Sunlight: Dermatologists and the Cancer IndustryTell You To Avoid It, Yet It Prevents Major Cancers.
By Edward Morgan and By Marco Torres.
Guest writer for Wake Up World According to researchers, the widespread useof sunscreens promoted by dermatologists and the cancer industry may lead to a significantdecrease in solar-induced pre-vitamin D3 in the skin, which actually correlates with ahigher risk of cancer.
Why Do Dermatologists Promote Sunscreen? Quite simply because they like repeat business.
Exposure to ultraviolet B radiation in sunlight provides the mechanism for more than 90% ofthe vitamin D production in most individuals and they know it.
Our interaction with thesun is the one thing that may prevent cancer more than anything else.
A study in the American Journal of Epidemiology,showed that women who had at least 21 hours a week exposure to the sun�s UV rays intheir teens were 29 percent less likely to get cancer than those getting under an houra day.
For women who spent the most time out side in their forties and fifties, the riskfell by 26 percent and for those above 60, sunshine halved their chances of a tumor.
Comprehensive scientific reviews indicatethat 83% of 785 sunscreen products contain ingredients with significant safety concerns.
Only 17% of the products on the market block both UVA and UVB radiation which is the intendedpurpose of sunscreens.
The assessment by the Environmental Working Group�s Skin Deepdatabase was based on a review of nearly 400 scientific studies, industry models of sunscreenefficacy, and toxicity and regulatory information housed in nearly 60 government, academic,and industry databases.
Moreover, almost half of the 500 most popularsunscreen products may actually increase the speed at which malignant cells develop andspread skin cancer because they contain vitamin A or its derivatives retinol and retinyl palmitatewhich accelerate tumor growth.
Sunscreen Does Not Prevent Melanoma Now what�s fascinating is the claim by publichealth watchdogs that almost 90 percent of melanomas are attributed to exposure to ultraviolet(UV) radiation from the sun.
They claim that regular daily use of an SPF 15 or higher sunscreenreduces the risk of developing melanoma by 50 percent.
It�s also interesting how when travelingfrom either pole to the equator, UV exposure increases up to 5000% whereas ozone depletiononly increases UV exposure by 20%.
If UVB exposure and ozone depletion were the causeof skin cancer, those populations living closest to the equator would be diagnosed with malignantmelanoma at a phenomenal frequency.
The opposite is true.
Researchers have concluded that UVA exposurehas not contributed to the rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past 30 years.
UVA makesup 90 percent of the ultraviolet light spectrum of sunlight.
�Our data refute the only direct evidencethat UVA causes melanoma, which is not to say that UVA is harmless,� said the study�slead author David Mitchell, Ph.
, professor in M.
Anderson�s Department of Carcinogenesislocated at its Science Park � Research Division in Smithville, Texas.
�UVA is just not asdangerous as we thought because it doesn�t cause melanoma.
� Both UVA and UVB can cause tanning and burning,although UVB does so far more rapidly.
UVA, however, penetrates your skin more deeplythan UVB.
UVB appears to be protective against melanoma� or rather, the vitamin D your body produces in response to UVB radiation is protective.
Vitamin D Shuts Down Cancer The study in PLOS ONE reinforces links betweenvitamin D status and rates of breast, lung and bladder cancer first made in the 1980s.
There are well over 800 references in themedical literature showing vitamin D�s effectiveness�both for the prevention and treatment of cancer.
Findings from this analysis could help shapehealthcare guidelines by placing vitamin D status as a key and primary prevention tool,while promoting more responsible advice on adequate sun exposure.
Information gleamed from this study couldalso form a basis for primary prevention to slow or reverse upward trends in cancer incidence,treatment burden, mortality, and associated costs.
�Almost every disease decreases in frequencyand duration as we move towards equatorial populations, and the data shows that thereis a minimum of a 1000 percent increase for many diseases in countries furthest from theequator, however we have obtained the same results based on data through populationsand vitamin D supplementation,� said Dr.
Anthony Petaku who studies the effects ofVitamin D2 and D3 on mutating cells.
There were 14 million new cases of cancerworldwide in 2012 and 8.
2 million cancer-related deaths.
In the years ahead, the annual numberof new cases is projected to increase to 22 million within the next two decades.
The objective for researchers at the Universityof California, San Diego School of Medicine, was to determine what blood level of vitaminD was required to effectively reduce cancer risk.
The team were specifically looking for 25-hydroxyvitaminD, the main form of vitamin D in the blood, as a marker for vitamin D levels.
Following an unusual approach, the team combineddata from two previous studies.
One was a randomised clinical trial of 1,169 women (Lappetrial cohort) and the other was a prospective cohort study of 1,135 women (GrassrootsHealthcohort).
By combining the two studies, the researcherswere able to work from a larger sample size and a greater range of blood serum levelsof 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D).
It is generally accepted that the most accuratemeasure of vitamin D levels in a person is a blood test.
In the Lappe trial cohort, themedian blood serum level of 25(OH)D was 30 nanograms (ng) per millilitre (ml).
In theGrassrootsHealth prospective cohort, it was higher: 48 ng/ml.
In drawing conclusions, the team found thatthe age-adjusted cancer incidence was 1,020 cases per 100,000 person-years in the Lappecohort and 722 per 100,000 person-years in the GrassrootsHealth cohort.
In other words, rates of cancer declined withincreased 25(OH)D levels.
Females with 25(OH)D concentrations of 40 ng/ml or greater hada 67% lower risk of cancer than women with levels of 20 ng/ml or less.
�These findings support an inverse associationbetween 25(OH)D and risk of cancer,� said Dr Cedric Garland, adjunct professor in theUC San Diego School of Medicine Department of Family Medicine and Public Health and memberof Moores Cancer Center at UC San Diego Health.
�It highlights the importance for cancerprevention of achieving a vitamin D blood serum concentration above 20 ng/ml, the concentrationrecommended by the Institute of Medicine for bone health.
� In a recent study, author Dr Hui Wang, said:�The results suggest vitamin D may influence the prognosis for people with breast cancer,colorectal cancer and lymphoma, in particular.
� The meta-analysis, published in the Journalof Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, included 25 studies and 17,332 cancer patients.
Inthe majority of the research included the patients were tested for vitamin D levelsbefore undergoing any cancer treatment.
The researchers from Shanghai�s Institute forNutritional Sciences and other Chinese universities and institutions found a ten nanomole/liter(nmol/L) increase in vitamin D levels correlated with an increased survival rate of 4% Strong Vitamin D Cases The results suggest the importance of vitaminD for the prevention of cancer and are supported by a number of additional studies that havealso found a similar reduction in risk for individual cancers.
One study demonstrated in a hospital-basedcase control study that women with serum concentrations of more than 60 ng/ml had an 83% reductionin breast cancer risk compared to women with concentrations less than 20 ng/ml.
A population-based case control study founda 63% lower risk of breast cancer for women with 25(OH)D concentrations of 30 ng/ml comparedto women with concentrations of less than 20 ng/ml, with a 71% lower risk among post-menopausalwomen.
A recent nested case-control study found a55% lower risk of colorectal cancer in women with 25(OH)D concentrations 29 ng/ml comparedto women with concentrations of less than 18 ng/ml.
The wealth of studies has made recommendingan optimum blood serum level of vitamin D difficult to establish.
In 2010, the IOM concluded that levels lowerthan 12ng/ml represented a vitamin D deficiency and recommended a target of 20 ng/ml.
Otherregulatory bodies have argued for higher blood serum levels of 50 ng/ml or more.
Many vitamin D supporters now advocate 800to 1,000 International Units of vitamin D (IUs) daily (800-100 micrograms); more forpersons older than 70 and pregnant or lactating women.
Garland did not identify a singular, optimumdaily intake of vitamin D or the manner of intake, which may be sunlight exposure, dietand/or supplementation.
He stated that the current study clarifiedthat reduced cancer risk became measurable at 40 ng/ml, with additional benefit at higherlevels.
Sun Exposure Consistently Associated withDecrease in Four Major Cancers A 2009 study published in the European Journalof Cancer Prevention, entitled Sunlight, vitamin D and the prevention of cancer: a systematicreview of epidemiological studies, concluded that while vitamin D levels/supplementationwas only consistently associated with a decrease in colon cancer, sun exposure was consistentlyassociated with a decrease in all four cancer types including four cancer types: breast,colon, prostate and lymphoma.
Sunlight and latitude studies: 77.
1% showsignificant correlation.
Vitamin D level studies: 63.
4% show significantcorrelation.
Diet or supplementation studies: 47.
4% showsignificant correlation.
Exposure to sunlight and vitamin D has beenshown to effectively deal with toxins including medications.
A study from the Swedish medicaluniversity Karolinska Institutet has shown that the body�s ability to break down medicinesmay be closely related to exposure to sunlight, and thus may vary with the seasons.
Making vitamin D through sun exposure is thenatural way to maintain D levels as shown through hundreds of thousands of years ofhuman history.
To make vitamin D, you need UV-B rays to comeinto direct contact with your skin.
UV-B rays cannot penetrate glass, so you don�t makeany vitamin D while you�re sitting in a car or by a window at work or at home.
But creating enough vitamin D in your bodyisn�t as simple as getting a certain number of minutes of sunlight exposure every daybecause the number and intensity of UV-B rays that reach your skin and lead to vitamin Dproduction is affected by a number of different factors, the main ones being: 1.
Your skin color: Lighter skin color allowsdeeper penetration by UV-B rays, which decreases the amount of sunlight exposure needed foradequate vitamin D production.
If you have darker skin, it�s harder for UV-B rays topenetrate your skin and create vitamin D, which means that you need greater exposureto sunlight than someone with lighter skin.
Season: If you live above 35 degrees latitudenorth or below 35 degrees latitude south, you receive little to no UV-B rays from somepoint in autumn to some point in spring.
During this time, your body has to rely on the vitaminD that it has created during warmer months, or on intake of vitamin D through food andsupplements.
Altitude and latitude: The further northor south you live from the equator, the less exposure you have to UV-B rays.
The higheryou live above sea level, the greater exposure you have to UV-B rays.
Pollution and clouds: Both decrease thenumber of UV-B rays that reach you.
Your age: With each passing year, naturaldegenerative changes that occur in your skin make it harder for UV-B rays to convert cholesterolin your skin into vitamin D.
It�s a known fact that elderly people need to rely moreon food sources than sunlight for their vitamin D.
At 70 years of age, the average personhas approximately 30% of the capacity to generate vitamin D from sunlight that a 20-year old has.