Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Can CIA, FBI Miscommunication be Remedied?; How Can Teens Protect Themselves From Skin Cancer?

Aired June 03, 2002 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Hello everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.

While intelligence agents track terrorists around the country, no one's connecting the dots. The CIA won't talk to the FBI. The FBI apparently doesn't even communicate with itself very well, and neither of them talks to the NIS -- or the INS. We're going to find out how they do work, and I want to hear what you have to say about this. So you know how this works. Give me a call at 1-800-310-4CNN or-mail talkback@cnn.com. Now before we meet our guests here's what's on the show today. Terrorists in America.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They were operating entirely in the open under their names. One of them, al-Hazmi actually was listed in the phone book. And they were taking flight school lessons.

NEVILLE (voice-over): And the CIA was watching.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The CIA knew about these two hijackers, or soon-to-be hijackers, did not give the information to the FBI, even though the two agencies are supposedly working side-by-side.

NEVILLE: Why didn't they share such critical information? And can gaps in America's intelligence be fixed?

Also: teens pursuing the perfect tan from beaches to pools to tanning salons -- how dark, how deep, how deadly? Dermatologists warn the bottom line on tan lines could be cancer before age 30. Is it worth the risk?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

NEVILLE: OK, we're going to start with intelligence. A "Newsweek" report says the CIA tracked two al Qaeda terrorists from Malaysia to the U.S. and watched as they crisscrossed the country and, with other suspected terrorists, prepared for the September 11 attack. Now that they knew they would -- there would be a September 11 attack -- they didn't know that at the time, but they knew that one of the men was linked to the bombing of the USS Cole. And according to "Newsweek," sharing that information might have thwarted the 9/11 attack. Let's find out more about it from CNN's national security correspondent David Ensor. OK David, walk us through this. How and when was the CIA tracking these guys and who are they?

DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: These two men were being tracked in a sense since January of 2000. They were two names al-Hazmi and al-Midhar that the CIA had. These were people they were keeping an eye on and they knew that they were attending this meeting in Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia in January of 2000, but they didn't know where they were coming from.

Then in -- let's see, it was March of that year, they found out from another foreign intelligence service that following the meeting in Kuala Lumpur, one of these two men had gone to Los Angeles, California. Now after that, and this is where the trouble really starts, in January of 2001, the U.S. intelligence -- the FBI actually, satisfied itself that another one of the people who'd attended the meeting in Kuala Lumpur, a different, a third man, was a suspect in the USS Cole bombing.

Now at that point in January of 2001, in theory the CIA or the FBI both had this information, could have put two and two together and said these two guys attended a meeting with somebody who was involved in the Cole bombing. They might be al Qaeda. We probably should put them on a watch list and not allow them to get back in the United States. But that was not done until August 23, 2001, which was less than three weeks before the September 11 bombing.

So there was a -- basically if you want to find fault, if you want to use 20/20 vision, you know, looking back on things, you can -- you can find fault with U.S. intelligence from about late January until mid-August. Somewhere in there closer to front end, they really should have put these two men on a watch list. Now officials I speak to point out that even if they had been on a watch list, that might not have stopped the hijackings. There was another man who was put on the watch list that was supposed to be one of those planes. He simply was replaced by someone else.

NEVILLE: And you know you mentioned the whole situation, the meeting in Malaysia but, I understand that the CIA was also working with the Malaysia intelligence and they were photographing these guys and following them and getting shots of them as they ducked in various cyber cafes to check Arabic Web sites. I mean help -- maybe you can or maybe our guest can help us understand why is it that they have this sort of information and it's not passed on?

ENSOR: They had some still pictures from the Malaysian police, who they had asked to take pictures of these guys meeting, people that they thought might be connected with terrorism, but didn't know all that much about the time. It was only over a year later, that one of the people who'd been at that meeting was established to have been a suspect in the USS Cole bombing. At that point anybody at that meeting should have been suspect.

NEVILLE: Exactly. You know what David, thank you so much for joining us today. I want to try to get some answers now for -- from some other guests right now and joining us are David Adler, a former CIA officer and attorney and Ron Kessler, an investigative journalist and author of "The Bureau", "The Secret History of the FBI" and "Inside the CIA" I'd like to welcome both of you gentlemen to the show.

DAVID ADLER, FRM. CIA OFFICER: Thank you.

NEVILLE: David Adler, I want to start with you. How can something like this happen? I mean does the agency, the CIA, have such an elitist attitude that CIA agents feel they don't need to share intelligence information?

ADLER: No I don't think that's the attitude at all, and I think the agency officers by and large do share their information. That is the number one job of CIA officers is to collect information and to disseminate it. There's no reason for them to collect it and not pass it on. I think the problems arise when you start talking about how they pass it on and what is done with the information after they passed it on.

NEVILLE: Then David, help us understand how can something like this happen? They had some crucial information in hand and not pass it along to the FBI, the FAA, the INS?

ADLER: Well I'm not sure I agree that they didn't pass it on. I think it's a question the timing of when they passed it on. I don't think from what I've read, the information they had in January of 2001 was simply that these individuals were associated with al Qaeda or possibly associated with al Qaeda and wasn't until much later on that they learned that they were definitely involved with al Qaeda's activities.

And so the agency runs the risk of just putting everybody's name on the watch list and that's pointless because then the law enforcement community certainly can't watch -- they couldn't even watch the people that were on the list let alone if the agency started flooding the list with hundreds of thousands of name that were just possibly associated with al Qaeda.

NEVILLE: Ron Kessler, listen, try, but true timing is everything. David said well perhaps they had the information or they share the information, but it's a matter of when and the timing in which they share the information, but that's quite crucial.

RON KESSLER, AUTHOR, "INSIDE THE CIA": Well in hindsight, of course, this whole system was broken. The CIA ideally would have been sharing information on a real-time seamless basis with the FBI including this information, which early on was not that significant. If they had in fact given the FBI that information early on, the FBI wouldn't have done anything with it, as Mr. Adler said.

The FBI was totally overloaded as it was. Unless someone were a much higher-level threat, they wouldn't have had the resources to do anything. And in fact, the FBI was so backward when it came to communicating because of Louis Freeh's aversion to technology -- he didn't use e-mail, that they actually did not even have e-mail between the FBI and CIA until a few months ago and then some 80 million pages...

NEVILLE: But that's ridiculous. I don't care if you don't want to use e-mail, find a pigeon, do something, get the information where it needs to get to, you know.

KESSLER: Sure, you...

NEVILLE: It's ridiculous.

KESSLER: ... can use secure telephones, but they had some 93 million pages of documents just on terrorists alone going back 10 years at the FBI, none of which was on computers or if it was you couldn't put in flight schools and come up with an answer. Now the whole system is being changed. They are insisting on real-time sharing of information. I think you know, between the two agencies, the CIA was much more on top of al Qaeda than the FBI.

George Tenet a year ago said publicly that this is the greatest threat to the United States. He was totally focused on al Qaeda, although, again, they needed more resources.

NEVILLE: Ron, let me...

KESSLER: The FBI, on the other hand, was way behind the curve, didn't know very -- knew very little about al Qaeda before September 11.

NEVILLE: You said something that provoked a thought with me, and I've got Mike (ph) from Minnesota in our audience who'd like to speak out. But I have to take a break right now and of course, I want to hear from you at home on this. So give us a call and TALKBACK LIVE will continue after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back everybody. We're talking with former CIA officer David Adler and author Ron Kessler about why America's intelligence community knew so much, but still failed to stop the September 11 attacks. Now before we go on, is it fair to say that, though? Let's say the CIA was able to -- or did give the information to the FBI, and everybody had all the information. Would -- is it fair to say that perhaps September 11 would not have happened?

KESSLER: No, none of these dots by themselves would have led to the plot. If all the dots had been brought together, then they might have led to more investigation, more hunches that possibly could have uncovered the plot, but the real way to uncover a plot like that is to penetrate al Qaeda. That's something that CIA did to some extent, but not enough, not on a -- on the highest levels, not in the inner circle.

NEVILLE: And I understand...

KESSLER: The FBI, on the other hand, had no penetrations whatsoever. NEVILLE: But I do understand that it's a bit difficult to penetrate that organization because if you don't have that fanatical approach to it, you stick out like a sore thumb.

KESSLER: It's very difficult and just remember that there's a $25 million reward on bin Laden's head. Nobody's turned him in. He said himself in the videotape that very few people in his organization were aware of the plot. But it's still not impossible and the FBI -- CIA, I'm sorry, will often use people from other foreign intelligence services from the Middle East, for example, to do...

NEVILLE: Right.

KESSLER: ... this kind of work and make penetrations. There's also intercepting communications, which is also another avenue to getting leads on possible plots.

NEVILLE: Let me let Mike (ph) from Minnesota get in on the conversation.

MIKE: Hi, good evening or good afternoon, I should say. I live in a town where actually all the events took place from September 11 with Moussaoui and the FBI agent. My problem is that the arrogance of the FBI, the CIA and INS that they don't want any outside help to really help every -- have an effort to really stop this, and if they would have had that search warrant, they would have actually prevented some of this events from September 11 taking place. So I wish we would -- everyone would actually join in and actually prevent any of this from happening again.

NEVILLE: David Adler, respond to that please.

ADLER: I think he's exactly right. I think arrogance is the precise term to use to describe the behavior of the law enforcement and intelligence communities with regard to these type of terrorist incidents. The arrogance is more appalling than I think most Americans can fathom. The fact is that very few people get fired over this. I don't think you're going to see any FBI people fired over this or CIA people fired over this and I...

NEVILLE: And why not?

ADLER: Well I think the U.S. government and the Catholic Church are the only two employers where if you mess up they don't fire you. They just kind of move you off to somewhere else. There's just a real reluctance to do that. There is to some degree a good old boy network that just protects all of the middle level managers who are obstructionists and more interested in their careers than in protecting the American population.

NEVILLE: That is ridiculous and is there anything that can do -- we can do or government can do -- I guess not -- to change that?

ADLER: Well I hope that Mr. Mueller is not removed as director. He seems to have a sincere desire to change the culture of the organization, and the same is true with Mr. Tenet. The problem does not lie at the top of the pyramid. It, in my opinion, it lies in the middle of the pyramid where you have officers and special agents who've been there for 20 years or so, who are quite frankly, frightened of younger and more aggressive officers and agents who are out there doing their job.

NEVILLE: And who are less afraid I'd imagine, to speak out.

ADLER: And it's not that the younger officers are not interested in their careers. They certainly are, but they put the priority of protecting the American population before their own career path, and I think there are quite a few mid level managers in the law enforcement community and the intelligence community who put their careers first and...

NEVILLE: And then -- and then also, David, I'd imagine that when you have some of the mid level manager types, you're talking about upper level. These are people who are a little bit older, probably have families, and they don't want to loss their bread -- the money that puts bread on the table.

Let me get Robert (ph) from Georgia to speak out.

ROBERT: We keep on hearing about the watch list, who's on it, who's not on it, but how many people exactly are on this list? How big is it?

NEVILLE: David.

ADLER: I would estimate that the agency is probably putting a few hundred people on the list every month. The problem is that even a few hundred per month would very quickly overwhelm the law enforcement community as far as surveillance on these people. And so, with regard to the allegation that the CIA had information back in January, if it's fragmentary information and there is sort of this rumor that an individual is associated with al Qaeda, it really is not helpful to put that person on a list because I could be taking attention away from someone who is a confirmed al Qaeda member.

So there has to be a point where they draw the line and they say OK, we have enough information at this point to add the person to the list. But the short answer to the man's question is I would guess there are probably thousands of people on the list at this point. The other problem is I am unaware of any mechanism that the law enforcement community has for dealing with the people who are on the list. I'm not aware of efforts that are made to surveil these people on a regular basis. So even if all 19 of the hijackers were on the watch list, they simply would have been observed getting on to flights on that day...

NEVILLE: That is unbelievable.

ADLER: ... and nothing would have been done...

NEVILLE: Ron Kessler, what do you say to that?

KESSLER: Well the FBI needs a little more than simply meeting with terrorist in Africa let's say, to start surveillance, which is not very good. We need to have a much more aggressive FBI, and many more resources. I wouldn't be unhappy if we doubled the size of the FBI so that it can not only focus more resources on terrorism, but also take care of the other areas of crime that it has to -- organized crime, white color crime, political corruption, and espionage. You know the total number of agents in the FBI is 11,500 compare with some 60,000 New York City police officers.

NEVILLE: Right.

KESSLER: And we're, you know we want this agency to protect the whole country, I think we should talk about doubling it.

NEVILLE: Well if they double it, they should communicate as well. Let me get Belinda (ph) from Kentucky to speak out. Go ahead Belinda (ph).

BELINDA: Good afternoon. You know up until September 11, we've got people were arrogant and didn't believe that we would even be attacked here again, not since Pearl Harbor. So it's real easy for us to point the finger when we do have 11,500 FBI agents. We didn't have the funding until after September 11. You know we get -- we were so upset about violating someone's rights, that before September 11, we wouldn't have pushed the button that we need to push now and ask the people the hard questions because we were afraid we were going to violate someone's rights.

NEVILLE: Belinda (ph), great point because David Adler, that's exactly the position that I was taking on that, is that these people, the al Qaeda terrorists, whomever, it seems they understand -- they understand the rules and regulations of America and they're using those rules and regulations against America.

ADLER: They are, but I think it sounds trite, but if we start violating people's rights because we're afraid of what the al Qaeda members may do, then they have in fact won to a larger degree than any terrorist -- single terrorist activity. They have effectively changed our whole attitude about individual liberties in the United States. So I think the work can be done quite effectively without violating individual civil rights. I think that's kind of a way to direct attention away from the problems that are at hand, and the FBI and the CIA both could certainly have done more. The entire U.S. government could have done more...

NEVILLE: But going forward, do you feel hopeful that these two agencies can work together?

ADLER: Well, I'm hopeful. If I wasn't hopeful, I would live in the United States. But I don't have any illusions about the entrenched bureaucracy in the FBI and also in the CIA, as well as all of the other law enforcement communities, and it's going to take a significant amount of effort and political will to change...

NEVILLE: Wow...

ADLER: ... those bureaucracies. NEVILLE: ... you would think September 11 would change that attitude. David Adler and Ron Kessler, thank you very much for joining us here today on TALKBACK LIVE.

And up next, it started with 5-year-old Rilya Wilson. Now, the state of Florida is busy explaining why at least 120 children in its care are missing. CNN's Susan Candiotti has a live report, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back everybody. Last month, we talked about the disappearance of 5-year-old Rilya Wilson. The little girl was in the care of Florida's Department of Children and Families. Rilya's caregiver claims the child was taken from her home in January by people claiming to be from the Department of Children and Family Services, but her disappearance wasn't reported until April 25. Now it appears there are more children the state can't account for. Let's get the details from CNN correspondent Susan Candiotti.

Susan, what's the latest word?

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well Arthel, it's been a very frustrating day in terms of gathering information because at noon time today, at least three and a half hours ago, the state of Florida announced that it would be issuing a report with the latest numbers. And three and a half hours later we're still waiting. We are told that Florida's governor will not be available today to talk to us about it nor the woman who heads up the Florida Department of Children and Families.

However, through our digging we talked to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. That is the statewide police agency and the latest numbers that it has reported to it, it says by the child welfare agency is that 155 children who are dependents of the state of Florida are unaccounted for, proving, it would appear, that again the Rilya Wilson case is not isolated.

Also these state officials hasten to add that only children they consider to be as they put it, endangered is Rilya Wilson. Most of the other children, they point out, are cases of, for example, runaways or children who have disappeared with one or the other parent. Nevertheless, child advocates say these children are in as much endangerment, possibly as Rilya Wilson may very well be. You'll recall the police are treating her case as a possible homicide because they have virtually no leads right now as to her whereabouts -- Arthel.

NEVILLE: And Susan, I guess that's the latest, that they don't know what's going on with that -- with that case unfortunately.

CANDIOTTI: That's right and they've increased the reward from 25,000 to $50,000 in hopes that that might generate some new leads, some possible new leads -- so far no luck.

NEVILLE: Susan, do you have any idea maybe how long some of these other kids have been missing? Has this list been that long for a long period?

CANDIOTTI: Well we've been trying to gather that information. So far, state police have not been able to give us that -- the breakdown about that and anytime we hope to -- that's the question, of course, we'll be asking of state authorities. However, we can tell you this, I received a report from the city of Miami police who received a report from a Florida caseworker who came in since the Rilya Wilson case came to light, and this caseworker reported that they had found a case of a child who had been missing since 1996. And so you double that in the city of Miami alone, that the police department has received at least cases of 20 children that cannot be accounted for by caseworkers here in the state of Florida in this one police department.

NEVILLE: Wow.

CANDIOTTI: When you do the numbers and start to multiply by how many counties there are, 66 counties in the state of Florida, it's unknown how many...

(CROSSTALK)

NEVILLE: And it's really just kind of unbelievable that this is happening and before you go, Susan, I wanted to ask you -- I know you're waiting to try to get some information and they're not giving it to you, but when you are able to speak to those officials, I wonder if you could find out how those Florida numbers compare to the national numbers in terms of...

CANDIOTTI: Yes...

NEVILLE: ... the number of children...

CANDIOTTI: ... we're working on those and what's also interesting is that certainly, this is a scene that has been duplicated around the country and that since the publicity surrounding Rilya Wilson, for example, we hear from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement that that agency received reports of 18 missing children in April. Since the Rilya case came to life, they received 120 reports of children not being accounted for in the month of May.

NEVILLE: Right. And I'm wondering if the -- it's not so much that all of a sudden you had that many more missing kids, it's more that, OK, the department is saying we better get our acts together somehow and start filing some of these reports, or putting -- starting a paper trail, if you will?

CANDIOTTI: Well, evidently there has been an internal rule on the books within the Florida Department of Children and Families, that any time a case worker cannot account for a child -- when that child is missing, they are to immediately report this to the police department as well as the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

We received a copy of this memo that I just indicated that was put out in July of last year. Well, quite clearly, those reports are not being made on a timely basis. NEVILLE: Wow. Susan Candiotti, thank you very much for that update, and glad you could join us here today.

CANDIOTTI: You're welcome.

NEVILLE: OK, it's time for a break everybody. We're going to take the news break, and then we will be back, so don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE after a moment.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): Still ahead on TALKBACK LIVE: Tan now, pay later. Unfazed by cancer warnings, what price will these teen beauties pay for bedding down in tanning booths? Why don't they care?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: OK, welcome back everybody. I'm Arthel Neville.

Every year around this time you hear the warnings: Too much sun exposure can give you skin cancer. And every year the warnings are pooh-poohed as sun worshipers head to pools and beaches to, as they say, work on their tans. But tans aren't just a summer phenomenon anymore. Tanning salons have made them year-round fashion accessories. And as a result, according to the Cancer Society, melanoma is now the number one cancer striking people in their 20s.

And here to talk about it is CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland.

Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE

RHONDA ROWLAND, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, thank you. And we have some bad news.

NEVILLE: What's the bad news Rhonda?

ROWLAND: Well, the bad news is that adolescents and teens are not getting the message about using sunscreens.

NEVILLE: Why is that? Why don't they use it?

ROWLAND: Well that's -- I guess they like the look of being tan. They think it's a healthy look.

But we have a new study to tell you about. It just came out today. A new survey in the journal "Pediatrics" looked at about 10,000 teenagers across the country. And it found that only one-third of them are using sunscreens. Only one-third. And this is real important, because studies show that using sunscreen actually reduces non-melanoma why skin cancers by about 78 percent.

The study also found that 83 percent had at least one blistering sunburn, and one-third had three blistering sunburns. Really bad news because studies show that at least one during childhood can double your risk of melanoma. That's a deadly kind of skin cancer.

NEVILLE: Wow. Interesting numbers. Where is my friend here? Sarah (ph), stand up for me.

You said you got this burn here from just sitting at church outside and you weren't wearing your sunscreen. Why don't you wear it Sarah (ph)?

SARAH: I don't like the way it feels, and it's too much of a hassle to put on. And once you put it on, you don't know how much to put on, and you don't know if you have on enough. And you don't know what SPF to use and stuff.

NEVILLE: But you have fair skin. You've got fair skin, fair hair, light eyes. I mean, I now that, I don't have that, and I know you should wear sunscreen. And you just heard Rhonda give us these horrifying numbers and statistics that say that, you know, it's not good for you. And -- will you start?

SARAH: I might if I remember to, like, put it on.

NEVILLE: Come on. See -- how old are you?

SARAH: 15.

NEVILLE: See, this is the thing: You're 15 years old and you think, oh, you know, I've got time. It's not going to happen to me. It can happen to you. Come on.

I need the fab five here. All of these girls, get a wide shot of them. They're all friends. You guys work together on that, OK?

I mean, in the meantime, if they don't want to, Rhonda, put on the sunscreen -- but there are the self-tanning products, right, that have sunscreen in them?

ROWLAND: Well, some may, but not all of them. You have you to be very careful because I have three of these self-tanning products right here. And if you put those on, they'll give you an instant tan, but they won't protect you against the sun. So you have to be very careful.

Another thing, Arthel, is a lot of teenagers are going to tanning beds. Bad news again. In fact, in this particular survey, found 10 percent of teenagers are going to tanning beds. And they also found that girls are more like go to them. And as can see from our graphic, as the girls get older they're more likely to use the tanning beds. It goes from 7 percent to 16 percent between ages 14 and 15.

And this is not good because tanning beds deliver UVA rays. Those are rays that age you. They give you wrinkles. That's something you don't want when you're older, but...

NEVILLE: You don't want those at any time.

ROWLAND: That's right. That's right. NEVILLE: Jessica (ph) here, Rhonda, I'm standing with her.

And how old are you, first of all?

JESSICA: 18.

NEVILLE: Tanning bed or sun?

JESSICA: I have used a tanning bed some, but not a lot just because it's not good for you, and because of all of the risk of cancer. I do lay out in the sun, though, but I'm always careful to use sunscreen and cover my face and try not to stay out too long.

NEVILLE: Yes, but you've got all this exposed. Do you put sunscreen there?

JESSICA: Yes.

NEVILLE: Honey, you're about my color. You are out in the sun too much. You should not be my color.

JESSICA: I use sunscreen though. I'm really comfortable with that. I use 15 to 30, and I still get a good tan and I'm not out there that long. I don't burn, like, to peel...

NEVILLE: So you had the olive skin kind of thing going on to begin with? OK, do you -- so Rhonda, any words for Ms. Jessica here?

ROWLAND: Well, she is doing well when she uses those SPFs of 30. That's definitely better than 15. The reason for that is, many people don't put on enough sunscreen. And, in fact, one study showed the way people put on an SPF of 30, it's about the equivalent to an SPF of 2. So if you go and use a higher SPF, you're getting better protection. And people often don't put enough on. That's a problem.

And you can see here, I have some sunscreens, and can I talk to you a little bit about what you should use. You want me to tell you, Arthel? Do you want to know?

NEVILLE: I do want to know. But what I'd like to do is bring in -- we have a dermatologist to add to this conversation as well.

ROWLAND: Oh, that's great.

NEVILLE: And, you know -- and think about this, because I want to talk to you as well as Dr. Katz about this -- that people think that because they're my color, that they don't need sunscreen. Wrong.

ROWLAND: That's wrong; exactly.

NEVILLE: Wrong. Exactly.

OK. With us now is Dr. Bruce Katz, a dermatologist and director of the Juva Skin and Laser Center in Manhattan. He is also associate clinical professor with the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. We want to welcome you to the show as well, Dr. Katz.

DR. BRUCE KATZ, DERMATOLOGIST: Thank you.

NEVILLE: And you've been listening to this conversation, I know. And if you could maybe use an analogy, if you will, to give us an idea of what people do to their skin when they lay out in the sun.

KATZ: Well, people don't realize that, actually, 80 percent of your lifetime sun exposure occurs before you're 20 years old. So teenagers, young people, really have to understand that they are risking skin cancer as well as wrinkles and sun spots and other kinds of damage to the skin.

NEVILLE: And let me ask you this, because a lot of times -- you know, when you're before -- before 20, you're in your teens and your 20s you feel invincible -- you know, nothing's going to happen to me. Is it -- I'd say younger skin, is it more sensitive than older skin, if you will?

KATZ: Well, younger skin is more sensitive because it isn't weathered like older skin. But blistering sunburns, tanning, these all lead to skin cancer down the road. People think if they don't get sunburned, they just get a nice tan, like that young lady was talking about earlier, it's not a problem. Sun damage is cumulative. It adds up with each exposure.

So you really have to protect yourself. Wear sunscreens. Wear a hat. Avoid sun exposure between 10:00 and 3:00 in the afternoon. And wear clothing to cover yourself up.

NEVILLE: OK, but doctor, are you saying that people can't get a tan at all?

KATZ: A tan -- there's really no safe tan. Self-tanners are the way to go.

NEVILLE: Except mine, doctor.

KATZ: Your tan is safe. But if you get sun exposure, you're also at risk.

NEVILLE: I know that. And I actually did used to lay out in the sun in high school, and got burned pretty bad, that whole thing. And I know you're thinking, why would I? Because, I told Sheryl Pots (ph), a writer here on TALKBACK, that I used to lay out in the sun and she couldn't believe. And I said, oh, I get golden brown, honey. But I don't do that anymore because I know better now.

Anyway, I've got Jonathan (ph) on the phone now from Indiana.

Jonathan (ph), what do you have to say about all of this?

JONATHAN: Yes, I really think that this is totally something about vanity. You know, I'm a teenager, and I really think that there needs to be a much better campaign, like on educating people, because I had no idea that this could lead to skin cancer or anything. And I actually -- I know a girl that died of skin cancer because she just couldn't get tan and, you know, she was pasty white. And every day she'd go out and she would come back and she was all red. And I really think that there needs to be a better campaign on educating people on the dangers of tanning.

NEVILLE: Well, that's what we're trying to do here. And I think it's been around, but I'm glad you're paying attention. Now we want to get your friend to pay attention as well.

Listen, we have someone who is the beauty editor of "Glamour" magazine who is going to join this conversation in a moment to talk about the whole fashion aspect of it, and why it's so good to look my color.

Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: OK welcome back everybody. I'm Arthel Neville. We're talking about sun tanning and the dangers of sun tanning.

Joining us now is Mary MacLean. She is the executive beauty editor at "Glamour" magazine.

Hi, welcome to the show Mary.

MARY MACLEAN, "GLAMOUR" MAGAZINE: Hi Arthel.

NEVILLE: OK, you've heard us talk about this whole tanning thing. If you could help us understand, why it is so popular? And I thought the real dark, deep, deep, deep tan like the grandmother in "Something About Mary" was like old -- it was passe. But is that -- you know, what's the popular tanning level? I don't know.

MACLEAN: There is no popular tanning level, as far as we're concerned. There is no such thing as a good tan. And we try more and more to show, even in our summer issues, that tanning is not what is sheik. That if you're on the beach, you're covered up. You have your normal skin tone, you wear SPF 15 through 30, waterproof. We always try to educate on how much you need to apply, because it's always more than you think that you should.

NEVILLE: Well, you're on the right track. And I have Helen (ph) here, who might have a suggestion for the magazine.

HELEN: Well, I think it would be beneficial then, if you want to educate teenagers as to how dangerous it is to be out in the sun, to find someone from their own peer group that's well known that can promote sunless tanning creams or, you know, the SPF -- higher SPFs and things like that.

MACLEAN: That's absolutely right.

NEVILLE: OK, but speaking of those creams, we have some of those -- I'm sorry Mary, were you going to say something else? MACLEAN: No.

NEVILLE: Oh, OK. We have some of those creams right here with Rhonda. And if you could point out some of the -- what you have, the self-tanning creams as well as sun block or something?

ROWLAND: That's right. That's right. And this is one of the benefits of being a medical reporter. I went to a pharmacy with a dermatologist. And this one here is her favorite. This is an SPF of 40. It also protects against both UVA and UVBm, because it has a key ingredient, parsol 1789. It also doesn't block pores, so that's great too, for teenagers worried about acne.

So that's something you want to look for: UVA and UVB protection, the ingredient parsol 1789 or zinc. Those are some keys. Also...

NEVILLE: You know, before you go on, though, let's open this thing and show me how much I need to put on to be protected.

ROWLAND: Well, you would put it on just like any kind of lotion, you know, and rub it in. But the problem is, usually people...

(CROSSTALK)

NEVILLE: ... all the way up your arm, and maybe on my neck...

ROWLAND: All over the place. You are want to get plenty of it on to get the coverage. And oftentimes if have a lower SPF like a 15, you have to use a lot more to get the same protection that you would with a 40. So even though a higher SPF may cost more, you can get away with using less because you get better coverage.

NEVILLE: But now doctor, I have this -- what do I have here, it's an SP-40 -- SPF-40 on my hand here. Is there a myth, though? Do people feel that if I have on a sun block, I can just lay out in the sun for days and not risk getting skin cancer?

KATZ: Well, that's only part of the solution. It's also important to avoid intense sun, to wear clothing that protects you because sun tan lotion wears off.

Rhonda makes a very good point, that you have to wear the sunscreen, but you also have to reapply it after you go swimming, or if you're perspiring a lot, playing tennis or golf. And make sure you're covered, because it's only part of the solution. It's not just sunscreen. And it shouldn't give you license to go out in the sun.

The ozone layer has thinned out over the last few years, and it's really critical that people protect themselves. There's a great national organization called the Skin Cancer Foundation, and they will give you all the information you want. You can you call their 800 number. It's 800-SKIN-490. And they'll give a lot of the young folks there who are asking about this information about the campaign great information on how to protect yourself.

NEVILLE: Mary, I want to get you back in on this conversation. From your perspective, what are you hearing from young people, older people about tanning and tanning beds?

MACLEAN: Oh, tanning beds. Hopefully the message is going out that there is no such thing as a safe tanning bed. And our effort is to make sure that the tan doesn't look sheik -- a real tan that you get from UV light. Our efforts are to show how to use self-tanners properly, and bronzing creams, et cetera -- the cosmetics. How to use those to get a healthy glow if that's what you want, but to never use UV light as an alternative.

NEVILLE: I want to bring Keith (ph) in now. Keith (ph) is calling from -- where? Montana.

Keith (ph), go ahead. Oh, you've left. OK. That's OK.

We mentioned the whole idea of self-tanning creams. And Dr. Katz, I want to ask you this, are those safe?

KATZ: Oh, yes. They are completely safe.

Self-tanners -- see, a lot of people think the self-tanners make you look orange or yellow like the old QT (ph) tans. Today self- tanners are natural-looking. You can get a nice deep, dark tan, as Mary points out.

But people have to remember, when they get that tan, they're really not protected. They still have to wear a sunscreen so that they don't get sunburned.

NEVILLE: OK. And here is a question. There are some people who have cancer -- skin cancer -- already. And when we come back, doctor, I'm going to ask you, are there any options for those people?

We have to take a break right now, but TALKBACK LIVE will continue in a moment. Don't go anywhere

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: Welcome back everybody. We're talking about tanning.

And Rhonda, we were talking during the commercial. You were giving me some statistics regarding teens and cancer -- skin cancer.

ROWLAND: That's right. I have a lot of dermatologists tell me they are seeing an increase in skin cancers in their teenage patients and those in their 20s. Very scary.

NEVILLE: Wow. Dr. Katz, what if you already have skin cancer, what are your options?

KATZ: Well, there are a variety of ways to take care of the sun damaged skin. There are chemical peels, one called a pulse peel, which is a great way to take away the precancerous cells. We have lasers today, particularly at our center here in New York, Juva Skin and Laser Center, which will take away the sun damaged skin, as well as wrinkles.

NEVILLE: Wow. Stand up for me, I've got -- short on time, but what do you have to say?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One of the teenagers asked earlier how many people develop skin cancer. And I can't really talk about that. But what I can say is, I'm fair, and I don't tan. I don't like to tan. When I was 24 or 25 I actually developed a preneoplastic lesion. And so, you know, tanning is only one way that you get skin cancer. But I think that if your chances are increased you should...

NEVILLE: Thank you so much. I'm sorry, we're out of time everybody.

Rhonda Rowland, Dr. Katz and Mary MacLean, hey, thanks to all of you for joining us here on TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville. I'll see you again tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern.

And now it's time for Judy Woodruff with a look ahead of what's happening "INSIDE POLITICS." We'll see you tomorrow.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com