People who tan indoors, such as using a tanning bed, are 74 percent more likely to get melanoma, a type of skin cancer, than people who have never tanned indoors. Looking at this, it’s no wonder that B.C. has passed a new law stating that people under 18 will not be permitted to tan indoors unless you have a doctor’s note. However, is this law really protecting us, or just taking away another one of our choices? I will discuss this and other aspects of indoor tanning and the new law.
A tanning bed is a device emitting ultraviolet rays while the user lies on top of it, resulting in a tan. As a result of this, people are prematurely ageing their skin, and getting skin cancer, which is the most common form of cancer in the United States. As for people under the age of 35, their risk for getting melanoma when they tan indoors is even higher, which is the main reason for the new ban. Not only are there health risks, but eventually indoor tanning can become addictive. Studies have shown that 70 percent of people who tan regularly had the same symptoms as alcohol abusers.
However, not everyone who use tanning beds are regular customers. If you compare a tanner who tans only occasionally and an outdoor tanner who tans frequently than the outdoor tanner is at a much higher risk of cancer. If so, then why is indoor tanning being picked out? Researchers have found out that tanners preferred natural UV lights to artificial UV lights. The natural UV lights also decreased the craving to tan and made the users more relaxed and happy compared to the artificial UV lights.
On the other hand, we should have the freedom of making our own decisions. The government should not be able to make our decisions for us, instead they should trust and allow us to. In addition, if we ban tanning beds, the mentioned addicted tanners would still feel the need to tan and will seek out an illegal tanning salon. These would likely be less safe and sanitary than those that are legal and government inspected. However, tanners could just go out and get a natural tan, which would satisfy and decrease their craving to tan.
After weighing the various pros and cons, I believe the government is doing the right thing in banning indoor tanning for citizens under the age of 18. They are not completely taking away our choices. After all, you can still tan outdoors, and even if you still think they are restricting us too much, it’s for our own wellbeing.
Sources
http://www.skincancer.org/prevention/tanning/hooked-on-tanning
http://www.skincancer.org/healthy-lifestyle/tanning
Wow, that is a really good post. I did the same topic, but it is much more interesting to read it in your prespective. Your writing is easy to understand and read, because its in neat paragraphs. It also isn't too long, which I tend to do in my posts.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I looked into your sources and I couldn't find anything about the tanning having the same symtoms for alcohal abuse. Apparently tanning has similar symtoms for smoking, and physical symtoms for heroin. Did you mean something else, or did I just overlooked the alcohal part? If I didn't overlook it or misunderstand then, make sure that your imformation is actually based on sources and not added there to take up space.
Your paragraphs flow very smoothly throughout you multi-paragraph, and it wasn't just a big wall of text.
Your paragraph is very smooth, but I noticed how you still use the words pro and con. It is ok to use them, but since this is a final post, it probably would of been better to use other words like benefits, disadvantages, and problems because these words are more suited to this topic.
Your structure for the multi-paragraph is very well done. Not only to you have the introduction, conclusion, and the body paragraphs required, you have made an outline of what is in the post in the introduction.
Another thing I would like to point out about your research is that you seem to be missing a couple of sources. Which site did you go to learn about the ban in tanning beds? Although this site was posted on the class blog, not everyone who reads this post knows about it. The purpose of the criteria was to speak out to an audience that isn't in our class, and make sure they understand too. By excluding information simply because our class already knows about this site, your post is more meant to be read inclass instead of a wide audience.
It could be that you forgot to include this, but if that is the case cite down your sources immediately after you used the website.
Despite some issues with your sources, it is evident that you used them. For example "People who tan indoors, such as using a tanning bed, are 74 percent more likely to get melanoma, a type of skin cancer, than people who have never tanned indoors."
ReplyDeleteYour multi-paragraph is really persuasive. I do agree with you that the benefits of the tanning bed law outweighs the moral issue of choice. We aren't abolishing indoor tanning, since by the time you are 18 you could make that choice again. You could say that tanning is one of those laws like being 16 to drive. It is there for our safety, and also because we aren't ready to make that decision yet.
I enjoy reading your well written posts, and this one espcecially. Great final post Sara!
Thanks for the feedback Michelle. About your first comment, it actually does mention the alcohol abuse symptoms matching up with the tanning abuse symptoms, so I'm pretty sure I didn't just put it there to take up space. Also, if you read Ms. Lees' CE topics page, it says to list 2 other sources, so I assumed that I didn't have to put the one she listed.
ReplyDelete