|
Proposal for Ontario to ban tanning for under 18s
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
The "ban-wagon" continues in this sorry province... :whip: :whip: :whip:
| quote: | TORONTO (CP) - A southern Ontario district health unit is seeking to pull the plug on teens under the age of 18 who want to use artificial tanning equipment, and has drafted a resolution urging the province to begin regulating the industry.
The document was drafted by the Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge District Health Unit, where melanoma has recently ranked among the top ten cancers for men and women in the region.
"Too many in our own area are starting to develop melanoma, so our goal is to reduce that number," said Angela Andrews, health promoter with the HKPR District Health unit.
"We thought that by putting forward this message to (the) provincial legislature to ban artificial tanning use for teens 18 years and under, we would be able to reduce the rate of skin cancer down the road."
The health unit, with offices in a number of southern Ontario communities, works in partnership with more than 170,000 area residents in advocating health promotion.
Some 1,200 area residents were surveyed from January to December 2004 on artificial tanning. The majority of respondents said they used the service between 2-5 times a year, and those surveyed between the ages of 18-24 were in the top percentage of users at 27.7 per cent.
Health Canada recommends against the use of artificial tanning equipment by anyone under 16, but only has jurisdiction over the manufacturers of the equipment.
The resolution, approved by the health unit's board of health, was delivered last week to Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman and Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson.
The move comes after similar recommendations by the World Health Organization in 2005 that those under the age of 18 should be prohibited from using artificial tanning equipment. The WHO estimates there will be 132,000 cases of malignant melanoma - the most dangerous form of skin cancer - worldwide each year.
An estimated 66,000 people around the world will die annually from malignant melanoma and other skin cancers, while in Canada, about 880 of 4,500 new cases of melanoma this year will result in death, Canadian Cancer Statistics estimates.
However, statistics from government agency Cancer Care Ontario found that while incidence rates of malignant melanoma increased among the elderly, they declined among the youngest age groups, including individuals aged 15-34.
The WHO has also acknowledged the difficulties in determining the long-term effects of artificial tanning.
"Sunbeds for self-tanning purposes have been available for the last two decades, and due to the long latency period for skin cancer and eye damage it has been difficult so far to demonstrate any long-term health effects," the organization wrote on its website.
Andrews said it's vital to make people understand that the perils of tanning aren't immediately apparent.
"People may go to an artificial tanning salon and may enjoy the effects of the tan, but . . . they're not seeing the effects of skin damage until 10 years down the road."
However, the president of Fabutan Sun Tan Studios, Canada's largest indoor tanning company, said a blanket ban on artificial tanning use by those under 18 would be "too extreme."
"Fabutan would support a system of regulation that allowed parents to make these informed decisions about what happens to their children," Doug McNabb said in a phone interview from Calgary.
"We believe this is a decision for parents, no different than it is taking your child to a Little League game in the middle of a hot summer day."
McNabb said clients between the ages of 16 and 18 must have a parent attend the first session, where they have to a sign a parental consent form to allow their child to proceed.
"If they're 16 and under, parental accompaniment is a must," McNabb said. "We would terminate a franchise in the event that they were going to tan someone 16 (without it)."
He also said he believes it's wrong-headed simply to urge people to avoid getting a tan.
"The main message should be we should teach Canadians that they shouldn't sunburn," McNabb said.
"We're missing the boat here when we simply say things like, 'There's no such thing as a safe tan."' |
|
|
|
| Floorwhore |
just think about the outrage of the vagino's out there.
i smell riot. |
|
|
| simms327 |
i would buy it if there was a definite link btw artificial tanning and skin cancer - then it would save the medical system money down the road.
but, i think thats pretty far fetched. this province seems to want to ban everything...
glad im leaving soon. |
|
|
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorwhore
just think about the outrage of the vagino's out there.
i smell riot. |
i smell malizia |
|
|
| Floorwhore |
| i just flat out smell.... i've been wearing the same briefs since friday night, and have been drifting/sleeping in a ditch for a week now. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by simms327
i would buy it if there was a definite link btw artificial tanning and skin cancer - then it would save the medical system money down the road.
but, i think thats pretty far fetched. this province seems to want to ban everything...
glad im leaving soon. |
whether it saves our socialized medical system money or not isnt the point. The fact is that the province may yet again decide our lifestyles for us to "save us from ourselves". Im sick of it. |
|
|
| nusty |
aren't you over 18 yet?
you can smoke at 19 in ontario... going out to get sunburnt which could lead to cancer down the road seems like a relatively safe step towards helping prevent stupid youngsters from moves that may cause them cancer in the future... there are no immediate effects from smoking either but I think most of us agree that those under 18 should be limited in how easily they can get access to it.
Seems to me like the smoking and tanning restrictions go hand in hand with trying to safe guard Canada's youth from Cancers later on in life. Look at the upside... once you're 18 it won't matter, until you're 18 the government is trying to ensure you live a long and happy life by helping you make smart choices in your earlier years. |
|
|
| nusty |
| quote: | Originally posted by Floorwhore
i just flat out smell.... i've been wearing the same briefs since friday night, and have been drifting/sleeping in a ditch for a week now. |
lovely. ;) |
|
|
| FunkyGroove |
i say it's a bluntly stupid move
the more restrictions they will put on stuff like tanning/smoking/whatever else, the more chances are that people would be buying fake ID's and going in and tanning or buying cigs
instead of just irrationally banning things, maybe they should come out with better warnings about dangers of smoking and tanning |
|
|
| Skipper |
| I do think there should be a minimum age to when people can use tanning beds. I think the age should be 16 though. |
|
|
| nusty |
| quote: | Originally posted by FunkyGroove
i say it's a bluntly stupid move
the more restrictions they will put on stuff like tanning/smoking/whatever else, the more chances are that people would be buying fake ID's and going in and tanning or buying cigs
instead of just irrationally banning things, maybe they should come out with better warnings about dangers of smoking and tanning |
you mean better warnnings like using half of the box of cigarettes to show a cancerous long or to show a 'limp stick' on the box... I think they have done a fair bit to warn people of the risks.
Now don't get me wrong here... I fully support people being able to choose to help eliminate themselves from the gene pool where god only knows how many people are still around because society protects them from their own stupidity... I'm all for everyone being able to choose for themselves, but looking at it from the perspective of responsible gov't then I can see the clear angle the gov't is taking on this.
Also it's kind of funny that one of your main points as to why they shouldn't create this restriction is because it will force people to get fake id's. think about it for a minute... who's the silly one if that's the real problem here. |
|
|
| FunkyGroove |
| quote: | Originally posted by nusty
you mean better warnnings like using half of the box of cigarettes to show a cancerous long or to show a 'limp stick' on the box... I think they have done a fair bit to warn people of the risks.
Now don't get me wrong here... I fully support people being able to choose to help eliminate themselves from the gene pool where god only knows how many people are still around because society protects them from their own stupidity... I'm all for everyone being able to choose for themselves, but looking at it from the perspective of responsible gov't then I can see the clear angle the gov't is taking on this.
Also it's kind of funny that one of your main points as to why they shouldn't create this restriction is because it will force people to get fake id's. think about it for a minute... who's the silly one if that's the real problem here. |
i'm not very good with getting my points across sometimes - but what I mean that the more restrictions is put on whatever good/service, there more incentive there will be for people to go ahead and make sure they get through and get to try it out, with whatever means they can
i really don't think banning will solve any problems, any kind of banning that is
i mean, as if 19+ on drinking has elliminated drunken house parties where teens get trashed out of their heads? |
|
|
|
|
