Consider Applying a Self-Tanner

Fake tanners have gotten a bad rap over the years, and for good reason: They can look fake. Luckily, these products have gone through significant improvements in recent years. The new brands of self-tanners are virtually streak-proof, and some even come with built-in SPF. Self-tanners do not injure the skin, and you'll be able to pick out the exact shade of tan you want. There are numerous options available for self-tanners. You can choose between gels, lotions or sprays. Be careful, though. Just because your skin will be golden doesn't mean you won't burn. So keep applying that sunscreen whenever you go in the sun.

Applying a self-tanner is simple. First, you need to exfoliate. This simply means getting rid of all the dead cells on your body. This will help the tanner to go on more evenly. To exfoliate, merely go to a beauty-supply or drug store and get an exfoliation kit or loofah sponge.

Make sure your body is completely dry before applying the tanner. If there is any moisture, the tanner may come out blotchy. Try to find a brand that you can see going on (read: the cream itself should be colored, not clear) so you won't miss any areas.

Get a pair of surgical gloves, preferably latex; they'll help keep your hands from getting stained. If you are applying a cream, use upward strokes on all of the body, except the chest area. For the chest, horizontal strokes will help keep the coverage balanced. To avoid dark stripes, use less of the tanner on joints, such as the knees and the elbows.

Wait about 20 to 25 minutes, and you'll look like you've been sunbathing for days.

Page:
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5

Printer Friendly

Comments

DiscountTickets said

Flag This Comment

on 6/21/2010 Great way to get a (Relatively) safe tan.

on 6/21/2010 Thank you so much. I have written about this issues several times for eHow and I must commend your comprehensive approach with the highlight of "there is no such thing a 'safe' tan"! I have spend too many house in my infectious disease practice excising "warts" and such only to know that I what i was doing was removing a melanoma. Melanoma kills. Saddest case of recent memory was a handsome, built 22 year old house painter who just did not never wore a shirt, let alone used any protection. His funeral was just after his 23rd birthday And one for the "truth is stranger than fiction" books his beautifully muscled and tanned corpse look so ghoulish in the open coffin that his boyfriend had it closed.

big-tony said

on 4/12/2010 "However, the level of protection a person needs is usually based upon her tanning history."

One big rule in web design is not to be sexist with your articles. Refer to his/her.. Not just one of them when speaking to the public.

123marion said

on 4/10/2010 Moderate tanning is GOOD for you and makes a great base before travelling. FACT: Almost all sun protection creams and lotions contain KNOWN carcinogens: Oxybenzone is just one. Google it. Many of the parties promoting the anti-tanning campaign have ties to the $35 billion sunscreen industry, which wants you to over-use THEIR products. Lawsuits have been filed against sunscreen manufacturers. The use of sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) of just 8 inhibits more than 95% of vitamin D production in the skin. 37,000 people die in Canada due to Vitamin D deficiency. Only 1,000 die due to melanoma and other skin cancers and MAYBE only 20% of those ppl were tanners. So 200 deaths that are questionable vs 37,000. That ratio is 185:1. Is this what we are arguing about? Save 1 so 185 can die?

on 4/10/2010 Moderate tanning is GOOD for you and makes a great base before travelling. FACT: Almost all sun protection creams and lotions contain KNOWN carcinogens: Oxybenzone is just one. Google it. Many of the parties promoting the anti-tanning campaign have ties to the $35 billion sunscreen/sunblock industry, which wants you to over-use THEIR products. Lawsuits have been filed against sunscreen manufacturers. The use of sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) of just 8 inhibits more than 95% of vitamin D production in the skin. 37,000 people die in Canada due to Vitamin D deficiency. Only 1,000 die due to melanoma and other skin cancers and MAYBE only 20% of those ppl were tanners. So 200 deaths that are questionable vs 37,000. That ratio is 185:1. Is this what we are arguing about? Save 1 so 185 can die?