists sunlight as “the most important source of vitamin D.” Our bodies produce the aptly named “sunshine vitamin” when ultraviolet (UV) rays reach our skin. In order to produce the amount that most experts now agree is the minimum daily requirement (about 1,000 to 2,000 international units), some individuals would need to bare it all for about 20 minutes in the sunshine every day. Most of the United States doesn’t even come close.

Without vitamin D, our bodies cannot build strong bones or maintain a healthy immune system. New research indicates that the sunshine vitamin plays a vital role in the prevention of many deadly illnesses, including multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis, schizophrenia and heart disease. Health officials estimate that as many as 47,000 cancer deaths could be prevented each year in the United States if adequate vitamin D levels were attained.

Vitamin D deficiency is contributing to hundreds of thousands of cases of chronic and terminal diseases. That means the sunlight myths perpetuated by the skin care industry aren’t only misleading—they’re deadly.

The public is largely unaware that spending five to seven minutes in a tanning bed a few times a week provides people with the necessary amount of vitamin D to stay healthy. In fact, most people aren’t even aware that they could be at risk of vitamin D deficiency.

That’s why the Indoor Tanning Association has declared February Vitamin D Deficiency Month and is urging salons across the country to celebrate by telling customers about the importance of getting enough vitamin D and encouraging them to share the information with friends and family. While current customers enjoy tanning because it makes them look and feel good, there is a potential market you can tap into simply by letting people know that your tanning salon is an optimal place to get their much-needed vitamin D. It also gives your current customers another good reason to keep coming back!

http://www.lookingfit.com/hotnews/81h289416.html

That's good to know. Do you just ask at the salon, or what? Would the person at the desk even know?

I don't know, but I can tell you this, Sara. I didn't use much sunscreen when I was a teenager (I'm from the era of tanning with baby oil or Hawaiian Tropic No Sunscreen) and the only parts of my skin that are not "damaged" and looking pretty bad are the parts that have NEVER SEEN THE SUN, if you know what I mean, my BUTT AND MY BREASTS. My face is still in really good shape, b/c in my "circle" we covered our faces for tanning and just used darker makeup in summer. But my forearms are so ugly...and my legs have little spots and moles all over them. YUK. I had a LOT of bad BAD sunburns as a child and teenager and that probably didn't help.

Sun damage is definitely a consideration while appreciating the benefits. It's a difficult balance to achieve. I always talk about being "sun kissed" but that means beng out just long enough to get a few more freckles and feel the glow and warmth of the sunshine before the burn starts. It's been a challenge my whole life and I've failed before to the point where I have uneven freckles on my back in the shape of an X from a burn from 1994 (I kid you not) where I'd forgotten to put sunscreen on (and was out in full sun on a beach for far too long). I'm very lucky the rest of my skin still looks as good as it does and I think moisturizing has probably played a big part. Regardless of my SPF use I can tell you I am absolutely dedicated to slathering on after-sun moisturizers. Ironically (re: Elle's story) I like Hawaiin Tropics version - but anything with Aloe, Vitaman E, Cocoa Butter and/or Shea Butter (or combos thereof) work for me. I think it's helped though I know more concious and careful time in the sun is the best option.

Hey, Elle, we're the same age, so we're from the same "era"! I don't think I used the grease very often as a teen, just let it happen naturally, but I remember a couple of burns. One in particular was just a strip across the top of my breasts from my swimsuit being out of place----that one blistered up and left scars!

When we took DD to the dr. once, as a teen, he commented on her tan and told her to look at my butt to see the difference between my exposed and unexposed parts! He did nothing but gross her out.

Another remedy for the lack of exposure is Dr. Mike's recommendation of 5,000 IUs of D3 every day. I swear it is making a difference in my mood and, miraculously, I have not yet come down with the plague that is roaring through my family! That's not to say I won't get it, but I'm holding on longer than usual. I'm usually very susceptible to stuff.

Oh, he recommends 5000 units? That's good to know. I couldn't find it anywhere. I take 1600 right now. Maybe I should increase it. I definitely noticed a difference in my skin when I added the Vit D3 and the fish oil to my day. I have been unusually "well" too, now that I think of it.

I had gorgeous skin all over when I was teenager. My niece is the same and is really into tanning. I want to show her my skin now and tell her to STOP it. She has a deeper skin tone and tans that really really DARK DARK, and I am pretty fair and mine was more gold--would get to certain color then wouldn't get any darker, no matter how much time I spend in the sun. Her mother is the same and her skin still looks really good at almost 50...so maybe it's all in the skin type.

I agree with Lisa...the Eades recommend just enough sun to feel a good strong warmth each day.

That's a quote from one of Dr. Mike's blogposts in December. I couldn't find a whole article in a short time. But, I think he's saying that even if you get the 10 mins. of sun every day, if you're very far north (of El Paso!), or darker skinned, you really need the supplement. Yes, I'd rather have the sun, but in the winter there is not enough skin exposed to make a difference.

This really is an interesting topic (if I do say so myself). Many questions to be answered. Unfortunately, this is a topic that is hard to find good information about. A lot of biased conflicting opinions from the pharmaceutical companies and reverse theories coming from the sun worshipers (a.k.a. The Indoor Tanning Industrial Complex). By the way, I thought February was Black History Month. Or, at least that's what I heard on the Howard Stern Show. Stern is planning on honoring African-Americans every day in the month of February by presenting a daily black joke. This is a level of political correctness unmatched since last October when Stern celebrated National Breast Cancer Awareness Month by giving out free on-air breast exams to strippers. (No, Howard Stern is not a doctor, but he did read a pamphlet, so he's qualified.)

A key question brought up is: Even if indoor tanning (or outdoor tanning) is safe, does it cause wrinkling? I wish I knew the answer. But, I think I'm going to try a tanning salon (after asking all of the relevant questions about spectrum, etc.). As ElleH mentioned, asking for scientific advice from the bronzed bimbettes who work in these cancer dens is probably futile. I imagine these "intellectuals" trying to explain the the theory of electromagnetic radiation to customers using a diagram written in crayon. My main concern is to go very gradually. Like, five minutes a day. I happen to a person who looks SO much better with a nice tan. Contrary to the book's advice, outdoor tanning in the winter is not a realistic option.

Speaking of the book (Protein Power Lifeplan), I'm almost finished with chapter two, which was a bunch of scientific mumbo jumbo about insulin. A little hard for a political scientist like myself to follow. Although, chapter one was fun to read! It was all about pre-historic anthropology. I LOVE reading about cavemen!

ElleH: Thanks for the tip about Dr. Eades Blog. Where is that blog on the 'net?

P.S. Tan lines are sexy!