par Pierret, Lauranne;Suppa, Mariano 
;Gandini, Sara;Del Marmol, Véronique ;Gutermuth, Jan
Référence JEADV. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 33, page (28-33)
Publication Publié, 2019-03-01
;Gandini, Sara;Del Marmol, Véronique ;Gutermuth, JanRéférence JEADV. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 33, page (28-33)
Publication Publié, 2019-03-01
Article révisé par les pairs
| Résumé : | Vitamin D seems to be associated with a protective effect in a vast range of diseases, including cardiovascular, autoimmune and oncologic conditions. Since ultraviolet (UV) B light is the most important prerequisite for the cutaneous synthesis of vitamin D, sunbeds are able to increase serum vitamin D levels, although only transiently in most cases. In this scenario, the artificial tanning industry relentlessly tries to promote the use of sunbeds as a ‘safe’ therapeutic measure to achieve an adequate serum vitamin D status. The World Health Organization classified UV-emitting tanning devices, as well as the whole UV spectrum, as group-1 carcinogens, as they significantly increase the risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer. In case of vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency, the current risk-benefit ratio is therefore in favour of vitamin D supplementation instead of sunbed use. Artificial tanning devices should never be considered as an option to achieve an appropriate vitamin D status. Their supposedly beneficial effects, vastly publicised by the artificial tanning industry, are not worth the carcinogenic risk associated with sunbed use. |
