UV drying lamps in High Street nail salons could cause

UV drying lamps in High Street nail salons could cause skin cancer, scientists warn

UV drying lamps in high street nail salons could cause skin cancer, scientists warn, as studies show they can damage skin in a similar way to sunbeds

UV lamps in High Street nail salons could pose a risk of skin cancer, scientists fear.

The lamps, which help harden some types of nail polish gel called shellac, could damage skin in ways similar to sunbeds, say researchers from the University of California San Diego and the University of Pittsburgh.

In a series of laboratory studies, they found that a high proportion of skin cells died after repeated exposure to the light emitted by these lamps.

Cells that survived showed signs of damage, including to DNA, which can increase the risk of skin cancer.

UV lamps in High Street nail salons could pose a risk of skin cancer, scientists fear

UV lamps in High Street nail salons could pose a risk of skin cancer, scientists fear

The authors of the study warn in the journal Nature Communications: “Our experimental results … strongly suggest that the radiation emitted by UV nail polish dryers can cause hand cancer.”

They added, “UV nail polish dryers, similar to tanning beds, may increase the risk of early-onset skin cancer.” However, they cautioned that the study “does not provide direct evidence of an increased risk of cancer in humans.”

They called for a long-term analysis comparing rates of hand skin cancer in those who regularly use nail sticks to rates in those who don’t. This would take “at least a decade,” they said.

There has been growing concern about nail bars. “Anti-UV gloves” that only expose the fingernails can now be bought online.

In a series of laboratory studies, they found that a high proportion of skin cells died after repeated exposure to the light from these lamps

In a series of laboratory studies, they found that a high proportion of skin cells died after repeated exposure to the light from these lamps

US influencer Kourtney Kardashian – Kim’s older sister – has said she doesn’t use UV dryers because they “age the skin with brown spots and wrinkles”.

Last night, the nail salon industry scoffed at the new findings.

Doug Schoon of the US Nail Manufacturing Council, a chemist by training, called the study “a biased and unfair attack”.

He said the researchers used a very powerful UV lamp and exposed cultured skin cells for far too long — 20 minutes a day for three consecutive days.

He added that clients typically hold one hand under a lamp for three minutes during a nail salon session. Most go a few times a month.

A dangerous online trend has emerged that glamorizes the use of tanning beds years after they were banned from commercial premises over links to skin cancer

A dangerous online trend has emerged that glamorizes the use of tanning beds years after they were banned from commercial premises over links to skin cancer

“I can guarantee the results would be very different if they used three one-minute exposures. It seems their plan is to make all UV nail lamps look dangerous,” he said.

“For over 20 years, these lamps have been used regularly by millions of people, giving them a long history of safe use.

“Most of the scientific evidence shows that UV nail lamps are safe when used properly.”

One reason nail-stick UV lamps are unlikely to pose the same risk as tanning beds is that they produce a different light.

Sunbeds emit UV radiation with a broader spectrum of wavelengths, which includes both longer-wavelength UVA (315 to 400 nanometers) and shorter-wavelength UVB (280 to 315 nanometers). Nail stick lamps tend to only produce UVA.

UVB is more “energetic” and the main cause of sunburn, but does not penetrate below the skin’s surface. In contrast, UVA is less energetic but penetrates deeper.

Excessive exposure to either can lead to skin damage and skin cancer.

Previous studies have not found a link between frequent use of nail sticks and skin cancer.

None of these, however, were the kind of rigorous long-term studies — that followed individuals for many years — that scientists in the latest research have advocated.

Lead author Ludmil Alex-androv believes there is cause for concern, adding that prior to their work, there was “zero molecular understanding of what these devices were doing to human cells.”