AFP/Getty Images

Even in the coldest of winter months, and an icy “polar vortex” ripping through a third of the US, President Donald Trump manages to maintain his mysterious, and never-fading infamous orange tan.

But how does he really do it?

Is it perhaps the result of hours and hours spent on a tanning bed, like former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman claims in her tell-all book Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House?

Or is it tanning lotion or spray, which is another plausible theory presented by Dr. Tina Alster, a top Washington dermatologist who claims his "orangey" tint could only be the result of self-tan. Alster, who has treated other White House officials, but does not treat the current president, says another indication of a self-tan is the often-present white circles under Trump's eyes:

I have nothing against self-action tanning creams, but I think you need to be careful about how you apply it.

Or does Trump simply spend way too much time under the hot sun in Florida, while sinking golf balls on his Mar-a-Lago resort?

Now, a senior White House official is debunking all of these theories, revealing to The New York Times that the president’s meticulous, winter-defying tan is actually just the result of “good genes”.

The administrator, who spoke to the newspaper on the condition of anonymity, added that Trump also applies “translucent” powder (but no bronzer!) on his skin before television appearances.

The president is known to be obsessed with how he looks on camera, having complained previously that his skin and hair appear to yellow on the screen, according to a close aide.

This has resulted in more dimly-lit events at the White House, with the president also preferring settings like the White House Rose Garden – the area with the most natural light – as his place for official announcements.

Either way, it was difficult for this groundbreaking news to change the minds of people on the internet.

HT Daily Mail

Keep reading...Show less
Please log in or register to upvote this article
The Conversation (0)