Long term effect of UVA

Celebrity Q and A'sI am very concerned about the long term effect that UVA can have on the matrix of the nail. I have had several cases where ladies have complained, that up to 1 year after removing gel nails that their nails are not back to 'normal' they display a thinner ridged appearance. Bearing in mind that the systems used in UK South Africa and Australia require a minimum of 2 x 9 watt bulbs with a minimum of 2 minutes exposure per layer of gel applied. This can equate to 12min exposure per hand if only two fingers, as recommended by the manufacturer, is inserted in the light at a time. I have conducted research on my own toe nails and find that immediately after 2 x 3 min exposure that the cuticles display a 'tanned' appearance. Please can any one help me, this is quite urgent. I am currently studying cosmetic science.  Colleen, South Africa 5/02

The U-V light emitted by UVA bulbs such as you refer to (9 watt osram types) delivers very narrow bandwidth very closely correlated with the photo-initiator used in the gels. This narrow bandwidth is NOT the one associated with tanning by and large, and it has been estimated that it would take over a year of continuous exposure to get any tanning effect at all from these bulbs. A client gets more exposure to this bandwidth of UVA light every day in a few minutes by a window or in her car! The FDA has deemed this light safe and it is used daily not only in our industry, but by the medical and dental industries as well.

What you ARE most likely experiencing in your alleged "tanning" phenomenon, is that you are getting the tacky dispersion layer from the gel onto the cuticle when wiping it, thus causing irritation that you are mistaking for a "tan". Getting this dispersion layer of gel on the skin is akin to wiping the cuticles with the liquid monomer in an acrylic system at each fill. The dispersion layer should be PULLED off in one swipe, cuticle to free edge; and not rubbed into the cuticle back and forth or side to side.

Barb Wetzel, "The Gel Queen"

The UVA-fluorescent lamps used in Wilde`s polymerization devices are extremely weak and emit light of 360 nm. At this low energy level and at this wavelength a skin reaction is impossible ever within a continuous irradiation time of one hour. A tanning effect after an irradiation of 6 minutes is certainly impossible.

The brittle and thin nails of your customer are certainly created by other effects. Perhaps the nails where predamaged, perhaps the customer formerly uses a powder/liquid system, perhaps acidic bonders have been used etc. However, a negative influence of the light emitted by our light curing devices is certainly impossible.

Fabio Manocchi
Light Concept Nails, Wilde Cosmetics, Germany

Related Topics:
MSDS Sheets - the Whole Story
Krazy Glue and Nail glue
Polish - Cured??
Regular acrylics versus "organic" nails
Acetone versus Acetone-free
Chemical reations from enhancements
Does monomer have a shelf life and is it product specific?
Are acrylic fumes are dangerous?
EMA - How safe is it?
Which Chemical determines set time in acrylics?
Longer Lasting Polish
Lacquer and Enamel
MMA exposure..
Vapors/fumes harmful for pregnant techs?
Is it in the best interest of the client to mix Brand A liquid with Brand B powders?
Retail polish ingredients