Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Tanning Bed Erroneous Claims
Please read link when you get a chance. This happens to our industry all of the time. There are so many fallacies. I hope in the next few weeks to research-it's Christmas! There is no time to do it right now! Please give me a chance!
Friday, December 9, 2011
Here is the Real America
This has nothing to do with my business, but I wanted to share because it is a confirmation that I might be on the right theme for the season. I just caught the tail end of a story on the news this morning that someone had paid for layaway for a family. The person wanted to remain anonymous. What a story!
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Where is the Real America?
Now I know yesterday sounded a little bleak, but I did not mean to appear like I am STRESSED OUT! Actually, I am quite content where I am in life. Have I confused you? To me, it all depends on what you place as your trust. The type of business that I have has seen many difficulties-tan tax, parental consent for under 18 years old, and right before warm weather hits I have the sunscreen industry influencing dermatologist with sun scare tactics to name a few. Despite obstacles, my business is not a failure. I have valued, happy customers, and I have weathered many storms. Have I made everyone happy? Unfortunately, I know I haven’t. I try to be an honest owner-making sure no one is getting ripped off or short changed. This is a part of the real America that is missing from our country. Don't get me wrong there is the silent majority who tick this way. So where am I going with this? Stay tuned . . . . .
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Facing a New Year
With the economic thermometer reading disaster for the coming year, what is there for my business? Now is supposed to be the time to look at your business plan and decide if it is time to move forward or stay stifled.
The truth needs to be told. The government makes sure you keep no capital to invest each year in your business. Because of this, it is hard to run a business these days. Capital is so important to grow your business, and you should not have to be punished. This is how I have felt for the 11 ½ years that I have been in business. Here is an example: I have a loan, and I cannot make additional payments because it goes against me at the end of the year. I still have to claim it as income, but I do not have it. I like paying down my loan before due date so that I can purchase additional equipment sooner. IT JUST ISN’T FAIR!
I should not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the tax codes, so I can KEEP MY MONEY. I cannot be a huge corporation to benefit from the breaks in the tax codes. No one is going to bail me out if I make a risky financial decision. Why should anyone else get this benefit? I, a taxpayer, am paying for their decisions and not my own.
I understand business. You have to be an honest, hard working individual. You should not get breaks or rewarded if you are dishonest or corrupt. Where is the Real America? To be continued . . . . . .
The truth needs to be told. The government makes sure you keep no capital to invest each year in your business. Because of this, it is hard to run a business these days. Capital is so important to grow your business, and you should not have to be punished. This is how I have felt for the 11 ½ years that I have been in business. Here is an example: I have a loan, and I cannot make additional payments because it goes against me at the end of the year. I still have to claim it as income, but I do not have it. I like paying down my loan before due date so that I can purchase additional equipment sooner. IT JUST ISN’T FAIR!
I should not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the tax codes, so I can KEEP MY MONEY. I cannot be a huge corporation to benefit from the breaks in the tax codes. No one is going to bail me out if I make a risky financial decision. Why should anyone else get this benefit? I, a taxpayer, am paying for their decisions and not my own.
I understand business. You have to be an honest, hard working individual. You should not get breaks or rewarded if you are dishonest or corrupt. Where is the Real America? To be continued . . . . . .
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
California ignored science?
California lawmakers succumbed to anecdotal evidence, emotional pleas and alternate agendas while ignoring a balanced approach to science in passing the nation’s first statewide ban of indoor tanning for patrons under 18 years old, the Indoor Tanning Association said in a statement Monday.
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Sunday banning those under 18 from using sunbeds in salons effective Jan. 1, 2012. ITA issued the following statement on Monday:
The Indoor Tanning Association is disappointed that the California Legislature and Governor decided to ban teens under the age of 18 from tanning indoors. In making this decision, they ignored the fact that there is no consensus among researchers that normal non-burning exposure to ultraviolet light, whether from the sun or a sun bed, has any effect on the development of melanoma skin cancer.
It is important to note that the Food and Drug Administration, which has regulated this industry for over 30 years, has reviewed the same data that was presented to the California legislature in support this ban and the FDA has never implemented any age restrictions.
One outcome of the passage of this bill is clear, this will cause small businesses to close and cost jobs across the state. The recession has already hit this industry hard leading to 25% of the professional indoor tanning salons to close in California since 2009. This age restriction will only push more over the edge. With unemployment at all time highs across the state and nationally, the legislature should be looking for ways to assist economic growth, not harm it.
The irony is that this legislation ignores the law of unintended consequences. It is a fact that taking away from teens the option to tan indoors will not stop teens from sun tanning; it will only send them outdoors into an uncontrolled environment, with no supervision, no trained staff, no parental consent required, where they are more likely to be over exposed or sunburned – which is exactly what the proponents of this bill say they are trying to avoid.
The new law also ignores the substantial body of research regarding the protective effect that vitamin D synthesized through the skin has in preventing melanoma. For example, outdoor workers are less likely to develop melanomas than indoor workers and the fact melanomas rarely occur on parts of the body regularly exposed to ultraviolet light, the face, back of the neck, back of the hand.
Often times, groups calling for restrictions on indoor tanning have partnered for financial reasons with the sunscreen industry – for the sunscreen industry, it’s more about dollars than science, and that’s unfortunate. And until we have more definitive science that better explains the relationship between UV exposure to any number of skin problems, it is premature for the government to weigh in against an industry that is made up largely of women owning small businesses that employ tens of thousands of people.
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Sunday banning those under 18 from using sunbeds in salons effective Jan. 1, 2012. ITA issued the following statement on Monday:
The Indoor Tanning Association is disappointed that the California Legislature and Governor decided to ban teens under the age of 18 from tanning indoors. In making this decision, they ignored the fact that there is no consensus among researchers that normal non-burning exposure to ultraviolet light, whether from the sun or a sun bed, has any effect on the development of melanoma skin cancer.
It is important to note that the Food and Drug Administration, which has regulated this industry for over 30 years, has reviewed the same data that was presented to the California legislature in support this ban and the FDA has never implemented any age restrictions.
One outcome of the passage of this bill is clear, this will cause small businesses to close and cost jobs across the state. The recession has already hit this industry hard leading to 25% of the professional indoor tanning salons to close in California since 2009. This age restriction will only push more over the edge. With unemployment at all time highs across the state and nationally, the legislature should be looking for ways to assist economic growth, not harm it.
The irony is that this legislation ignores the law of unintended consequences. It is a fact that taking away from teens the option to tan indoors will not stop teens from sun tanning; it will only send them outdoors into an uncontrolled environment, with no supervision, no trained staff, no parental consent required, where they are more likely to be over exposed or sunburned – which is exactly what the proponents of this bill say they are trying to avoid.
The new law also ignores the substantial body of research regarding the protective effect that vitamin D synthesized through the skin has in preventing melanoma. For example, outdoor workers are less likely to develop melanomas than indoor workers and the fact melanomas rarely occur on parts of the body regularly exposed to ultraviolet light, the face, back of the neck, back of the hand.
Often times, groups calling for restrictions on indoor tanning have partnered for financial reasons with the sunscreen industry – for the sunscreen industry, it’s more about dollars than science, and that’s unfortunate. And until we have more definitive science that better explains the relationship between UV exposure to any number of skin problems, it is premature for the government to weigh in against an industry that is made up largely of women owning small businesses that employ tens of thousands of people.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Snooki & Supre Tan partnership
Can a celebrity help the tanning industry? It is nice to see a company, which is taking a business risk in this economy. If this works, it will not only help Supre Tan, but also will help any tanning salon who will be carrying her line. Unfortunately, I will not be attending the Nashville convention, so I will miss the debut of her line, but I do plan on trying it here in the salon. I just called to see if I could order her line early, but my rep was not available. Keep posted on updates.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Spot Might Be Pre-Cancerous
If you see a doctor and you hear this diagnosis,” The spot might be pre-cancerous,” how would you react? Of course you would be freaked out! But is it really as bad as it sounds.
This happened to me a few years after I opened my salon. I quit tanning, so I would not hear the preaching about how bad it is. To me, this gave them more ammunition to prove that tanning was bad. Of course it takes a while to be white, so they can still tell, but at least it doesn’t look like I am anorexic about tanning. Well, I never do anyway. My motto is “Tan in Moderation.”
According to Wikipedia “A pre-cancerous condition (or pre-malignant condition) is a disease, syndrome, or finding that, if left untreated, may lead to cancer. It is a generalized state associated with a significantly increased risk of cancer.”
So, the doctor takes a skin sample and sends if off, right? Here you are waiting for answers. Oh, I was nervous, but my outcome was not bleak. I had a reaction to tingle tanning lotion on my face. Since then I have never used it on my face. Of course, you might not be in the position that I was. Where do you go for answers?
Here is something to keep in mind if this happens to you. First, the key in the definition is “if left untreated”. This just means that you have to see a doctor and let him/her take a piece of skin for a biopsy. It will be the only way to know what to do next. Of course, the term “pre-cancerous” is classified this way so that Insurance companies will pay for the removal of a suspicions spot. So, please keep this in mind when you hear that from your doctor.
This happened to me a few years after I opened my salon. I quit tanning, so I would not hear the preaching about how bad it is. To me, this gave them more ammunition to prove that tanning was bad. Of course it takes a while to be white, so they can still tell, but at least it doesn’t look like I am anorexic about tanning. Well, I never do anyway. My motto is “Tan in Moderation.”
According to Wikipedia “A pre-cancerous condition (or pre-malignant condition) is a disease, syndrome, or finding that, if left untreated, may lead to cancer. It is a generalized state associated with a significantly increased risk of cancer.”
So, the doctor takes a skin sample and sends if off, right? Here you are waiting for answers. Oh, I was nervous, but my outcome was not bleak. I had a reaction to tingle tanning lotion on my face. Since then I have never used it on my face. Of course, you might not be in the position that I was. Where do you go for answers?
Here is something to keep in mind if this happens to you. First, the key in the definition is “if left untreated”. This just means that you have to see a doctor and let him/her take a piece of skin for a biopsy. It will be the only way to know what to do next. Of course, the term “pre-cancerous” is classified this way so that Insurance companies will pay for the removal of a suspicions spot. So, please keep this in mind when you hear that from your doctor.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)