Danger of nasal tanning sprays that can cause skin cancer
The unregulated sprays - which claim to accelerate tanning - may also trigger nausea, vomiting, and high blood pressure according to the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI).
The CTSI is now urging the public to avoid any tanning product that is 'inhaled or ingested'.
The sprays claim to work by delivering a substance known as Melanotan 2, a chemical that darkens skin pigmentation and which is banned in the UK.
While this creates a tan it 'may also encourage abnormal skin cell changes in response to UV exposure', according to the Melanoma Fund.
It's these changes that can potentially lead to melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.
However, as the sprays are marketed as a cosmetic product rather than a medicine, they are not as tightly regulated and have surged in popularity.
According to the British Beauty Council, the self-tan market is set to hit $990million by 2027.
The CTSI also raised the alarm on the growing trend of people using flavored nasal tanning sprays, drops and gummies.
They warned that 'unscrupulous' sellers on Facebook and TikTok were posting pictures of the products available in child-friendly flavors such as peach, bubblegum, grape, strawberry and lime.
The regulator said it feared they could become the latest 'must have' products among young people 'leading to a youth epidemic as we saw with disposable vapes'.
Susanna Daniels, chief executive of the skin-cancer charity Melanoma Focus, said: 'We're becoming increasingly concerned about the use of both nasal tanning sprays and tanning injections and their potential links with melanoma skin cancer.
'These unregulated and illegal products not only pose serious health risks but also encourage harmful behaviors, particularly among young consumers.
'We urge the public to consider the long-term impacts on their health and avoid using these substances altogether.'
Gary Lipman, chairman at the Sunbed Association, added: 'Nasal sprays have absolutely no place in a professional tanning salon.
'We fully support CTSI's campaign to heighten awareness of the dangers of using them.'
Some British patients have already been harmed by the products.
Jen Atkin, a former Miss Great Britain winner from Grimsby, Lincolnshire, said she has been permanently scarred after using a nasal tanning spray she bought on Instagram.
'Unfortunately, I decided to go to extra lengths and fell into the trend of nasal tan,' she said.
Atkin used the product twice and a dark brown mark appeared 'out of absolutely nowhere' on her forehead.
She added: 'It scared the life out of me. It made me feel so nauseous and weird.'
Melanoma is a serious form of skin cancer that begins in melanocytes, cells found in the upper layer of skin that produce melanin, which gives skin its color.
While less common than other types of skin cancer, it is more dangerous because of its ability to spread to other organs more rapidly if it is not treated at an early stage.
Around 17,000 people are diagnosed with melanoma each year, according to the latest figures published on the Cancer Research UK website.
Almost nine in ten people diagnosed with melanoma survive ten years or more.
There is an annual average of 2,300 deaths from the skin cancer, according to the charity, with it accounting for around 1 per cent of cancer deaths.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on regulating cosmetic procedures: rogue operators must be tackled, but aren't the only problem
The enormous popularity of beauty treatments, including dermatological fillers and Botox injections, is not solely an issue for health regulators. Changing norms and aspirations about appearances, and the way that these are marketed mainly to women and girls, are a cultural and economic phenomenon that requires wider consideration. While attitudes to these procedures and aesthetics vary, many people – including some cosmetic surgeons – are concerned that younger women account for a growing share of a highly lucrative and growing market. The death last year of 33-year-old Alice Webb in Gloucestershire, after a non-surgical Brazilian butt lift, as well as multiple reports of injuries, and the deaths of at least 28 women who have travelled to Turkey for cosmetic treatments, have increased the pressure on ministers to tighten the law. Wes Streeting's announcement of new licence requirements for UK businesses, and tighter regulation of higher-risk treatments, is probably overdue. The Chartered Trading Standards Institute recently warned that untrained people have given cosmetic injections in public toilets and hotels. Altering the law in order to exclude such 'rogue operators' ought to make high streets and the internet – where many clinics advertise – safer. Talking about the risks, as the health secretary has been doing, and holding a consultation on proposed changes, may have the beneficial effect of raising awareness even before changes are introduced. But councils will need resources if they are to be expected to enforce new rules by issuing licences, checking premises and so on. As in many other areas of economic activity, the law on its own is unlikely to be enough. Mechanisms are needed to ensure that businesses comply. It is already illegal to administer Botox or dermal fillers to children in England – although, worryingly, it is still allowed in Wales and Scotland. Mr Streeting's announcement that rules regarding children will be tightened further is particularly welcome. Strenuous efforts should be made to place them off limits for the industry as a whole. The reported preoccupation of some children with anti-ageing products is not healthy and should be discouraged. Mr Streeting did not refer to the cost to the NHS if cosmetic procedures go wrong, when announcing plans to tighten the law. But Karin Smyth, one of his ministers, has raised this. And Prof Sir Stephen Powis, who was NHS England's national medical director until last month, made the same point specifically in relation to butt lifts – the cosmetic procedure with the highest death rate of all. Ministers should expect pushback even though many experts, including plastic surgeons, favour tighter rules. The pro-growth mood of the Treasury means proposals for new regulations are unlikely to be smiled upon there. The more restrictive approach being proposed for England will also do nothing to prevent surgical tourism and could even increase it, if tighter regulation of the domestic industry results in higher prices. The gap in safeguards that allows foreign cosmetic surgery providers to market directly to the public needs to be addressed separately, which the government has begun to recognise. There is no single or instant fix. But by cracking down on cowboy operators, ministers will send a message that appearance-altering injections and other invasive treatments must be treated seriously. They are a different order of activity from applying makeup or painting nails. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Obese to get soups and shakes diet instead of weight-loss jabs
Low-calorie soups and shakes are to be prescribed to thousands of overweight people in Scotland in an attempt to reduce their dependence on expensive weight-loss drugs and provide longer-lasting health benefits. From January, 3,000 patients who have been newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes will be recruited for a clinical trial. About 300,000 Scots live with type 2 diabetes, a condition commonly linked to obesity, in which badly regulated blood sugar levels can increase the risk of heart disease, kidney disease, strokes or nerve conditions. About 10,000 of them are being treated with weight-loss drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro, with injections costing the NHS £3,000 a year. The estimated annual bill of £30 million is expected to rise as manufacturers raise prices. NHS chiefs believe that not only will the soups and shakes plan be less expensive, it will also bring longer-term health benefits. In the Total Diet Replacement (TDR) plan, to be rolled out over three years, patients who have recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and are deemed eligible will be given low-calorie substitutes for their breakfast, lunch and dinner. The replacement meals, containing a maximum of 900 calories a day, will be delivered to patients for between three and five months. • What to do now Mounjaro's hiking its prices, by an obesity expert After this initial period, normal food will be reintroduced, but with guidance given on healthy meals through online consultations and an app. The ambition is for patients to lose up to 10 per cent of their body weight over a year. Doctors are also optimistic that up to 40 per cent of the trial participants will achieve remission from type 2 diabetes within a year. There are fears that the weight lost through injections — which work by suppressing the appetite — may last only as long as the patient is taking the drug. By contrast, the effects of diet changes should prove more long-lasting and cost effective, NHS officials believe. The TDR scheme is set to cost £5.6 million for 3,000 patients, a one-off cost of about £1,866 per person. Doctors hope the plan will help patients to fundamentally alter their diet and lifestyle. A spokesman for the Scottish government said: 'We anticipate that around 35 to 40 per cent will achieve remission from type 2 diabetes at the end of their first year on the programme, with a majority of patients benefiting from a clinically significant average weight loss of 10 per cent.' This would lead to reductions in blood pressure and contribute to a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. He added: 'We will measure impact by the number of patients recruited into this programme, the number who achieve remission and the number with clinically significant weight loss.'
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on regulating cosmetic procedures: rogue operators must be tackled, but aren't the only problem
The enormous popularity of beauty treatments, including dermatological fillers and Botox injections, is not solely an issue for health regulators. Changing norms and aspirations about appearances, and the way that these are marketed mainly to women and girls, are a cultural and economic phenomenon that requires wider consideration. While attitudes to these procedures and aesthetics vary, many people – including some cosmetic surgeons – are concerned that younger women account for a growing share of a highly lucrative and growing market. The death last year of 33-year-old Alice Webb in Gloucestershire, after a non-surgical Brazilian butt lift, as well as multiple reports of injuries, and the deaths of at least 28 women who have travelled to Turkey for cosmetic treatments, have increased the pressure on ministers to tighten the law. Wes Streeting's announcement of new licence requirements for UK businesses, and tighter regulation of higher-risk treatments, is probably overdue. The Chartered Trading Standards Institute recently warned that untrained people have given cosmetic injections in public toilets and hotels. Altering the law in order to exclude such 'rogue operators' ought to make high streets and the internet – where many clinics advertise – safer. Talking about the risks, as the health secretary has been doing, and holding a consultation on proposed changes, may have the beneficial effect of raising awareness even before changes are introduced. But councils will need resources if they are to be expected to enforce new rules by issuing licences, checking premises and so on. As in many other areas of economic activity, the law on its own is unlikely to be enough. Mechanisms are needed to ensure that businesses comply. It is already illegal to administer Botox or dermal fillers to children in England – although, worryingly, it is still allowed in Wales and Scotland. Mr Streeting's announcement that rules regarding children will be tightened further is particularly welcome. Strenuous efforts should be made to place them off limits for the industry as a whole. The reported preoccupation of some children with anti-ageing products is not healthy and should be discouraged. Mr Streeting did not refer to the cost to the NHS if cosmetic procedures go wrong, when announcing plans to tighten the law. But Karin Smyth, one of his ministers, has raised this. And Prof Sir Stephen Powis, who was NHS England's national medical director until last month, made the same point specifically in relation to butt lifts – the cosmetic procedure with the highest death rate of all. Ministers should expect pushback even though many experts, including plastic surgeons, favour tighter rules. The pro-growth mood of the Treasury means proposals for new regulations are unlikely to be smiled upon there. The more restrictive approach being proposed for England will also do nothing to prevent surgical tourism and could even increase it, if tighter regulation of the domestic industry results in higher prices. The gap in safeguards that allows foreign cosmetic surgery providers to market directly to the public needs to be addressed separately, which the government has begun to recognise. There is no single or instant fix. But by cracking down on cowboy operators, ministers will send a message that appearance-altering injections and other invasive treatments must be treated seriously. They are a different order of activity from applying makeup or painting nails. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
