Does self-tanning increase the risk of cancer?

Is self-tanner carcinogenic?

Self-tanning is a popular alternative to natural tanning, allowing a golden complexion without UV exposure. But one question remains: is self-tanner carcinogenic? Discover what recent research says about this tanning alternative and whether we need to be cautious when using it.

Published on June 13, 2025, by Jamal, PhD, Doctor of human pathology and infectious diseases — 6 min of reading

Do self-tanners pose a carcinogenic risk?

To date, no international health authority – whether the FDA, the ANSM or the European SCCS – has classified dihydroxyacetone (DHA), the molecule used in most self-tanners, as a carcinogenic substance. Available data show no genotoxic or mutagenic effect in vivo when DHA is used at permitted concentrations.

To understand the mechanism, one must distinguish two pigments: melanin, produced by dermal melanocytes under UV exposure, and melanoidins, formed by a chemical reaction between DHA and amino acids in the stratum corneum. This Maillard reaction, non-enzymatic, results in brown pigments without melanin involvement. This is not physiological tanning but a artificial surface pigmentation. UV-induced tanning is a skin defence response to damage and carries an increased risk of skin cancer. It must be distinguished from the brown pigmentation obtained after applying a self-tanner.

Self-tanner: for a sunless tan but at what behavioural cost?

Getting a tan without sun exposure can alter sun-related behaviours. Artificially darkened skin may give the illusion of greater protection, which can reduce vigilance. A study of 2,005 South Australians found that regular self-tanner users were more likely to develop sunburn than non-users, despite more frequent sunscreen application. This paradox raises important questions. Several hypotheses can be proposed. On one hand, the amount of sunscreen applied may be lower than the recommended 2 mg/cm² needed to achieve the stated protection factor. On the other hand, reapplication—essential every two hours or after swimming—may be neglected.

A 2015 US survey of over 27,000 adults found that 6.4% reported using a self-tanner. Although self-tanners are presented as a safe alternative to UV tanning, the study showed that users adopt risky behaviours. They use tanning beds at a higher rate, endure more cases of sunburn, and wear fewer protective garments or seek shade to shield against UV rays, even though their sunscreen application rate is higher. These data raise the question of whether self-tanners change sun exposure habits or coexist with risky practices without correcting them.

By colouring the skin, a self-tanning product can give a false sense of sun protection.

In summary, a self-tanner adds colour to the skin without sun exposure and has not been shown to be carcinogenic to date. Its mechanism relies on the formation of melanoidins at the surface without triggering melanogenesis. However, it should not be considered protective. An artificial tan offers no UV defence. To maintain skin health, using a self-tanner requires thorough and regular sun protection.