"Tanning"

[1victor]

I unfortunately am as white as a ghost and even when I get sun it burns and peels.

If I happen to actually go through the agony (for me) to get sunburned enough to get a tan it fades instantly.

Tanning beds don't work for me either. The question I have is has anyone tried that Mystic Tan thing yet? If so what are your reviews.

Does it work and look good? How about the cost?

Please give me your input.

 

[supersport]

try some UVA "high pressure " beds. They only contain UVA rays....practically no burn. They are 170 times stronger than a regular wolfe bed....

I use UVA plus an accelerator that containes alot of copper and tyrosine. Stuff works big time.

UVA all the way!

 

[1victor]

supersport ,

Thanks for the reply. How can they be so much stronger but not burn? I'll check it out.

 

[SAEBodybuilder]

A buddy of mine did the mysitc tan thing before we went down to Cancun a few weeks ago becasue he can't tan (Irish bastard).

He did look great for like a day, but it faded extremely fast. By the third day down there he was white as a ghost again.

IMO totally not worth the money, but if you need to look tan for a certain day or something I guess it'll do.

 

[rubicon]

tanning

What? Nobody is into melanotan? Aside from a very long-lasting controlable tan, it gives viagra some stiff competition for treating erectile dysfunction.

 

[supersport]

supersport ,

Thanks for the reply. How can they be so much stronger but not burn? I'll check it out.

Sorry I missed getting back to you man.

Regular beds have UVB in them...this is the ray that is overwhelmingly responsible fo r burning.
UVA penetrates several layers of skin.

Works great bro....and you only have to go once every 10-14 days too.

 

[Ring Steel]

Got any more info on the Melanotan?
From what little I have found on it, it sounds interesting.

 

[rubicon]

Just run a Google search on Phoenix Pharmaceuticals. It's more than interesting. Please let me know if can find the method for re-constituting it and the protocals for using it. Even if it's by PM.

 

[saturn1]

I have fair skin also. I use 10mg oxsoralen/trisoralen 30 minutes before I do a tan session. It increases melanin and doesnt allow you to burn........after about two weeks of tanning and using this drug you will end up with a deep rich tan and not look like a tomatoe.

 

[FlexX]

And where does skin cancer come into all of the methods above - which is less dangerous etc Not that I need a tan but just curious...

 

[rubicon]

Almost any sort of radiation that you encounter is going to come at some risk, some less than others. That includes true sunlight and any sort of artificial tanning lamps. By virtue of wave lengths and other factors, you can decrease risks. Sun blocks help but are not impenetrable. Even clothing is not impervious to burn effects. Drugs like Trisolaren enhance tolerance to solar exposure and increase pigmentation but do not prevent burning. Melanotan, on the other hand, does not require sunlight, real or artificial, to produce outstanding and long-lasting tanning. It seems to mimick alpha-melanotropin, the hormone responsible for the natural depth of skin color. And yes, once it's taken effect, it's very effective at reducing the tendency to burn. Hence, skin cancer.

 

[fulforb]

Epitan sure sounds like a great item once it gets approved. Now just to convince the Doc to prescribe it.

 

[rubicon]

The original interest in melanotan was it's ability to produce a cointrolable depth of natural looking tan. Medical application was that it reduced the risks of sun-related skin cancers and cancer-like conditions by as much as 50%. Those areas of interest have been somewhat sidetracked by the possiblity of melanotan becoming a very strong competitor for other sexual/erectile dysfunction drugs. But as mentioned in an earlier post,k you can always check out Phoenix Pharmaceuticals if you're losing patlience with FDA approval but that's up to you.

 

[jc5]

tanning period is damage to your skin right? which would mean any source eventually can develop problems. I also heard that burning just keeps adding to previous burns, even though the red and tan is gone the damage is still there

 

[supersport]

Our medical authorities are seriously misled in thinking regular, moderate exposure to the sun causes skin cancer.

Full spectrum light-sunlight-is absolutely necessary for normal function of the human organism. Most know about the synthesizing of vitamin-D-and it is looking as though vitamin D is far more important to health tha previously thought.

Also there is the pineal gland to consider. The pineal is a photo receptor-and in many elderly people that are ill the pineal is shifted off center by a calcified mass that is detectable via x-ray.

This makes an argument against wearing sunglasses-unless you have some that can facilitate UV light.

Several years ago I was made aware of several studies in Russia where office workers had 2x the amount of skin cancer than outdoors people. Australian lifeguards have very low skin cancer rates.

Skin cancer-like most diseases-is caused by oxidative stress. 9 times out of 10 oxidative stress is caused by toxicity. Pollution, crappy diet, etc.

In the final analysis I find it difficult to believe our creator would make sunshine cause skin cancer. That is like saying breathing unpolluted air causes lung cancer.

I grew up at the beach, and have owned a landscaping service for 14 years. At the age of 37 I have some of the healthiest skin around-and a dark tropical tan year round. If the sun is out I am in it-whether working or at the beach (I live at the beach). And I use tanning beds during the winter-have for 20 years.

Our medical authorities are dead wrong on skin cancer-just like they are wrong on a very long list of health issues.

 

[rubicon]

What you're saying is basically correct. Almost any dermatologist will tell you that the situation is potentilally much worse than the surface might suggest. You can be lulled into a false sense of security just because the "burn" has departed. But the serious damage is much deeper in the tissues. Most people experiencing solar related skin damage like actinic keratoses or carcinomas actually aquired the condition much earlier in life when they thought sun burn was the only outcome. You can blame it on the depletion of the ozone layer or anything else but it's potentially there. A certain amount of sunlight is good for us and most of us need it. If that weren't the case, there would be no reason for some of our early ancestors to evolve into caucasians in regions of less seasonal sunlight. But there is a limit to how much we need. So to get that deep dark tan by exercising your thermonuculear relationship to the sun, you're most likely at risk.

 

[jc5]

supersport everything you said made perfect sense however, about our creator making sun there wasn't the ozone problem then there is now so take it for what you want...I just don't see how too many burns can be healthy look at ll the older people who had a lot of tans in their prime now that have that nasty aligator skin.

 

[saturn1]

I agree supersport. Look at other countries where people are constantly exposed to sun and skin cancer seldom occurs. The only difference is the way we live and eat.

 

[rubicon]

There is a lot to be said for atmospheric variation within different locales and the effect they have on the tendency to burn. But no approach to propoer nutrition or application of any array of anti-oxidents will prevent a good share of the population from burning. That's just the other side of human evolution. The process which allows some of us to withstand extended exposure while others are limited to safe a period took millions of years to acutualize. The amount of damage done to the enviroment hasn't helped things along either. So whether you want to attribute the blessings of sunlight to a creator or the evolution of the universe, some people will require more than a good diet and a round of anti-oxident to safely pigment. This isn't meant to be a challange to anyone's beliefs but the universe is 15 or 16 billion years old. The earth has been around about 5 billion years and figures to last approximately another 5 billion years. Of that 5 billion, 3.9 billion have sustained life in some form and many we wouldn't recognize. Several great extinctions have wiped out 2/3 or more of the life forms giving rise to new life forms. Remember the dinosaurs disappearing 65 million years ago? Tolerences to chages in enviroment don't come rapidly because we want them to or because we move from our natural habitats. But you're right, whoever or whatever you attribute it to, the presense of the sun is a gift and will continue to be for another 5 billion years or so. But keep in mind that same source also gave us famines, disease, natural disasters and mass extinctions. You have to look out for yourself. Again no offense meant toward anyone's beliefs. For those of us fortunate enough not to burn easily, count your blessings. I apologize in advance for boring anyone.

 

[saturn1]

BUMP.