Las redes sociales promocionan la lámpara UV para uñas artículos de seguridad
Está circulando un informe que cuestiona la seguridad de las lámparas UV. Sugiere unos resultados bastante terribles. Las redes sociales y varios sitios web de noticias se están haciendo eco de la noticia y están creando sus propios artículos para distribuirlos.
Original Article – Nature Communications
Artículo de Yahoo Life
Dail Mail – Artículo de periódico en línea
NailKnowledge ha recibido numerosas consultas solicitando comentarios. Con este fin, Doug Schoon ha abordado este informe y ha puesto en duda todos los detalles.
Doug Schoon Respuesta
Lamentablemente, cada pocos años alguien decide atacar injustamente a las lámparas UV para uñas. Esto parece haber ocurrido una vez más. El nuevo estudio publicado en Nature Communications, “DNA damage and somatic mutations in mammalian cells after irradiation with a nail polish dryer”, is nothing more than a biased and unfair attack. Why do I say this? This study does not look at the safety of UV nail lamps as used in nail salons… not at all! Rather, this is an unfair attempt to make all UV nail lamps appear to be very dangerous. How so?
The study authors did not choose the most widely used, or even commonly used UV nail lamps. Instead, they tested only ONE lamp- the highest wattage UV nail lamp on the market, a lamp that is rarely used by the nail industry. The seller claims this lamp is 50% faster than traditional
lámparas de clavos. ¿Por qué utilizaron sólo esta lámpara? Parece que intentan obtener el peor resultado posible, cuando el objetivo debería haber sido conocer la seguridad de las lámparas UV para uñas.
- Ensuring they get a scary result, they incorrectly used this lamp- exposing their samples to 20 minutes of continuous exposure. That’s right, they used an unrealistic lamp and exposed the tissue for an unrealistic length of time! To make matters worse, they repeated this unrealistic test with two more consecutive 20-minute exposures for a total of 60 minutes over three days. This is an irresponsible way to do scientific experiments. Tricksters often use shoddy scientific experiments to fool the public, so this is not new. They picked conditions that will give them the results they want. That’s silly science. These researchers know that the nail is typically exposed to 1-minute exposures, yet they tested 20 minutes- when no client should ever place their hand in any UV nail lamp for this long.
- The article claims to have tested exposure levels between 0 and 20 minutes, but the researchers only report the results of 20 minutes. I can guarantee that the results would be MUCH different if they used three 1-minute exposures. Why would they not test realistic exposures? It appears their agenda is to make all UV nail lamps look dangerous. If so, they should be ashamed of the needless fear they’ve created.
Durante más de 20 años, millones de personas han utilizado regularmente estas lámparas, por lo que tienen un LARGO historial de uso seguro. En resumen, la mayor parte de las pruebas científicas demuestran que las lámparas UV para uñas son seguras, si se utilizan correctamente.
Note that the authors state, “this does NOT provide direct evidence for an increased cancer risk in humans,” yet they appear to be promoting an exaggerated cancer risk to the media in their interviews. That raises the question, what is their true intention? All this study really demonstrates is that nail technicians should not use 54-watt UV nail lamps and expose their client’s skin for 20 continuous minutes. No surprise there. What’s really sad is when researchers use scientific studies to deceive the public and dupe the news media, when instead science is supposed to enlighten us with new and useful knowledge.
En resumen, el grueso de las pruebas científicas sigue demostrando que las lámparas UV para uñas son seguras cuando se utilizan correctamente.
Spanish 
English 
Portuguese 
Vietnamese