"Dangerous new summer trend could increase chances of cancer by 50 percent" says a daunting headline from Fox News 8.
They're talking our sunburn art, which goes re-viral (an internet viral revival) every year as summer hits the northern hemisphere for the past several. Sunburn art is exactly what it sounds like: drawing artistic patterns on your body in sunscreen and then getting the rest sunburned to show off the design. It's partway in the permanence scale between henna and tattooing/branding, depending on your particular skins tolerance and healing rate.
Simple by being published by Fox, the article imparts all manner of dubiousness into the concept. Could increase is not will increase, and everybody's chances are mostly minimal anyway. Don't be taking me for a doctor now, but in years past, I remember hearing the same numbers about just getting a mild tan.
Is getting sunburn art dangerous? Sure, could be, but it's less painful than a tattoo (unless you have sensitive skin), less permanent about a tattoo (so you have fewer regrets later in life, unless you come up a winner in the cancer lottery), but also less healthy than a tattoo (as one down by a professional, not some guy you know working out of his basement).
Fox also went on to say that their "Doctors" claim that "sun block creams work much better than spray." The truth of the matter is that it's a lot easier to under-apply spray than it is to under-apply cream. Mayo Clinic and WebMD agree: the difference between spray and cream is the delivery method, that's all. They also go on to say that the SPF value isn't everything; you need a sunscreen that protects you from both UVA and UVB wavelengths, and though Fox's doctors may try to assure you that any SPF 30 is good enough, once again (and to no particular surprise) they're wrong.