Teen Tan Ban
 

I just heard from a very reliable source that not only will tanning services be taxed under Obamacare, but if you are not 21 you cannot tan. Even if a parent of guardian accompanies you or agrees to sign a waiver, if you are not 21 you cannot tan. No exceptions.

According to the ASPS, the majority of people that tanned in 2007 and in 2008 were ages 17 to 19.

Not good for the young to get into this habit so early, but are all these taxes and restrictions necessary?

That's just plain silly! If a parent wishes to have their child tan, I believe it's their right. So you can be 18 and smoke in this country but you can't tan unless your 21:confused:

Teen Tan Ban
 

Received this in my e-mail:

"Dear Indoor Tanning Supporter:

Thank you for being a part of our campaign to stop the tan tax. While that effort was not successful, the industry has not given up on its repeal.

Today, however, we need your help fighting another attempt by government to tell us how to run our lives. There are two bills pending in Albany that would take away a very basic right of parents -- the right to decide whether or not a teen can suntan indoors. A9100 and S3461 would ban all teens under the age of 18 from tanning indoors, even with a parent's permission!

Please take a minute to click this link:


http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5746/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=1777

This will send an email to your state Assemblyman and Senator opposing this outrageous legislation.

This is a very serious threat, so please spread the word about this legislation. Forward this email to anyone who is willing to support our campaign and encourage your friends and family to take part as well.

If you have any questions or want to get more involved, please call or email the ITA at (202) 367-1142 or admin@theita.com"

Thanks for getting the word out, this is totally unfair! :Angry:

Yes, I think it's necessary considering the tremendous increase in skin cancer over the past 20 years. I used tanning beds a lot during the last 20 years. I'm currently having 11 moles removed that are black, but still round. So far the six that have been removed have come back negative for skin cancer. But if I let them go unremoved, they would have turned into cancerous moles. Not only will I have little scars all over my body from them being removed, it's costing me a fortune even though I have insurance ($200.00 a mole...do the math). Tanning is bad for your health, just as bad as smoking.

ACS :: Skin Cancer Prevention and Early Detection

First they tax this, then that, then ban this, ban that, ... then everything!!!

I can sympathize with your negative results from tanning, and I agree tanning is dangerous. I used to do it, and will not anymore. Cancers are directly related to tanning beds, however, all of these rules are starting to sound like the reasons why I left Scandinavia!!!

Professionally speaking smoking is still worse for your health than tanning. In the land of the free (is it still?), if people want to smoke they should be able to also.

But back to the topic ... these tanning restrictions are oppressive!