Tanning

[alzna]

I would only tan on vacation like while Im swimming or lounging.
okay thats a lie. Im guilty

 

[dumbfairy]

I decided to go to solarium before my prom ball, just to get a bit of tan (I know all harmful effects though), because I'm pale and I'd like to look healthy. I was so wrong! I went there twice, for the first time I lay there for 5 minutes and for the second time 6 minutes. I got sunburns, my skin looks dry and "washed out", plus my skin started itching like crazy. Now I'm applying jojoba oil all the time and in the evening I'm going to use Bepanthen.
No more tanning beds for me.

Noooooooooooooo! Oh how are you feeling now?

 

[Miwi]

Better, thank you! Jojoba oil worked amazingly and I'm going to use it daily from now on instead of all these body butters or body lotions.

 

[applejammy]

I've always been religious about avoiding excessive sunlight exposure but lately I've been wanting to get a tan... I just think it makes a person so much sexier. The problem is, having been so uptight for so many years about avoiding the sun, I have trouble letting the sunrays hit my skin without feeling scared of sun damage.

I've only done the tanning bed thing twice in my life and while I liked the tan, I was so nervous in the days afterwards, scared that I'd permanently damaged my skin, I'm iffy about going down that route again. Are tanning beds more safe than tanning under natural sunlight?

How do models get tanned for photoshoots and the runway? I would think since their careers are based so much on their looks they won't want to take any chances with doing anything that could accelerate the aging process.

Does spray tanning work? What's the best way to create the most natural looking tan without compromising your skin's health?

Thanks!

 

[Danstep123]

Hey! Spray tanning is completely unnecessary! All you need is a good fake tan and a glove to apply it with For gradual tanners my favourite is Dove holiday skin in medium/dark. I usually apply 2 coats and in the morning I have a nice glow. For something more intense I use Xen-Tan dark lotion which you can find fairly cheap on FeelUnique.com. The glove I recommend is a foam one you can buy from places like Boots and Superdrug in the UK around all of the fake tans. To help it last moisturise every single day! And exfoliate once it starts to fade or go patchy so you can get all of that tan off before applying a new layer.

Now, for real tanning. I'm not saying this is good OR bad so take this with a pinch of salt. I've never tanned in my life, always wore spf 50 in the sun even when I went on holiday. However, I got a bit sick of looking like a ghost, but I burn so easily! What did I do? I went on sunbeds in the winter to build a bit of a tan and get my skin used to tanning as my skin had never been exposed to UV rays long enough for melanin to change. Now it's summer and here in England we've had an insane amount of sun I sat in the sun all day yesterday and guess what? I'm so tanned it's untrue and without a hint of fake tan or redness in my skin! My skin has never looked so good.

Remember, I'm not saying that's good or bad but IMO we're supposed to be exposed to the sun and the fact I was burning so easily before isn't a good sign especially when I have dark eyes and dark hair. If you're pale and a red head I personally would avoid the sun altogether and stick to a gradual tanner.

Hope this was of some help

 

[sunn19]

I've always been religious about avoiding excessive sunlight exposure but lately I've been wanting to get a tan... I just think it makes a person so much sexier.

I hate when people say that tanned people look sexier. It's a load of bull, in my opinion. A tad bit more of self confidence would maybe help here?

 

[rayoflight]

I've always been religious about avoiding excessive sunlight exposure but lately I've been wanting to get a tan... I just think it makes a person so much sexier. The problem is, having been so uptight for so many years about avoiding the sun, I have trouble letting the sunrays hit my skin without feeling scared of sun damage.

Sun damage is very real thing, UVA rays are present all year round, penetrate clouds and glass and deep into skin, down to reticular dermal layer or so. Best thing - it's cumulative, so even if you get 20 min sun expose it still adds up to total damage. Leads or horrible, horrible degeneration called aging and sows seeds for cancers.

I think the mentality that tan is beautiful/sexy is a very Western one. I've never thought of tan skin as attractive, it seems ugly to me. Deep beach tan is kinda repulsive. And that was when I was a little kid before I knew about the UV damage and cancers.

I've only done the tanning bed thing twice in my life and while I liked the tan, I was so nervous in the days afterwards, scared that I'd permanently damaged my skin, I'm iffy about going down that route again. Are tanning beds more safe than tanning under natural sunlight?

Tanning beds are worse than natural sun. They have mostly UVA rays, those who make pigment cells turn skin dark. They are also 5-50 times more intense than real sun. Most tanning beds don't use UVB (the ones that produce vit D) rays because they create burns. UVB lamps are used mostly in medical settings to correct some conditions, but that's a different kind altogether.
Fun fact, while UVB rays produce vit D in skin, UVA rays destroy it. It's natural safeguard from prehistoric times to keep humans from overdosing vit D. If one uses tanning beds then UVA rays actually reduce vit D levels in skin and other vitamins get depleted at well, vit A and C for starters.

How do models get tanned for photoshoots and the runway? I would think since their careers are based so much on their looks they won't want to take any chances with doing anything that could accelerate the aging process.

They are young, in their early 20s or so. Even if they bake in sun or tanning bed the effects are not that visible. Some older models (over 25 ) do have pretty damaged skin, especially male models.
Could also be that they use self-tanners or bronzers when models need to look tan.

Does spray tanning work? What's the best way to create the most natural looking tan without compromising your skin's health?

Self-tanners and spray tan does work, it works by applying a chemical called dihydroxyacetone (DHA) among a couple others and skin's proteins undergo enzymatic oxidation reaction which creates the color. Since it's oxidative reaction it creates free radical molecules which add to skin's oxidative stresses.
2007 research by K. Jung showed that skin treated with DHA is vulnerable to UV rays 24 hours after self-tanner use. An increase of 180% in free radicals was discovered on DHA treated skin exposed to UV light.
What that means is that 24h after self-tanners sun should be avoided.

http://www.gematria-test-lab.de/pdf/SelftannerSoeFW2008.pdf

 

[Danstep123]

I personally think a little colour is nice on everyone. Not a deep tan! I like going a nice light beige which I find compliments my colourings as a whole Also, whilst the sun is damaging to the skin it cured the slight bit of eczema I had and I've had next to no spots since exposing my skin to the sun. I think it's more moderation than anything else. Too little sun exposure can cause problems too. Just ask Gwyneth Paltrow.

Also, let's face it we all look better with no clothes on when we have a tan. Pale skin is definitely gorgeous, but personally I love looking sunkissed with natural highlights in my hair.

I will agree though that a deep tan just looks unhealthy, but so does being deathly pale unless you've been blessed with flawless porcelain white skin. I think this whole mentality that "Sun exposure is the worst thing ever" is just as bad as "A deep tan is the only way you can look good." It's down to each individual. A tan has and always will be sexy, it's got nothing to do with looking better than pale skin. Pale skin is appealing in a different way.

 

[rayoflight]

I can hardly agree that "tan has and always will be sexy" (not to mention that 'sexy' is rather subjective thing). Tanning in Western society became mainstream in 1940s (and before a bit in 1920s), although I still have older magazines from 30s that already have Nivea sun oil ads in them. By 1960s people started to tan en masse. At the same time there has been a steady growth in skin cancers as well. Coincidence?

topicalinfo.org

Btw, eating a healthy diet with cartenoid rich veggies also gives a nice tint to skin and adds to skin's defense against UV rays. All without a single proton damaging skin.

 

[Danstep123]

Our perception of what's sexy has changed too. Pale is beautiful in a way that it looks pure and innocent. But, a tan is beautiful in a way that it looks exotic, summery and..well...sexy. I'm not saying that pale isn't sexy, but a tan to me and many others is too. It's all down to individuals like I said. If I had perfect white porcelain skin i.e Cate Blanchett then god knows I'd slather on the SPF. But, sadly, I don't and a tan not only makes me look healthier, but it improves the appearance of my skin.

What about cancers relating to Vitamin D defficiency? Or bone disorders?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5IQwt9ikqY&feature=relmfu

Personally I think both extremes are bad. Too much sun or a lack of decent sun exposure is bad for you. It's just everything in moderation. Plus, I find deep tans vulgar and ageing to the appearance regardless of wrinkles. For a lot of people, being too pale makes some people look ill. Don't even get me started on the number of fake tan disasters I see everyday. A little colour is flattering to a high percentage of the population.

p.s If you're worried about wrinkles, just wear sunscreen on your face and decolletage and just wear makeup or an instant tanner to even it out. It's what I do.

 

[CarolineRose]

Yes, I wear sunscreen on my face/hands/feet/neck religiously, but getting a (light) tan on my arms and legs is honestly the ONLY thing that eradicates my KP. I'm very careful about it and I've asked my doctor and she says that (I have such sensitive skin that my KP flareups are truly painful and so itchy) the benefits outweigh the negatives. DON'T burn and DON'T get dark, but a little amount of color just isn't going to kill you.

oh . . . and THE #1 way to prevent advanced skin cancer is to have your moles and skin checked out by a derm at least every year, more often if you have a lot of moles and a family history of skin cancer. Skin cancer can be devastating if left unnoticed but is easily treatable when caught early!

 

[rayoflight]

Our perception of what's sexy has changed too. Pale is beautiful in a way that it looks pure and innocent. But, a tan is beautiful in a way that it looks exotic, summery and..well...sexy. I'm not saying that pale isn't sexy, but a tan to me and many others is too. It's all down to individuals like I said. If I had perfect white porcelain skin i.e Cate Blanchett then god knows I'd slather on the SPF. But, sadly, I don't and a tan not only makes me look healthier, but it improves the appearance of my skin.

What about cancers relating to Vitamin D defficiency? Or bone disorders?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5IQwt9ikqY&feature=relmfu

Personally I think both extremes are bad. Too much sun or a lack of decent sun exposure is bad for you. It's just everything in moderation. Plus, I find deep tans vulgar and ageing to the appearance regardless of wrinkles. For a lot of people, being too pale makes some people look ill. Don't even get me started on the number of fake tan disasters I see everyday. A little colour is flattering to a high percentage of the population.

p.s If you're worried about wrinkles, just wear sunscreen on your face and decolletage and just wear makeup or an instant tanner to even it out. It's what I do.

Aesthetics aside... ('cause I have the horrible belief healthy skin is beautiful when untanned regardless of natural pigmentation and sick/ill looking skin reflects bad diet/lifestyle choices )
Sun is not exclusive source of vitamin D. Besides it's hard to get decent amount vit D from tanning. A study conducted in Hawaii showed that young healthy people who didn't use sunscreen (cancels out skin's ability to create vit C completely) and tan still don't get enough vit D. Unless one does blood work (25-Hydroxy Vitamin D test) there is no way of knowing if the person gets sufficient vit D at all. It's also been suggested (by Dr. Mercola; not that I take his word for gospel) that for appropriate amount of vit D short full body exposure is necessary, not just arms or legs. It's hardly practical, if true.

http://www.grc.com/health/pdf/Low_Vitamin_D_Status_Despite_Abundant_Sun_Exposure.pdf

Also people who live far up north (like I do) don't even stand a chance of getting much vit D from sun in first place. So I take vit D and get my 25-OH test done and don't have to tan. Seriously, vit D is best supplement ever, I never get sick while on it.

Anyhow, I'm also a bit against sunscreens. Chemical sunscreens to be precise, they are horrible, they eliminate the possibility of vit D synthesis in skin and at same time don't protect fully from the more damaging UVA rays, also they are unstable (methoxycinnamate), some filters (oxybenzone) create free radials in skin and the very way chemical sunscreens work is not exactly skin friendly, they convert UV rays into heat which also can be damaging to cells.
I also suspect incorrect sunscreen use is responsible for lots of sun damage, because sunscreens create a false sense of security and people tend to stay in sun for longer periods and in the higher sun intensity hours from 10-15.

There is a popular misconception that SPF relates to time of solar exposure. For example, many consumers believe that, if they normally get sunburn in one hour, then an SPF 15 sunscreen allows them to stay in the sun 15 hours (i.e., 15 times longer) without getting sunburn. This is not true because SPF is not directly related to time of solar exposure but to amount of solar exposure.

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDER/ucm106351.htm

And adding to the insult, most people don't know how to properly use their sunscreen even they have a good one, because the information is not really common knowledge and there are many myths surrounding them. They don't use enough sunscreen, don't reapply often enough or at all, rub them in because they are white and oily, use old/expired product and in the end they don't get any meaningful protection at all.

Zinc oxide sunscreens and ones with hybrid filter Tinosorb M (in Japanese and EU sunscreens) are reasonable choices, provided they are used correctly. And even they don't offer 100% protection, no sunscreen/sunblock does.

 

[Danstep123]

Well after a long, cold and dreary winter, you'd have to literally drag me out of the sun to keep me from it! I have translucent skin to the point where you can literally see my veins marbling my skin. I find a nice peachy glow makes them less obvious and just overall compliments my eyes and hair as well as my clothing choices Skin cancer doesn't run in my family, and they're all avid sun worshippers. Like I've said before it's down to each individual and most importantly moderation!

And to the SPF thing, I reapply my SPF every hour that I'm sunbathing and cover my face up with a t-shirt as well as wear UV protective sunglasses. But, a good skincare regime and a healthy diet will probably counteract the hour or 2 a week I spend topping up my tan.

 

[CarolineRose]

I'm sorry, rayoflight, but the Gibson Research Center isn't exactly a great source, and the information in that study just isn't that clear-cut. That aside, when you read that study, the sample population is only 93 people, which is not nearly enough subjects to get a representative result. Furthermore, there are several other factors that the conductors of the study mention that could contribute to the lower-than-recommended levels of Vit D created by sun synthesis. I would be happy to detail them if anyone wants, but I don't want to clog up the thread if nobody is interested.
There is no doubt that not enough research has been done to fully resolve the debate over the benefits vs. damage from sun exposure. There are many conflicting scientific views, many of which are backed by solid research and have valid points. However, such small-scale studies which are not nearly diverse enough to be prototypical are the cause of much of the confusion around the subject. By all means, let's continue the debate . . . but we have to be careful about our sources. I mean, Gwyneth Paltrow's "wellness doctor" recommends a certain amount of sun exposure, but that doesn't send me running out into my backyard in a bikini and slathered in tanning oil

As for whether northern people have been surviving without sun for a long time, that's just not quite accurate. THIS fact sheet, which is the most complete amalgamation of studies and medical knowledge I can find on the internet (and comes from the National Institutes of Health) says that "Perhaps surprisingly, geographic latitude does not consistently predict average serum 25(OH)D levels in a population. Ample opportunities exist to form vitamin D (and store it in the liver and fat) from exposure to sunlight during the spring, summer, and fall months even in the far north latitudes [1]."

Also, as the NIH notes, "Assessment of vitamin D requirements cannot address the level of sun exposure because of these public health concerns about skin cancer, and there are no studies to determine whether UVB-induced synthesis of vitamin D can occur without increased risk of skin cancer [1]."

 

[rayoflight]

I'm very interested!
Where I live 54% of people are vit D deficient (25-OH under 30 ng/ml) despite very strong tanning culture and total disregard of sun protection. I can't post my local study since it's not online or in English... I find it correlates with the small study done in Hawaii, people here get lots of sun exposure during warmer months when UVB levels are high, but still don't get anywhere near enough vit D.
I'm not sure how it's further up north in Scandinavia. Any data?

 

[rosiecheeks]

Spray Tan? Do or don't

Hello

Next week I will attend a wedding and the weather is looking up and I have picked an outfit (silk dress with quite a lot of leg and back showing). Now I'm of that variety of girls who is extremely pale. And I'd like to look a bit more.. healthy? Are there people who have experience in getting a (subtle?) spray tan? Is there even such a thing as a subtle one?
I've tried self tan and it just doesn't work for me. Too streaky, too smelly, too much caution with clothes and bedsheets. And above all too little result.
If this spray tan doesn't work is make up an option? I've heard great stories about MAC face & body?

 

[Vega Magnus]

Don't do it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being pale.

 

[tigerrouge]

I just use one of those moisturisers with a hint of self-tan in it... it doesn't tan me, but it lifts the pallor of my skin from grey to a more acceptable shade of pale. I do that every three or so days.

 

[Tiger-lily]

I don't think you should do the spray tan or the make up. Personally, I would be concerned about even coverage and possible transfer to the dress. Wear your dress with confidence because there is nothing wrong with your skin tone.

 

[dumbfairy]

I use some cheaper knock off of St Tropez fake tan mousse and it gives me a really good coverage,however,I always have those tell-tale fake tan lines on my wrists. Any advice on how to combat this? Is fake tanning the back of my hand and fingers a bit too much?