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?