How much is your ‘base tan' really protecting you against sun damage and cancer? Melanoma expert weighs in
'There's no such thing as a safe tan,' Krista Rubin, nurse practitioner at Mass General Brigham's Center for Melanoma, told The Post. 'It's an injury to the skin.'
But what about the popular belief that a 'base tan' can protect your skin from sun damage? The answer is more complicated than you might think.
Advertisement
4 Gen Z youths are bringing back tanning as skin cancer cases are on the rise.
Studio Firma/Stocksy – stock.adobe.com
Across the country, about 1 in 3 US adults intentionally tan outdoors — with women and younger adults leading the pack, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
And while indoor tanning beds have declined since their '90s heyday, research shows that roughly 7.8 million Americans still regularly use them.
Rubin said she often hears from patients who believe a 'base tan' will help prevent sunburn. While there's some truth to that, the protection it offers is minimal at best.
Advertisement
When your skin is exposed to ultraviolet radiation from the sun or tanning beds, it causes genetic damage to the DNA in your skin cells.
In response, your skin produces more melanin — the pigment that darkens your skin and acts as a natural defense mechanism by absorbing and scattering UV rays to reduce further damage.
'It's like the body's way of putting up a fence to protect its DNA,' Rubin explained.
Advertisement
4 Approximately one-third of American adults experience at least one sunburn each year.
Pattarisara – stock.adobe.com
But experts estimate that natural 'fence' only provides about SPF 2 to 4 protection. 'That isn't enough to rely on alone,' Rubin warned.
Crucially, tanning itself means DNA damage has already occurred — and your risk of skin cancer has gone up.
Advertisement
'People with darker skin tones may be less likely to get skin cancer, but anybody with skin can have damage at the cellular or DNA level,' Rubin said.
Some people maintain a year-round tan, whether from spending long hours outdoors or artificial methods like tanning beds. This, Rubin said, is a sign of chronic sun damage.
'They're more likely to have wrinkles, premature aging, and especially as they get older, a higher risk of skin cancer,' she said.
4 Skin cancer risk increases as you get older, but people of any age can be affected.
WavebreakMediaMicro – stock.adobe.com
That should serve as a wake up call for Gen Zers, who are bringing the bronzed look back into fashion with Y2K aesthetics and viral tanning trends dominating social media.
On TikTok alone, the hashtag #tanlines has racked up over 236 million posts — many featuring influencers hawking tanning hacks, from slathering on accelerators for a faster glow to timing their sunbathing with the UV index.
But all that fun in the sun comes with a price.
Advertisement
Skin cancer rates are rising among teens and young adults — and melanoma, the deadliest type, is now the third most common cancer in Americans ages 15 to 39, according to the NIH.
Despite this, 20% of Gen Zers say that being tan is more important to them than protecting themselves from skin cancer, and 30% admit they'd rather look 'great' today with a tan 'even if it means looking worse later in life,' according to survey data from the American Academy of Dermatology.
4 Tanning beds are having a resurgence despite concerns about their risks.
Drazen – stock.adobe.com
'There are a lot of influencers out there giving false information, and unfortunately, a lot of young people are getting burned,' Rubin said. 'It's dangerous; if you have skin, you should want to protect it because it's with you for the rest of your life.'
Advertisement
If you're planning to spend time outdoors, she recommends using a broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or higher — and reapplying every two hours, or more often if you're sweating or swimming.
Rubin also advises seeking shade and wearing sun-protective clothing whenever possible, especially between 10 am and 2 pm, when the sun's rays are strongest.
'Babies under six months really shouldn't be in direct sun at all,' Rubin warned.
'Their immune systems are too immature to properly filter ultraviolet radiation, so inflammation from sun damage can start early — and their bodies may not be able to repair it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
38 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
51 Horrifying Photos That Encapsulate US Healthcare
Healthcare in America is genuinely dystopian. You should not have to advertise for a kidney. Make this make sense. Remind me again how America is the greatest country in the world? Lab work should 100% be a part of routine or preventative care. You should also be able to talk about your child's medical issues at their physical??? It's absolutely ridiculous to require a subscription on TOP of health insurance you already pay for. Denying people a heart transplant because they can't pay for the meds shouldn't be a thing, because the meds should be covered in the first place. This is so, so bleak. As is this. JFC. Mental healthcare is so expensive and stressful that it's actually making people's mental health WORSE. It's a horrific cycle... ...That just goes on and on. Allow me to remind you that the inventors of insulin sold the patents for $1 so that everyone who needed it could afford it. "But private healthcare means you can choose your doctors!" This policy doesn't even make sense unless you view it through a lens of greed. Healthcare should NOT be a business. It can't possibly cost this much for the hospital to treat a rattlesnake bite. What's the point of an annual physical if not to check in on any issues? No medical care should cost $620k. This person didn't even receive any medical care and got charged almost $1.5k. Can someone explain why it costs $316 just to get evaluated over the phone? Tell me how this is "cosmetic" when the person is in pain. ELEVEN HOURS??? What are we even paying for? And I'm 99% positive "Nancy" is an incompetent AI bot. I will never understand why ambulance rides are so expensive. This was for a few MINUTES-long ride. People are literally having to refuse ambulances — that they NEED — because they're so expensive. This is ridiculous. This should not be legal. Same with this. Insurance companies are dickheads. Seriously. They want to make it impossible to get a cent from them. I'm asking the same question. This is one of the many reasons why we should have universal healthcare that isn't tied to your job. People are really out here looking for coupons for medical care, that's how bad it is. This is the bad place. This is such BS. If you can't read the above, it says:American Insurance(55M) Had a heart attack, died, revived and my cardiologist wouldn't let me leave the hospital without a LifeVest (portable defibulator). It automatically triggers in case of another cardiac incident.I spent two extra days in the hospital because insurance didn't want to approve the LifeVest. That cost the insurance another $20,000ish. They finally relented and let me have a LifeVest. Now, they say they don't have to pay for the the American insurance system (read scam) in a single sentence!!!"Your plan doesn't provide coverage for services that are considered investigational or not medically necessary. The fact that a provider may prescribe, order, recommend or approve a service, treatment, medication, or supply does not make it Medically Necessary or a Covered Service, and does not guarantee payment. These terms are defined in the 'Definition' section of your health plan document." As is this. If you can't read the above, it says:Diagnosis: I26.99 Oth Pulmonary Embolism W/O Acute Cor PulmonaleDate(s) determined not to be medically necessary: 11/29/2024 - 11/30/2024The clinical reason for our determination is:You were admitted to the hospital on 11/29/2024. The reason is blood clot to lung. We read the medical records given to us. We read the guidelines for a hospital stay. This stay does not meet the guidelines. You did not have to be admitted as an inpatient in the hospital for this care. The reason is you were watched closely in the hospital. You were stable. You had tests that did not show any problems that needed inpatient only treatment. The records showed your blood pressure was not too low. You did not need a breathing machine. You could have gotten the care you needed without being admitted inpatient at the hospital. The hospital inpatient admission is not covered. We let the hospital know that it is not covered. If insurance isn't going to approve life-saving medicine, what's even the point of having insurance? How was this $528??? (After insurance, too!) Tylenol should not cost $15/capsule. No one should have to go without life-saving care because they don't want to have to live for a medical bill. This is just completely unhinged. Meds should not be this expensive. Yes, good insurance can be great, but tell me why it's almost $40k to begin with??? US healthcare is a scam. This is so predatory. How are you supposed to afford these rates at $9/hour? Never mind the deductibles and copays? And finally, this is just genuinely bonkers. The entire system needs to change.
Bloomberg
39 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Healthy Living Helps the Aging Brain
A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association makes a compelling case that a healthy lifestyle does an aging brain good. That might sound obvious. Eat well, exercise, challenge yourself mentally, have an active social life and you'll be better off for it. Yet researchers are just starting to offer concrete data to support the theory that making conscientious lifestyle changes can lower the risk of dementia, which is estimated to affect some 6 million Americans.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
In the age of Ozempic, is there still a role for weight-loss surgery?
As weight-loss medications like Ozempic exploded across the U.S. over the past four years, bariatric surgeons faced a bit of an existential crisis: Were their jobs about to become obsolete? For the first time, health care providers have a combination of highly effective therapies to offer patients with obesity, a condition that has long been one of the most difficult to treat. The outlook is especially exciting for patients who are severely overweight — including those who are considered too heavy for surgery. Indeed, there may exist a future where drugs and other interventions prevent people from ever becoming obese and needing weight-loss surgery. But that future is far off, say surgeons and other weight-loss experts. In fact, even as millions of Americans are now taking drugs that dramatically improve weight loss, surgeons say their tool may be more powerful than ever. 'A massive amount of people have tried these medications, so the question becomes: 'How well do they work and is there a role for bariatric surgery in the era of these drugs?'' said Dr. Jonathan Carter, a UCSF surgeon who specializes in minimally invasive procedures. Bariatric surgery has for decades been the most effective and durable weight-loss tool available. The specific procedures vary, but the most common operation now is the gastric sleeve surgery, in which a large portion of the stomach is removed. Roughly a quarter of a million Americans undergo a bariatric procedure each year. The surgeries are highly effective for weight loss — patients can lose about a third of their body weight within two years, and they generally keep off most of those pounds long-term. The side effects with the sleeve procedure are minimal and may include gas, bloating and nutritional deficiencies that can be alleviated with diet. Meanwhile, more than 1 in 10 Americans have now taken the newest weight-loss medications. On these drugs, patients can lose about 15% of their weight, but they must remain on the drugs for life — those who stop gain all of the weight back. Side effects are similar to the surgery. The drugs and the surgery work somewhat similarly by essentially quashing people's hunger and cravings. And though the surgery is more expensive at the outset — about $12,000 to $15,000 — it's cheaper in the long-term compared to drugs that cost about $1,000 a month. Both treatments are often, but not always, covered by insurance. With the surgery, 'You take someone who is 100 pounds overweight and their knees hurt and they have sleep apnea,' said Carter, 'and you do a one-hour intervention and a year later they've lost 100 pounds and their knees don't hurt and the sleep apnea is gone. It's like a butterfly coming out of a cocoon.' But bariatric surgery has never been a popular weight-loss option for those who need it most. Of all Americans who are eligible for surgery, only about 1% undergo the procedure. Surgeons and weight-loss experts say that's largely been due to misconceptions about the procedure and stigma around obesity. 'If you've been treating patients with obesity for decades, you always felt like, 'Yes, I have a great treatment, I can do these surgeries and do them safely, I believe in them whole-heartedly,'' said Dr. Dan Azagury, a Stanford University bariatric surgeon. 'But you were still limited in your capacity to treat patients.' Azagury took over Stanford's Lifestyle and Weight Management Center in February 2020, about a year before Ozempic, the first blockbuster weight-loss drug, blew up. Over the next 18 months, the number of patients on weight-loss medications jumped from 50 to 2,000. He said friends would often ask him if he would be out of a job soon. The drugs, though, have in some ways validated the surgical interventions, Azagury said. Weight loss has notoriously been a fraught topic in doctors offices, with patients feeling judged and doctors feeling frustrated by their lack of treatment options. 'A lot of times doctors would just say that you should eat less,' Azagury said. 'And I think patients intrinsically didn't see obesity as a medical condition,' he said. The success of recent weight-loss drugs, though, has made that conversation more palatable both to patients and providers, Azagury said. And he believes that is making some patients more amenable to a surgical option. There are, broadly, now three buckets for treating weight loss: diet and exercise, medication and surgery. The first option is likely best for people who don't have a lot of weight to lose and who are not facing any immediate complications related to their weight. They can manage their own treatment, or get a referral to a community or private weight-loss program. From there, patients with more serious obesity can decide if medication or surgery — or both — is the best option for them. Some people may be resistant to the idea of any surgical procedure and opt for medication. Others may decide that they would rather not deal with weekly injections for the rest of their life and prefer a one-time operation. Many patients, though, will end up with multiple interventions over their lifetime. They may start with medication and eventually decide they want a more permanent solution. Or they may get bariatric surgery and a few years later decide to start a medication if their weight is creeping back up. Mandy Hinz, 47, fought with her weight all her life, and it's only in the past two years that she finally felt like she had options. She had inquired about bariatric surgery about 20 years ago but was told she would need to lose 100 pounds before doctors would consider it safe. After that, she was up and down, peaking at about 415 pounds on her 5-foot, 3-inch frame. She started Ozempic in early 2023, and though the drug made her feel 'super sick,' she stuck with it and lost about 30 pounds. Around that time, Hinz, a Sacramento resident, was referred to the bariatric program at UCSF, and in October 2023, she finally got a gastric sleeve. She got down to about 200 pounds from the surgery, then started a different weight-loss drug and lost another 20 pounds. Though she's still obese for her height, Hinz said she's not interested in losing much more weight. 'I'm 180 and completely happy,' Hinz said. 'My journey has been absolutely amazing.' She noted that even with all of the tools at her disposal, losing the weight was never easy. And she has friends for whom even the newest therapies aren't solving all of their weight issues. But for Hinz, the weight-loss drugs finally unlocked a path that had never felt accessible to her. 'Being big my whole life, I missed out on a lot of stuff,' she said. Walking up and down stairs had become difficult, or spending a day on her feet at an amusement park. 'Now I can run up and down the stairs, I can walk around the amusement park the whole day. I went on my first hike a year and a half ago. It's like, let's go, let's do this.' Azagury said he's most thrilled for the patients — and their doctors — who have the most weight to lose, and especially those for whom a combination of medical and surgical therapies could be life-saving. 'The worst thing for a bariatric surgeon is when you get a patient in your clinic and it's too late — their condition is so bad that surgery is unsafe,' Azagury said. 'The conversation is, 'You have a condition I can treat, but I can't treat you.' It's the worst conversation. And I never have to have it anymore. Now I can tell them: 'I can't do surgery, but I have a good alternative for you.''
