UV-emitting nail polish dryers damage DNA and cause mutations in cells

I’m no expert here at all, but I wonder how much this translates to real world risk. It seems like they’re irradiating unprotected cells with a direct blast of UV. How much of that UV actually penetrates the top layers of skin? They’re also subjecting cells to 20+ minutes of continuous exposure, while during a gel manicure typically involves 60-120 seconds of exposure. Obviously we’re not seeing individuals walk out of manicure sessions with necrosis of the fingertips. Their values of 20-70% cell death don’t seem meaningfully representative.<p>I’d love somebody with an informed opinion to weigh in here. Is this bad science? Bad reporting? Or is there genuine danger here that’s been flying under the radar?<p>My concern is, we see a lot of sensational science reporting that plays up the risks and dangers of potentially routine things, lowering public trust in science.

The beauty industry is one of the most reckless and and capriciously hazardous consumer-facing industries there is. Online retailers are filled with insanely dangerous beauty products, like high power lasers that don&#x27;t even come with safety googles. Many of their chemical products are unproven at best, often outright hazardous to use at all without a fume hood. Parasites and synthetic stimulants sold as weight loss products, the list goes on and on.

How much damage does it do compared to, say, sitting in the summer sun for 20 minutes?<p>Also makes me curious about those UV teeth-whitening devices and whether there is any similar research for them. I don&#x27;t know how valid such a concern would be, but it seems reasonable to assume that the skin inside the mouth wasn&#x27;t designed to be exposed to UV as much as skin on the outside of the body, so I wonder if it&#x27;s more susceptible to damage from that type of thing.