Also:
This does not bode well for the health of the nation. In 1994, a Swedish study found that women 18-30 years old who visited tanning parlors 10 times or more a year had seven times greater incidence of melanoma than women who did not use tanning salons. In another study, people exposed to 10 full-body tanning salon sessions had a significant increase in skin repair proteins typically associated with sun damage, indicating that ultraviolet (UV) radiation from indoor tanning is as dangerous as UV from the sun. And in 2002, a study from Dartmouth Medical School found that tanning device users had 2.5 times the risk of squamous cell carcinoma and 1.5 times the risk of basal cell carcinoma . And yet, even with all this evidence, the tanning salons remain unrepentant.
The tanning industry relies on two misleading arguments: first, that since melanoma is mainly caused by sunburn, "controlled" tanning helps prevent melanoma by building up the protective pigment melanin; second, that UV exposure makes the skin produce vitamin D, which helps prevent breast, prostate and colon cancer, as well as other diseases.
Medical experts refute these arguments. They point out that our diet (especially vitamin D-rich foods such as dairy products and salmon) generally provides all the vitamin D we need. Furthermore, tanning to increase melanin is counterproductive. Tanning, like burning, causes genetic damage to skin cells. "You can't protect the skin by damaging it," said James M. Spencer, MD, director of dermatologic surgery at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City.
"Tanning not only increases the risk for melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma, but accelerates skin aging."
The Skin Cancer Foundation - The Case Against Indoor Tanning