Indoor tanning rates among children under age 17 in New Jersey didn’t budge after a ban enacted in 2013, and rates increased among male high school students in the Garden State from 2012 to 2014, according to a study in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 

“The fact that indoor tanning rates among New Jersey high school students under age 17 did not significantly decline after an age restriction was enacted is cause for concern and speaks to the need for ongoing surveillance of indoor tanning rates for this population. These results also highlight a need for continued monitoring of tanning facility operators to ensure they are adhering to the age restrictions put in place,” says study author Elliot J. Coups, PhD, behavioral scientist at Rutgers Cancer Institute and associate professor of medicine at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, NJ. “Additionally, the increase in tanning rates among male high school students in New Jersey during the survey period underlines the importance of implementing public health programs targeting varying demographic groups.”

The FDA has proposed a rule to restrict the use of indoor tanning devices to adults aged 18 and older. Many states incuding California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Washington, and some cities and counties have also banned indoor tanning by minors younger than 18 years, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. On October 1, 2013, commercial indoor tanning was banned in New Jersey for those under 17 years of age. Investigators sought to examine whether there was a difference in indoor tanning use by New Jersey high school students after the ban was enacted.

Data for the study were drawn from the 2012 and 2014 New Jersey Youth Tobacco Surveys, in which a combined 5,700 public school students in grades nine through 12 in New Jersey participated. The surveys included several questions related to indoor tanning. Along with providing demographic information pertaining to sex, age and race/ethnicity, survey participants reported the number of times they engaged in indoor tanning in the previous year. The 2014 survey captured results during the period when the under-17 ban in New Jersey was in effect. In it, 6.9 percent of students under the age of 17 years reported indoor tanning in the past year. This indoor tanning rate was not significantly different than the 6.7 percent rate reported in the 2012 survey. Additionally, the indoor tanning rates in the 2014 survey did not differ significantly from those in the 2012 survey for those aged 17 years and older. Among students of all ages, the past year indoor tanning rate did not differ significantly from 2012 to 2014 for female students, but among male students the rate increased from 5.8 percent to 8.6 percent during that period, the study showed.

The authors also note the use of indoor tanning devices in private homes is not subject to age restrictions but should be addressed by future legislation. “Future research is needed to examine youth indoor tanning behaviors, including a focus on the settings in which they tan and the impact of legislative and educational initiatives on such behaviors,” adds Dr. Coups in a news release.