Some Massachusetts teenagers looking for an artificial tan would need parental permission and others would be prohibited from going to tanning salons if a new bill is passed.

The bill, which attributes high rates of skin cancer to ultraviolet rays, would prohibit children less than 16 years old from using tanning beds. The bill also would require parents of 16- and 17-year-olds to be present at tanning salons to give their approval, and it would obligate teens to read information, which salons must provide, on the health dangers of tanning. The bill would change a 1990 law that prohibits children under 14 from using tanning salon beds.

Sen. Pam Resor (D-Acton), one of the bill’s co-sponsors – the other is Sen. James Timilty (D-Wapole) – said at a State House press conference yesterday she proposed the bill to protect children from “dangerous salons,” adding state health officials have a better understanding of what is safe for children than children themselves.

“We are here because we have to file legislation to try to gain a perspective on who should make decisions in tanning,” Resor said.

Melanoma Foundation of New England Executive Director Deb Girard supports the bill and cited data on the health risks of tanning beds.

“A session in a tanning bed gives you the same amount of UV as being outside eight hours on a beach unprotected,” she said. “We know through research that people are 2.5 times more likely to get skin cancer from the UV lamps.”

Girard said her organization visits schools at every level to teach minors of these risks while combating the trendy image associated with artificial tanning.

“Kids feel that if you use tanning, you’re smarter, wealthier and prettier,” Girard said. “This tanning sensation goes [as far] back as Coco Chanel. Since then, we have a culture [that says] tan is beautiful.”

Despite Massachusetts’s location in the northeast, Girard noted the commonwealth has the 18th-highest rate of melanoma cases in the nation, a problem she attributed largely to UV damage from tanning salons.

Despite the arguments against artificial tanning, Girard said many people still doubt the health risks associated with the salons.

“Parents need more education [on tanning beds],” Girard said. “People still think you are safe in a tanning bed.”

Massachusetts Academy of Dermatology president Kathryn Bowers said the state has an obligation to citizens to pass the legislation.

“The other thing people don’t realize is that every single ray stays there,” she said, likening the practice of artificial tanning to the now-discredited use of radiation therapy to treat acne in the 1950s.

Francie Hauck, owner of Perfect Tan on Commonwealth Avenue, disputed the senators’ assertion that moderate tanning is harmful.

“Reasonable tanning is as safe as being in the sun,” Hauck said in a phone interview. “A tan is your natural protection for the skin. When people don’t tan [before sun exposure], they get fried.”

Hauck said she already requires written parental consent from minors, and because her store does not get many young customers, she doubts the bill’s passage would affect her business.

“I think we have five tanners who are high school age . . . and they have to prove they are with parents,” she said.

Though she did not recommend tanning more than once a day, Hauck noted that law already prohibits tanning more than once in a 24-hour period.

“There are some tanning salons that have unlimited tanning, but we don’t do that here,” she said.