harney bans sunbeds for under 16

ronbyrne2005

harney attempts to pursuade parents she really does care for people under age of consent by protecting them from ultra violet paedophiles.

r3nu4l

Well, I'm no fan of Harney but I don't think that's fair!

Banning sunbeds for under 16s is a great idea although won't stop kids using them in friends houses or unscrupulous salons.

The fewer places kids can use these the better and the quicker the change in our idea that Celtic skin and sun tans mix well, the better.

InFront

Those things should be banned completely. I cant believe parents would inflict them on under 16s? You might as well hand them a pack of cigarettes.

Gurgle

r3nu4l wrote:

The fewer places kids can use these the better and the quicker the change in our idea that Celtic skin and sun tans mix well, the better.

I'm more surprised that enough under-16s use sunbeds that such a ban would make any difference.

GuanYin

I see sunbeds as fulfilling two important roles in society.

Firstly they act as selection pressure for darwinian natural selection and secondly the reduce the number of fake tan victims.

To be honest its a good move but its more tokenism while avoiding the important issues.

r3nu4l

Gurgle wrote:

I'm more surprised that enough under-16s use sunbeds that such a ban would make any difference.

My cousin was using them at 11! My Aunts response was that all the other girls in my cousins class were using them and that they are a great way to get the skin used to UV before going on holidays.

Also, having been involved in childrens groups for a few years I can tell you that there is a significant proportion of kids using them :rolleyes: Not just wealthy kids either, as you might imagine!

InFront

r3nu4l wrote:

a great way to get the skin used to UV before going on holidays.

Also, having been involved in childrens groups for a few years I can tell you that there is a significant proportion of kids using them :rolleyes: Not just wealthy kids either, as you might imagine!

Thats incredible. The worst are the ould ones who use them so their skin is all wrinkly AND freckly. rot.

homah_7ft

The most damaging age for UV exposure would be amongst this group so it makes sense from that perspective. What are the penalties though and who is responsible for enforcment?

cast_iron

r3nu4l wrote:

My cousin was using them at 11! My Aunts response was that all the other girls in my cousins class were using them and that they are a great way to get the skin used to UV before going on holidays.

With parents as deluded as your aunt, it's no wonder the world is going the way it is.
Is she really that ignorant of reality?

clearz

As much as I dont like them sun beds I believe the government is steping over the line here. It is upto parents to control their kids not the government.

cast_iron

clearz wrote:

As much as I dont like them sun beds I believe the government is steping over the line here. It is upto parents to control their kids not the government.

And with parents allowing 11 yo's on sunbeds, you think they should be left to themselves??

clearz

cast_iron wrote:

And with parents allowing 11 yo's on sunbeds, you think they should be left to themselves??

How many parents let their 11 year old kids do this? I am a firm believer in the government staying as much out of our lives as possible and not interfering every time something is bad for us. The kid would probably get as much UV radiation from spending a half hour down the beach. What, will they ban under 16's from the beach next? Nanny state BS.
I agree parents need to take responsibility for their kids but this is the parents job not the governments.

sceptre

Gurgle wrote:

I'm more surprised that enough under-16s use sunbeds that such a ban would make any difference.

It'd make a difference to the under-16s.

psi wrote:

To be honest its a good move but its more tokenism while avoiding the important issues.

Agreed. Harney barely talks the talk, I've yet to see her even make an attempt to walk the walk since moving into the Health position. Frankly, and while I'll freely admit that I'm not a fan of very much to do with the PDs though it's been a while since I've had the time to disassemble their economic views here and demonstrate why they're not even viable on their own terms, she's not cutting the mustard as anything more than a salary-taking seatwarmer in her current ministerial position, which is rather poor given that she's held that position for over twenty months.

cast_iron

clearz wrote:

How many parents let their 11 year old kids do this? I am a firm believer in the government staying as much out of our lives as possible and not interfering every time something is bad for us.

It appears you haven't really read many of the above posts before replying.
Look at what r3nu4l has posted, and what i stated in my first post, and had to restate again for you.
I despise the nanny state atittude also, though for the third time, look at the irresponsibilty of the parents.

clearz wrote:

The kid would probably get as much UV radiation from spending a half hour down the beach.

It's quite clear you know alot about UV radiation.

Gurgle

r3nu4l wrote:

Not just wealthy kids either, as you might imagine!

tbh, my first thought was not wealthy kids.
I'm thinking of all the 8yos buzzing around council estates on quads and mini-bikes after christmas, when they take a break from the new PS2.

Surrender

clearz wrote:

How many parents let their 11 year old kids do this? I am a firm believer in the government staying as much out of our lives as possible and not interfering every time something is bad for us. The kid would probably get as much UV radiation from spending a half hour down the beach. What, will they ban under 16's from the beach next? Nanny state BS.
I agree parents need to take responsibility for their kids but this is the parents job not the governments.

Maybe they should lift the ban on cigarettes & alcohol for minors as well, Surely parents can also deal with these. Sunbeds are dangerous, 15000 people in Ireland have been diagnosed with skin cancer. Can we not accept that this ban is a good thing. Who lets their 11 year old use a sunbed anyway?

Mossy Monk

clearz wrote:

As much as I dont like them sun beds I believe the government is steping over the line here. It is upto parents to control their kids not the government.

are you for real?

why not lift the ban on everything that minors cannot do. alcohol, cigarettes, driving. let the parents decide

garthv

All the bad press Harney has been getting lately and she goes and tackles an issue noone cares about...
I'll say again..she's an idiot.

r3nu4l

cast_iron wrote:

With parents as deluded as your aunt, it's no wonder the world is going the way it is.
Is she really that ignorant of reality?

Oh yeah, that ignorant and more! What's worse is she chooses to be that ignorant, completely ignoring anything that disturbs her comfort bubble :rolleyes:

MossyMonk wrote:

are you for real?

why not lift the ban on everything that minors cannot do. alcohol, cigarettes, driving. let the parents decide

Yeah, right on, we have rights! Gosh darn it, If my child wants to have sex on a sunbed while drinking a bud lite and having a Johnny blue, why should the government be allowed to stop her?:D

Come on clearz, as the great John McEnroe would say..."you cannot be serious!" I suppose it's only cancer after all :rolleyes:

cast_iron

GaRtH_V wrote:

All the bad press Harney has been getting lately and she goes and tackles an issue noone cares about...
I'll say again..she's an idiot.

Maybe the 15000 diagnosed with skin cancer every year for a start?
And maybe all parents concerned for their child's health?

Múinteoir

To those who think that the government has no business to interfere in your lives in this way, you should know that it's very much a part of the governments(and taxpayers) business, when these idiots who get cancer from sunbeds(or smoking as the case may be) clog up the health system with easily preventable(but frequently incurable) diseases. You may be happy to pay for the results of other idiots destroying their health, but I'm not. I can't stand this current government, but I support moves like this completely.

Chucky

Well, it's a good move but shouldn't we also completely ban red meat and and table-salt for people of all ages? Both contribute to heart-disease after all.


Democracy will keep churning out new laws but then we'll end up like the US - In need of a new form of government.

Múinteoir

Chucky wrote:

Well, it's a good move but shouldn't we also completely ban red meat and and table-salt for people of all ages? Both contribute to heart-disease after all.

That's a question of moderation(like every food and activity in life). Whereas any health expert will tell you than any use of sunbeds is bad for your health.

Chucky

"Any" use is bad? Do you have a source for that?

Victor

clearz wrote:

How many parents let their 11 year old kids do this? I am a firm believer in the government staying as much out of our lives as possible and not interfering every time something is bad for us.

Ah, you'll abolish the age of consent laws then?

Múinteoir

Chucky wrote:

"Any" use is bad? Do you have a source for that?

Dermatologists maintain that there is no such thing as a healthy tan.

http://www.irishhealth.com/index.html?level=4&id=4066

The Irish Cancer Society strongly advises you not to use sunbeds or sunlamps as their use increases your lifetime dose of ultra-violet radiation.

20 minutes in a sunbed or sunlamp is the same as 4 hours in the sun.

http://www.cancer.ie/text/sunsmart/sunbeds.php

Sunbed fans face cancer danger - Irish Independent

EVEN the occasional use of sunbeds can increase the risk of skin cancer, according to a new study. Skin cancer accounts for nearly 40pc of all cancers diagnosed in Ireland.

Researchers say frequent sunbed users more than double their chances of developing some forms of skin cancer. Everybody using a sunbed should be given a compulsory health warning.

The highest risk group are young women who engage in repeated sunbed sessions in tanning salons, either prior to going on a sunshine holiday or to "top up" their tan afterwards.

The latest warning has come from the British Medical Association. It says that even people who use sunbeds sparingly are at risk of cancer, prematurely aged skin, eye damage and suppression of the immune system.

The BMA's head of science and ethics, Dr Vivienne Nathanson, said there was a need to educate people about the dangers of sunbeds and the myths about tanning.

"A suntan is not a sign of good health. A tan, even when there is no burning, always means that the skin has been damaged. A suntan is not nature's own sunscreen. It does not protect you from ultra-violet radiation.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=954272&issue_id=9042

cast_iron

Chucky wrote:

Well, it's a good move but shouldn't we also completely ban red meat and and table-salt for people of all ages? Both contribute to heart-disease after all.

You're not comparing like with like. If you can't grasp that sun rays are harmful to kids especially, i'm sorry for you.
Too much of ANYTHING is bad for you, just the level of what is too much varies for different things.

ronbyrne2005

some sun light is good for ya,sun beds for kids is a joke but i dont think UV exposure is as bad for ya as many think ,if you are a person in high risk category it can be much worse for you than if you are a dark skinned person for instance,even the worst form of skin cancer has a high survival rate if caught early,much better to ensure regular checks and early detection than unworkable bans etc.

अधिनायक

The ban only relates to tanning shops selling services to children. Parents can still purchase sun beds and let their children use them. Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in Ireland, so it's hard to argue against this measure. It is a trade restriction rather than a restriction on personal freedom.

Chucky

cast_iron wrote:

You're not comparing like with like. If you can't grasp that sun rays are harmful to kids especially, i'm sorry for you.
Too much of ANYTHING is bad for you, just the level of what is too much varies for different things.

You're sorry for me? - That sounds pathetically arrogant of you. My words were the words of a disillusioned and depressed young man so nobody should really listen to me. I shouldn't even be posting here.

Bye.

mickcarroll10

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

harney attempts to pursuade parents she really does care for people under age of consent by protecting them from ultra violet paedophiles.

How can a moderator let this stuff up?

clearz

20 minutes in a sunbed or sunlamp is the same as 4 hours in the sun.

What kind of sun. Irish sun, Mediterranean Sun. Sahara Desert sun. This seems like more spin to me. I was out last week for an hour in the sun and my sholders got pretty burnt. This would never happen in 5 minns in a sunbed. If I spent 4 hours in direct summer sahara desert sun I would end up like a piece of crispy beacon. Again this would never happen with 20 minns in a sunbed.

Red Alert

Some modern sunbeds are incredibly powerful, many have 32 and 48 tubes and are designed really for use by adult people who tan easily. The trouble is when unscrupulous salons (particularly the hairdresser with the sunbed-type operations) then upgrade their 16 lamp unit to one of these and then allow the same level of usage on it.

These high powered machines can deliver a similar dose of UVA as you'd get on the beach for a day. Add in the unsupervised ones like in a gym and you've a receipe for disaster.

Well done mary!

gom

Mary Harney has delivered on her pledge to end waiting lists by banning under-16s from using Sun Beds in Beauty salons and Tanning studios. This has led to a fall in the waiting time for a tanning appointment much to the delight of Oompa Lumpa's across the country.
By ignoring the National Crisis in A&Es and allowing it escalate into a National Emergency, Minister for Health, Mary Harney has been able to focus all of her efforts on a new piece of penetrating legislation.
Commenting on the urgency, Harney believes that there is a link between sun beds and the cancer of anti-social youths in our society "We all know the link between sun beds, particularly for young people" said Harney.
One of the most drastic measures of the new legislation shall be the erection of signs where sun beds are available to the public. These signs will carry "warning notices" which will be in very authoritive lettering warning of the dangers of UV light on children and young people and the long-term effects of anti-social behaviour.
When asked about how the Minister will attempt to tackle the harmful effects of the sun, the minister stated that she would make the wearing of Communion Dresses compulsory for the under-16s.

mickcarroll10

Stand up night is friday night,if you dont want to debate the issue,post in another forum.

sceptre

mickcarroll10 wrote:

Stand up night is friday night,if you dont want to debate the issue,post in another forum.

We don't have a standup night (which is probably just as well) and as for the debating the issue, you've made two posts which haven't taken part in the discussion itself either so I'd take care of that massive plank in your own eye before pointing at the specks in others. You are of course free to start discussing the issue whenever it suits.

GuanYin

Just on this. Skin Cancer is the most common cancer in Ireland, yes.

However, skin cancer is the only cancer that is 100% avoidable. Nobody should get skin cancer.

It is also the only form of cancer where the cause is known ever single time.

The only way to get it is through UV exposure. However, what proportion of skin cancer incidents do sun beds make up? Its very hard to say but it is likely to be moderate percentage.

Simple, so the ban is a good thing. But, its nothing major, Its a common sense move and not even the tip of the iceberg of health issues that this government has bungled and avoided.

mickcarroll10

sceptre wrote:

We don't have a standup night (which is probably just as well) and as for the debating the issue, you've made two posts which haven't taken part in the discussion itself either so I'd take care of that massive plank in your own eye before pointing at the specks in others. You are of course free to start discussing the issue whenever it suits.

The standard of moderating is pretty poor on this site.

अधिनायक

It's just one measure in a cancer strategy document form the dept of health. If you were cynical you might think that the kiddy sunbed rule was brought in because it was newsworthy and would distract attention from the more controversial proposals such as reducing the number of cancer treatment facilities.

You would hope that each measure was costed with price against expected number of lives saved. If this was done you would wonder why the details are not in the document. Harney claimed, for example that it was decided not to introduce prostate screening on cost/benefit ground. But where is the data?

Maybe the reasoning is that a kiddy sunbed ban, like smoking in pubs, has no cost to the state so there's no need to estimate benefits, as any benefit makes it worthwile.

cast_iron

clearz wrote:

What kind of sun. Irish sun, Mediterranean Sun. Sahara Desert sun. This seems like more spin to me. I was out last week for an hour in the sun and my sholders got pretty burnt. This would never happen in 5 minns in a sunbed. If I spent 4 hours in direct summer sahara desert sun I would end up like a piece of crispy beacon. Again this would never happen with 20 minns in a sunbed.

In case you are not aware, there is only one sun!

Who is "spinning" this, and what advantage is it to do this.

Remember, a sunbed is designed to do all your body at once, a feat impossible to achieve the sun, so by definition, the sunbed covers much more body area in the same time.

sceptre

mickcarroll10 wrote:

The standard of moderating is pretty poor on this site.

Complain in the Feedback forum as the guidelines for posting advise/require you to and you'll get more than a "boo hoo" from me. Report any posts you feel need to be reported rather than whining about them on-thread as the guidelines require you to do and I'll stop wondering why you bother reading at all. Do anything else in this thread (including your currrent attention-seeking) apart from discussing the topic at hand and you'll see how clinically efficient I can be at moderating users rather than posts. In short, read the damn rules. You're breaking them, the people you're dancing around aren't. Take it to PM or Feedback and stop interrupting everyone else.

Nuttzz

I was talking to a salon owner recently who is delighted at this, she was plagued by mothers wanting to put the childern of communion and confirmation age on a sun bed for the last few weeks

po0k

Those mothers should be paid a visit by social services.

Reprehensible, silly cows.

{edit}Sceptre: your "swift sharp shock" brand of justice.{/edit}

mickcarroll10

sceptre wrote:

Complain in the Feedback forum as the guidelines for posting advise/require you to and you'll get more than a "boo hoo" from me. Report any posts you feel need to be reported rather than whining about them on-thread as the guidelines require you to do and I'll stop wondering why you bother reading at all. Do anything else in this thread (including your currrent attention-seeking) apart from discussing the topic at hand and you'll see how clinically efficient I can be at moderating users rather than posts. In short, read the damn rules. You're breaking them, the people you're dancing around aren't. Take it to PM or Feedback and stop interrupting everyone else.

Take a chill pill,jesus:eek:

r3nu4l

mickcarroll10 wrote:

Take a chill pill,jesus:eek:

[voiceover]Looking to get banned? Simply post a lot of rubbish and completely ignore the moderators requests to add sensibly to the conversation. Our fine moderators are standing by to carefully ban you in the most sensitive way possible. Post "Cr*p" now to "boards.ie" and we'll fulfill this request as swiftly as possible. Terms and conditions apply.[/voiceover]

Back to the topic. Salons can be regulated, parents are harder to regulate but perhaps the sale of home sunbeds can be regulated in such a way that users must agree that under 16s will not be allowed to use them and potential buyers must be informed of the dangers by the salesperson.

I know that won't stop parents allowing their kids to use them but it might help stop the inevitable attempts to sue sunbed companies in twenty years time.