Uncategorized

sun exposure stops sepsis

Sepsis, anyone? Soak up some sun!

Sepsis and septicemia, major killers that associate with sun deprivation. By Marc Sorenson, EdD

Sepsis facts:

Sepsis is an infection of tissues by bacteria, and septicemia is a form of sepsis that infects the blood. Septicemia is a severe and often deadly blood infection. Noxious bacteria attack tissue or blood, and when they die or when their cell walls rupture, they release poison (endotoxin). So, these dying organisms may do more harm than the bacterial attack itself. In addition, the disease accounts for 500,000 emergency-room hospital visits per year in the USA. And, it is followed by a typical stay of 6 to 9 days.[1] As a result, it is one of the worst medical conditions. And, it often results in multiple organ failure and death. There are about 750,000 cases per year, and about 3% of all hospital admissions result in a case of sepsis. Read more.

Sepsis and hospitals

Hospitals are hotbeds of antibiotic-resistant “superbugs” and other infectious agents. In cases of severe sepsis, antibiotics have not improved survival. In fact, antibiotics may produce molecules that exacerbate sepsis.[2] Therefore, the health system must urgently find and implement non-antibiotic solutions to this crisis.

Also, it should be remembered that sunlight is said to be the best disinfectant.[3] The annual cost of care for sepsis is about $17 billion. And, in the case of severe sepsis, antibiotics have not improved survival. In fact, it is especially relevant that antibiotics may produce molecules that exacerbate it.[4] Sepsis is one of the top-ten causes of death and the second leading cause of hospital-associated deaths. So only coronary intensive care units end up having more deaths. In North America, sepsis and its related disorders kill more hospitalized people than heart attacks, colon cancer, breast cancer or AIDS.

Dr. William B. Grant’s research with sepsis and septicemia.

Dr. William Grant hypothesized that vitamin D deficiency, due to inadequate sun exposure, is a risk factor. That is true for both sepsis and septicemia.[5] He points out that septicemia incidence is also highest in winter and lowest in the autumn. Another point is that rates are highest in the Northeast (low sunlight) and lowest in the Southwest (high sunlight).[6] Therefore, all of this leads to the idea that sun deficiency is a major cause this disorder.

Safe, non-burning sunlight, the great healer

Consequently, sun deficiency could play a strong causal role in the disease, since deficiency inhibits the production of cathelicidins. Cathelicidins are antimicrobial peptides which facilitate the destruction of pathogenic germs’ cell walls, leading to their death. In addition, these peptides also help inactivate the endotoxins released as a result of that destruction.[7], [8], [9]

Stay well and thereby avoid hospitals (and sepsis).

Finally, it would be best to avoid hospitals and their superbugs. The formula? Obtain some regular, non-screened, non-burning sunlight around noon when available. Happy sunning! And be sure to read my new book, Embrace the Sun.


[1] http://www.summitmedicalgroup.com/library/adult_care/ac-sepsis_dx/

[2] Mookherjee N, Rehaume LM, Hancock RE. Cathelicidins and functional analogues as antisepsis molecules. Expert Opinions on Therapeutic Targets 2007;11:993-1004

[3]http://sunlightinstitute.org/tag/sepsis/.

[4] Mookherjee N, Rehaume LM, Hancock RE. Cathelicidins and functional analogues as antisepsis molecules. Expert Opinions on Therapeutic Targets 2007;11:993-1004.

[5] Grant, WB. Solar ultraviolet-B irradiance and vitamin D  reduce the risk of septicemia. Dermatoendocrinol 2009;1:37-42.

[6] Danai PA, Sinha S, Moss M, Haber MJ, Martin GS. Seasonal variation in the epidemiology of sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:410–15.

[7] Giacometti A, Cirioni O, Ghiselli R, Mocchegiani F, D’Amato G, Circo R, Orlando F, Skerlavaj B, Silvestri C, Saba V, Zanetti M, Scalise G. Cathelicidin peptide sheep myeloid antimicrobial peptide-29 prevents endotoxin-induced mortality in rat models of septic shock. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;169:187-94.

[8] Giacometti A, Cirioni O, Ghiselli R, Bergnach C, Orlando F, D’Amato G, Mocchegiani F, Silvestri C, Del Prete MS, Skerlavaj B, Saba V, Zanetti M, Scalise G. The antimicrobial peptide BMAP-28 reduces lethality in mouse models of staphylococcal sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:2485–90.

[9] Cirioni O, Giacometti A, Ghiselli R, Bergnach C, Orlando F, Silvestri C, Mocchegiani F, Licci A, Skerlavaj B, Rocchi M, Saba V, Zanetti M, Scalise G. LL-37 protects rats against lethal sepsis caused by gram-negative bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50:1672–9

Read More

Melanoma risk: Sun exposure prevents it!

Melanoma risk is prevented by sun exposure. Case closed! -By Marc Sorenson, EdD

Melanoma risk between persons with high and low vitamin D levels

Melanoma risk is probably the most misunderstood topic in medicine. I recently wrote about the inverse association between vitamin D and melanoma. But I finally decided that my case had insufficient passion and surety. Consequently, I decided to write this addition and provide some new and restated information.

Melanoma risk is directly associated with low levels of vitamin D. That is the conclusion of recent study published in the European Journal of Cancer.[1] The investigators measured the blood vitamin D levels of 137 subjects who had been diagnosed with melanoma. They collected the blood samples at the time of diagnosis of the disease. Another group of 99 healthy subjects served as the control group. The investigators collected the samples of the control group between October and April. The scientists then compared the blood collections of the melanoma group with those of the control group. They then determined whether vitamin D levels had an association with melanoma risk.

The study produced convincing results regarding vitamin D and melanoma risk.

The results were as follows:

  1. The controls (no melanoma) had vitamin D levels 50% higher than the melanoma group (27.8 ng/ml vs. 18 ng/ml).
  2. 66.2% of the melanoma group had vitamin D “deficiency,” compared to only 15.2% of the health controls. The scientists defined vitamin D deficiency as being equal to or less than 20 ng/ml. So, the melanoma group had more than four-times the risk of deficiency.
  3. The scientists defined vitamin D “sufficiency” as being equal to or greater than 30 ng/ml. They found that only 7.4% of melanoma patients were sufficient, compared to 37.4% of healthy controls. Hence, the melanoma group had about one-fifth the likelihood of having sufficient D levels.

More scientific analysis on vitamin D measurements vs. melanoma risk

The scientists then adjusted the data for possible confounding factors such as age, sex and body mass. Then, they performed an analysis that showed the following:

  1. First of all, a significant inverse association was demonstrated with vitamin D sufficiency versus deficiency. Those who had sufficient levels had only 4% of the melanoma risk when compared to those who were deficient! Hence, this would indicate that those with the lowest vitamin D levels (after adjusting for confounding factors) had 25-times the melanoma risk!
  2. And, vitamin D insufficiency vs. deficiency was significantly inversely associated with melanoma. Those who were insufficient had a definite advantage over those who were deficient. They had only 13% of the melanoma risk.

Now, let’s get to the most important point about melanoma risk:

In addition, this research proves conclusively that sun deprivation is a major cause of melanoma. Therefore, vitamin D levels are surrogate measurements for sun exposure in nearly every case. And why do I say than this research conclusively proves that sun exposure reduces melanoma risk? Because about 90% of serum vitamin D is produced by sun exposure to the skin.[2] So, the aforementioned research is really research on sun exposure. It indicates that regular sun exposure leads to a profoundly higher vitamin D levels and therefore a profoundly reduced melanoma risk. So, let’s restate the facts about vitamin D, sunlight and melanoma.

  • First of all, sunlight exposure to skin produces 90% of the vitamin D levels in the public.
  • Secondly, the higher the vitamin D levels, the lower is the risk of melanoma.
  • Therefore, high sun exposure reduces melanoma risk.
  • Case closed!

Nevertheless, there is more corroborating evidence for the case.

In addition, here are a few more facts indicative of sun exposure’s protective effect against melanoma risk: 

  1. Another supporting fact: 75% of melanomas occur on body areas that are seldom if never exposed to sunlight.[3]
  2. In addition, sun exposure decreased by 90% since 1935, while melanoma increased by 3,000%.[4]
  3. Also, in the past four decades, melanoma has increased 400% while sunscreen use also increased 400%.[5]
  4. Furthermore, sunburn is said to increase melanoma risk. And recent research shows that sunscreen use increases the risk of sunburn from 300-600%.[6]

Could sunlight reduce melanoma through photoproducts beyond vitamin D?

In conclusion: In my new book, Embrace the Sun (coauthored by Dr. William Grant), we note that sun exposure provides more than vitamin D. It also provides other photoproducts such as nitric oxide, serotonin, endorphin, and brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF). All of these photoproducts are vital to human health. Could these photoproducts have a positive and protective effect against melanoma risk beyond vitamin D? And, who is to say that the vitamin D produced by sunlight is not superior to that given in pill form?

Finally, this research gives us one more reason to embrace the sun safely without burning. And who would have thought that safe sunlight could be one of the best prophylactics against melanoma risk?

Happy sunning! Do not burn.

The book is available at Amazon:  https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Sorenson/dp/069207600X


[1] Cattaruzza MS, Pisani D, Fidanza L, Gandini S, Marmo G, Narcisi A, Bartolazzi A, Carlesimo M. 25-Hydroxyvitamin D serum levels and melanoma risk: a case-control study and evidence synthesis of clinical epidemiological studies. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2018 Feb 12. [Epub ahead of print]

[2] Reichrath J. The challenge resulting from positive and negative effects of sun: how much solar UV exposure is appropriate to balance between risks of vitamin D deficiency and skin cancer? Prog Biophys Mol Biol 2006;92(1):9-16

[3] Crombie IK. Distribution of malignant melanoma on the body surface.Br J Cancer. 1981 Jun;43(6):842-9.

[4] Melanoma International Foundation, 2007 Facts about melanoma. Sources: National Cancer Institute 2007 SEER Database, American Cancer Society’s 2007 Facts and Figures, The Skin Cancer Foundation, The American Academy of Dermatology.

[5] Joseph C DiNardo and Craig A Downs. Should We Use Products Containing Chemical UV Absorbing Sunscreen Actives on Children? Clin Dermatol Res J 2019, 4:1.

[6] Kasey L. Morris, PhD; Frank M. Perna, EdD, PhD. Decision Tree Model vs Traditional Measures to Identify Patterns of Sun-Protective Behaviors and Sun Sensitivity Associated With Sunburn. JAMA Dermatol. Published online June 27, 2018.

Read More
Sunlight fighting liver cancer

Chemical sunscreen for skin protection? No!

Chemical sunscreen is toxic and hazardous. By Marc Sorenson, EdD

Chemical sunscreen has been mentioned in new medical and scientific papers lately, and the research is alarming. Yet, many governments and medical associations have not gotten the message. Consequently, I lately blogged about the idea being promoted in Australia and New Zealand, that sunscreen use is absolutely indispensable. Due to this promotion, a major Australian newspaper stated, “Make it like brushing your teeth.” That seems like a terrific slogan to line the pockets of chemical sunscreen manufacturers, no? But, it is most noteworthy that sunscreen use may lead to disability and even death.

A dermatology journal study takes chemical sunscreens to task.

But maybe the dermatology profession is starting to catch on. And Surprisingly, one of the best treatises on chemical sunscreen was written by dermatologists. It is rather interesting that they were strongly questioning the wisdom of chemical sunscreens. Furthermore, the study was published by the Clinical Dermatology Research Journal and was entitled, Should We Use Products Containing Chemical UV Absorbing Sunscreen Actives on Children?[1] This is amazing, because most dermatologists are loath to say anything about sunscreen that is not positive.

The salient points on chemical sunscreens from this research paper:

  • A 2018 report from the American Cancer Society demonstrated the following: after 40 years of sunscreen use (1975-2014) melanoma increased 4 fold in men and 3 fold in women. (So how does that information lead to the usual mantra that we should always be covered in sunscreen?)
  • Also, all six sunscreen chemicals (chemical UV absorbers) considered in this paper are known to be endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). And oxybenzone, one of the worst offenders, has been shown to cause a significant decrease in sperm density. (Since sperm counts have dropped rapidly in the past few decades among men, could it be due to chemical sunscreen use?)

More facts about chemical sunscreens:

  • Also, environmental exposure to chemical sunscreen in adolescent boys (ages 12-19) was associated with significantly lower total serum testosterone. Therefore, these chemicals would, as mentioned, produce lower sperm density.
  • In addition, chemical sunscreen passes through human skin. (About 8% of Oxybenzone finds its way through the skin. It seems like using these noxious products is something most of us would want to avoid!)

Other research on chemical sunscreens that may interest you:

Another important study demonstrates that chemical sunscreen does not help prevent melanoma, and, it could be a cause. [2] Rather surprising, no? Most of all, the researchers’ goal was to determine the efficacy of sunscreens in preventing melanoma. Hence, they compared melanoma rates with sales in 24 countries in Europe, during the period of 1997-1999 to 2008 and 2012. They thus found that higher income people had significantly higher melanoma incidence. And, increased use of chemical sunscreens had not prevented higher income populations from being at higher risk of melanoma. Consequently, we see this equation: Higher sunscreen use=higher melanoma risk and therefore higher melanoma death risk!

But does chemical sunscreen prevent skin cancer?

So, the following research probably deflated the egos of chemical sunscreen manufacturers. A meta-analysis of 20 studies showed what many probably not expect. Because, both melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers were not prevented by chemical sunscreens.[3] It is especially relevant that they were associated with a slight increase in risk, though this increase was not considered significant. We could probably say, from the information presented, that sunscreens are worthless at best, and dangerous at worst. So, who benefits?  The manufacturers and distributors. And who suffers? The people, because they use the noxious products.

Does chemical sunscreen even prevent sunburns?

And now, another recent scientific study corroborates this conclusion (worthless at best, dangerous at worst) regarding chemical sunscreen.[4]  The authors expected a different outcome—an outcome exactly opposite of what they found. The goal was to discover which sun-protection behavior was most effective in preventing sunburn. Hence, they designed a cross-sectional investigation using a nationally representative sample of about 32,000 US adults.

Excellent research method on chemical sunscreens

The researchers interviewed each participant, and they did it in person. This is especially relevant when attempting to achieve the most accurate results possible. We can conclude, therefore, that their findings regarding sunscreen use and other “sun-protective” behaviors have validity. The measured behaviors (beyond sunscreen use) were seeking shade, wearing a hat or visor, and wearing long sleeves and/or pants.

Results of the sunburn and chemical sunscreen study.

In addition, the researchers identified the subjects as sun-sensitive individuals or non-sun-sensitive individuals. Fifty-four percent of the subjects were women, and 15,992 of all individuals were considered sun-sensitive (fair skinned).  Those who used only sunscreen had the highest sunburn likelihood (62.4%). The group with lowest likelihood of sunburn did not use chemical sunscreen but engaged in the other protective behaviors (24.3% sunburned). 

A surprising conclusion that using chemical sunscreens was the worst choice!

In addition, among 12,566 non–sun-sensitive individuals, those engaged in all 4 protective behaviors had the lowest sunburn risk (6.6%). The highest likelihood of sunburn was among those who only used sunscreen (26.2%). Dr. Kasey Morris, the study leader, was stunned. She made the following statement: “The most surprising and counterintuitive finding was that regular sunscreen use, in the absence of other protective behaviors, was associated with the highest likelihood of sunburn.”[5]

The bottom line regarding chemical sunscreen and sunburns

So, you should now understand this fact: chemical sunscreen use associates closely with sunburning. [3] That fact has actually been known since 2014.[6] Therefore, sunscreen is not a good product. Of course, we should protect ourselves from overexposure to sunlight. But, we should do it the way God (or Mother Nature, if you prefer) intended it:  1. Cover up with clothing when you start to redden, 2. Seek shade. 3. Go indoors for awhile. And remember that good health depends on obtaining regular, non-burning sun exposure. Happy sunning!

Read more on sunscreens and toxicity in my new book, Embrace the Sun, available at Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Sorenson/dp/069207600X


[1] DiNardo JC and Downs CA, Should We Use Products Containing Chemical UV-Absorbing Sunscreen Actives on Children? Clin Dermatol Res J 2019, 4:1.

[2] Williams SN, Dienes KA. Sunscreen Sales, Socio-Economic Factors, and Melanoma Incidence in Northern Europe: A Population-Based Ecological Study. SAGE Open October-December 2014: 1–6.

[3] Elizabet saes da SILVA, Roberto TAVARES, Felipe da silva PAULITSCH, Linjie ZHANG. Eur J Dermatol 2018; 28(2): 186-201.

[4] Kasey L. Morris, PhD; Frank M. Perna, EdD, PhD. Decision Tree Model vs Traditional Measures to Identify Patterns of Sun-Protective Behaviors and Sun Sensitivity Associated With Sunburn. JAMA Dermatol. Published online June 27, 2018.

[5] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-sunburns/sun-sensitive-people-need-more-than-sunscreen-to-avoid-sunburn-idUSKBN1K02RB

[6] https://www.webmd.com/beauty/news/20110714/sunscreen-users-more-likely-burn#1

Read More
Embrace the sun sun stop sepsis

Kidney Cancer: is sunlight good and vitamin D bad?

Kidney cancer and sunlight. By Marc Sorenson, EdD

Kidney cancer is positively associated with vitamin D supplements—maybe.

There are 62,700 cases of kidney cancer and 14,240 deaths annually. Kidney cancer can be a killer, and maybe sunlight exposure can reduce its risk.  And, it is not vitamin D and kidney cancer, but sunlight and kidney cancer, which really piques my interest. I am an advocate of vitamin D and health if vitamin D is obtained from sun exposure to the skin. So today, I was alerted to an article that D supplements—in one subject—was associated with kidney cancer. Consequently, my mind immediately travelled to the book I wrote with William Grant: Embrace the sun.

Kidney cancer studies compiled in Embrace the Sun:

We referenced several studies, which determined that sun exposure reduced many cancers, including kidney cancer, by 35% to 42%.[1] Kidney cancer mortality rates were also found to be strongly inversely correlated with sunshine doses in Dr. Grant’s studies.[2], [3]

Kidney cancer, sunlight and women

Recent research has also demonstrated that high levels of sun exposure in women significantly reduces kidney cancer.[4] Those women with the highest fourth of sun exposure showed a 33% reduction in risk. Interestingly, the data was adjusted for vitamin D intake, and the results still showed sun exposure to have a stand-alone protective influence on kidney cancer—another indication that sun exposure has protective effects beyond the benefits of vitamin D.

Other studies on kidney cancer, using different designs, have produced comparable effects: A study of Swedish construction workers showed a significant 30% decrease in risk among men with the highest sun exposure.

Why would vitamin D supplementation be a negative for kidney cancer?

So why would vitamin D supplementation have deleterious effects on kidney cancer, when sunlight appears to have such salubrious effects on kidney cancer? First of all, one person does not research make! Secondly, the doses of vitamin D were also quite high, 8,000-12-000 IU per day. Thirdly, the vitamin was not produced by the sun, meaning that the subject’s kidney were not protected by the whole gamut of sun-stimulated photoproducts such as nitric oxide, serotonin, endorphin, dopamine, brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) and many others that we have yet to discover.

Summary:

All of the sun’s photoproducts have a place in the choir. Sun exposure should be used holistically. I have been beating that drum for some time. One cannot take a vitamin D pill and hope to achieve all the health benefits of whole-sun exposure.

It is also imperative to understand that toxic levels of vitamin D are not produced by sun. The body self-regulates vitamin D levels when they are produced in the skin by sun exposure. Sunlight is vital to human life. Be sure to get your share of non-burning, safe sunlight and protect yourself from kidney cancer. And while you are sunning, be sure to read the book, Embrace the Sun. And for more information on Kidney cancer, sunlight and vitamin D visit Sunlight institute.


[1] Tuohimaa P, Pukkala E, Scélo G, Olsen JH, Brewster DH, Hemminki K, Tracey E, Weiderpass E, Kliewer EV, Pompe-Kirn V, McBride ML, Martos C, Chia KS, Tonita JM, Jonasson JG, Boffetta P, Brennan P. Does solar exposure, as indicated by the non-melanoma skin cancers, protect from solid cancers: vitamin D as a possible explanation. Eur J Cancer 2007;43(11):1701-12

[2] Grant WB. An estimate of premature cancer mortality in the US due to inadequate doses of solar ultraviolet-B radiation. Cancer. 2002 Mar 15;94(6):1867-75.

[3] Grant WB, Garland CF. The association of solar ultraviolet B (UVB) with reducing risk of cancer: multifactorial ecologic analysis of geographic variation in age-adjusted cancer mortality rates. Anticancer Res. 2006 Jul-Aug;26(4A):2687-99.

[4] Karami S, Colt JS, Stewart PA, Schwartz K, Davis FG, Ruterbusch JJ, Chow WH, Wacholder S, Graubard BI, Purdue MP, Moore LE. Short Report: A case-control study of occupational sun exposure and renal cancer risk. Int J Cancer. 2015 Oct 27.

Read More
Embrace the sun sun stop sepsis

Great outdoors, sun exposure and health.

The great outdoors, sun exposure and health. By Marc Sorenson, EdD.

The great outdoors, because of the sun, is magnificent! The UVB rays have returned to the sunshine in Saint George, Utah, and I have taken full advantage of them, sunbathing daily at midday. But In addition, the great outdoors furnishes so many advantages beyond our life-giving sunlight. Or does it? First of all, sunlight directly effects human health through stimulating the skin to produce photoproducts. Hence, such life-saving products as vitamin D, serotonin, endorphin, nitric oxide, dopamine and brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) are increased. Furthermore, none of the other attributes of the great outdoors, such as the greenery and animal life, would be possible without the sun.

Recent research on the great outdoors

A recent study analyzed most of the health research that has been done on the benefits of the great outdoors.[1] The title of the research was: The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. It was an analysis of 143 studies. The researchers showed impressive results from spending time in the great outdoors, especially the green great outdoors, known as greenspace.

Health expectations derived from enjoying the great outdoors:

  • A reduction in diastolic blood pressure
  • Decreased preterm birth risk
  • A reduction in type two diabetes risk
  • Decreased all-cause mortality
  • A reduced risk of small size for gestational age
  • Decreased risk of cardiovascular mortality
  • An increased incidence of self-reported health
  • Decreased incidence of stroke, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, asthma, and coronary heart disease
  • Decreased risk of neurological and cancer-related outcomes and respiratory mortality
  • Reduced negative emotions and fatigue

In addition, the authors noted that groups who exercised in the great outdoors had better health results. Indoor exercisers had results that were less than the outdoor exercisers. Thus, the great outdoors groups had significantly improved blood pressure, heart rate, fat percentage, BMI, cholesterol, depression and physical functioning.

While being in the great outdoors is exceptionally important to health, so is sunlight exposure. It is especially relevant that benefits enumerated for outdoor exposure are identical to those for regular, non-burning sun exposure. My new book, Embrace the Sun, delineates those healthful effects. It also cites research that indicates sun deprivation is as dangerous a cigarette smoking.[1]

Summary: Combine sun exposure with the great outdoors.

I opine that both safe sun exposure and exposure to the great outdoors, are vital to health. So, it is best not to neglect either. Happy sunning!


[1] Lindqvist PG, Epstein E, Nielsen K, Landin-Olsson M, Ingvar C, Olsson H. Avoidance of sun exposure as a risk factor for major causes of death: a competing risk analysis of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden cohort. J Intern Med. 2016 Oct;280(4):375-87.



[1] Caoimhe Twohig-Bennett, Andy Jones. The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environmental Research 166 (2018) 628–637.

[2] Lindqvist PG, Epstein E, Nielsen K, Landin-Olsson M, Ingvar C, Olsson H. Avoidance of sun exposure as a risk factor for major causes of death: a competing risk analysis of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden cohort. J Intern Med. 2016 Oct;280(4):375-87.

Read More

Bright sunlight and diabetes. Two ways to save your life!

Bright sunlight and diabetes by Marc Sorenson, EdD.

Bright sunlight is important for health. And for the purpose of this article, we are talking only about the effects of sunlight on type-two diabetes. Type-one diabetes will be mentioned only briefly and will require another article at a later date.

First of all, we will tell you what diabetes is, then we will explain its devastating consequences. Finally, we will explain the relationship between diabetes and bright sunlight.  So what is diabetes? It is a pernicious and deadly disease which is due to chronically high blood sugar levels.

What is type-one diabetes? Can bright sunlight help?

In addition, diabetes comes in two types: First of all, Type-one. It is usually due to an autoimmune response, which damages the insulin-producing islet cells of the pancreas. Thus, the production of insulin is reduced. Insulin is responsible for removing glucose from the blood and storing it in the cells. And without insulin, a person has type-one diabetes. Type one comprises about 5% of diabetes cases. And, sunlight may help this less-common type of diabetes. Hence, I would suggest that you read our new book, Embrace the Sun, for that information.

What is type-two diabetes? Can bright sunlight help?

Especially relevant is the fact that that type-two diabetes makes up about 95% of all diabetes cases. The disease is deadly and increasing so rapidly that it threatens to overwhelm our health-care system. For example, the health-care systems in the state of Minnesota is on the brink, because fully one-third of all adults are diabetic.[1] Amputations, heart disease, blindness and neuropathy are just a few of the deleterious effects of diabetes. Yet, this disease is the easiest of all degenerative diseases to reverse.

Bright sunlight is not the cure for diabetes, but it can help.

Bright sunlight is not the cure for diabetes, nor is lack of bright sunlight the cause. Nevertheless, bright sunlight can help us to prevent and reverse the disease. First of all, let’s state the real cause of diabetes: the consumption of junk foods filled with fat and sugar. What one eats is all important. Enough said. Let’s now talk about bright sunlight and diabetes for those who are not eating perfectly. And remember that bright sunlight is only an adjunct for prevention and cure.  

The research on bright sunlight and diabetes.

So how much does bright sunlight influence diabetes? According to recent research, “Increased bright sunlight exposure may be associated with a reduced risk for type 2 diabetes and heart disease by lowering blood insulin and lipid levels.”[2] The study showed that people who were exposed to bright sunlight had lower insulin levels and blood-sugar levels (good result). For every extra hour of bright sunlight exposure, insulin levels decreased by 1.27%. Those who were exposed to bright sunlight also had lower insulin resistance (-1.36%), better islet-cell function and lower triglycerides.

Other important research on bright sunlight exposure and diabetes.

Also, one paper showed that blood-sugar levels were lower during the summer, (there is more bright sunlight in summer).[3] Another demonstrated that exposure to sun lamps increased insulin secretion.[4]  [5]

Finally, recreational exposure to bright sunlight lowers risk of diabetes.

In addition, a meta-analysis produced moderate evidence that recreational sun exposure (more bright sunlight) is associated with a reduced risk.[6] Also, the study was undertaken because the researchers observed that higher vitamin D levels were consistently associated with lower diabetes risk. Yet, vitamin D3 supplementation was not associated with lower risk.  They hypothesized that sun exposure could have influences beyond vitamin D, and such seems to have been the case.

Another of the more important investigations showed that women who had active bright sunlight exposure had a 30% decrease in the risk of type-two diabetes.[7]

The bottom line is that bright sunlight can reduce the risk of type-two diabetes. Do your sunning in a non-burning, safe fashion. And remove the junk food from your life. Enjoy good health!

For more information, read my book, Embrace the Sun, and visit http://sunlightinstitute.org/protective-effect-sunlight-diabetes/

Love the sun and embrace it!
Fun in the sun. Embrace it!

[1] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/01/17/diabetes-part1

[2] Noordam R, Ramkisoensing A, Loh NY, Neville MJ, Rosendaal FR. Associations of outdoor temperature, bright sunlight and cardiometabolic traits in two European population-based cohorts. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Feb 12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Noordham+R+Associations+of+outdoor+temperature%2C+bright+sunlight

[3] Ishii H, Suzuki H, Baba T, Nakamura K, Watanabe T. Seasonal variation of glycemic control in type-2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 2001;24;1503.

[4] Colas C, Garabedian M, Fontbonne A, Guillozo H, Slama G, Desplanque N, Dauchy F, Tchobroutsky G. Insulin secretion and plasma 1,25(OH)2D after UV-B irradiation in healthy adults. Hormone and Metabolic Research 1988;21:154-155.

[5] Song Y, Wang L, Pittas AG, Del Gobbo LC, Zhang C, Manson JE, Hu FB. Blood 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels and incident type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Diabetes Care. 2013 ;36(5):1422-8.

[6] Shore-Lorenti C, Brennan SL, Sanders KM, Neale RE, Lucas RM, Ebeling PR. Shining the light on Sunshine: a systematic review of the influence of sun exposure on type 2 diabetes mellitus-related outcomes. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2014 Dec;81(6):799-811.

[7] Lindqvist PG, Olsson H, Landin-Olsson M. Are active sun exposure habits related to lowering risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in women, a prospective cohort study? Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010 Oct;90(1):109-14.

Read More

Love the sun because. Part one

Love the sun because. By Marc Sorenson, EdD

We should love the sun and embrace it in spite of the spate of negative publicity it has received.

Love the sun because it gives life to all things on earth.[1]love the sun for beauty and size

We should love the sun because it gives us light, warmth and energy to make all earthly systems work. And not only physical systems, but physiological systems. Love the sun because it furnishes important rays that enhance the health of human beings, and all other animals.

Love the sun due to its impressive size!

We should love the sun because of its incredible size and temperature. Here is some incredible information from the web site, Plane Facts: http://planetfacts.org/how-big-is-the-sun-compared-to-the-earth/  And “To put it simply, the Sun is as big as more than 1 million Earth masses put together. It is also 1,287,000 times bigger than a solitary Earth. The Sun has a diameter of 1,392,000 km (865,000 miles) while the Earth’s diameter is only 12,742 km (7,918 miles).”

Love the sun due to its impressive temperature!

The temperature of the sun varies: “The Sun’s surface is known as the photosphere and has a temperature of about 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit. And at the core of the sun, temperature can be as high as 27 million degrees.” That’s hot! So, it was a great idea to place it 93 million miles distant from Earth! However, comparing our sun and earth to other heavenly bodies, they are rather small. See this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4cEyCaldH4 But for us, they are everything!

More reasons to love the sun.

We should love the sun because its effulgent rays can reduce the risk of breast cancer by up to 90%.[2]

Love the sun because its warmth allows us to navigate our rivers, lakes and skies.

Men should love the sun because its light profoundly reduces the risk of prostate cancer.[3]

Love the sun, because its light on the skin of a child can prevent the terrible childhood disease, rickets.[4] And, it can assure that our children may lead normal lives. Hence, we should not deprive our children of safe sunlight

We should love the sun, because it gives us wind, rain, and chlorophyll to provide our food.

We should love the sun because it keeps us in rhythm. (That is, if we use it).

Love the sun because it can reset our circadian rhythms daily, make us feel alive, and reduce the risk of bipolar disorder.[5]

Love the sun because it can reduce the risk of Parkinson’s disease by 98%.[6]  http://sunlightinstitute.org/parkinsons-prevents-sun-exposure/

Love the sun because regular sun exposure reduces the risk of melanoma. Since 1935, melanoma has increased by 3,000%.[7] [8] While at the same time, sun exposure has decreased by 90%.[9] And the same has happened in Europe, where melanoma has dramatically increased among the wealthy class that uses sunscreen.[10]

Are there more reasons to love the sun and embrace it?

There are many more reasons to love the sun. Due to the onslaught of misinformation promulgated by the anti-sun industry, the sun is avoided and slandered. It is thought of as a carcinogen (cancer causer), and this fear of sun exposure has cost millions of lives.

In conclusion:

It is especially relevant that our mathematical calculation in the book, Embrace the Sun, shows a phenomenal fact. For every death from diseases associated with sunlight, there are 328 deaths associated with diseases at least partially due to sun deprivation.[11] Consequently, I must ask the question: Do you really believe you should avoid the sun? I hope not. You should love the sun and safely embrace it, because a healthy life and mood depend on its healthful rays. More reasons to love the sun will be presented in my next blog.

Read the web site and you will love the sun!

There are also more than 400 blogs that I’ve posted on my web site. Expand your knowledge of our glorious sun by reading them: http://sunlightinstitute.org/

Enjoy safe sunning while reading the book, Embrace the Sun, available at Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Love the sun and embrace it!Sorenson/dp/069207600X

References:

[1] Marc Sorenson and William Grant. Embrace the Sun 2018. Appendix 1, PP. 256-262.

[2] Bidgoli SA, Azarshab H. Role of vitamin D deficiency and lack of sun exposure in the incidence of premenopausal breast cancer: a case control study in Sabzevar, Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(8):3391-6

[3] Moon SJ, Fryer AA, Strange RC. Ultraviolet radiation: effects on risks of prostate cancer and other internal cancers. Mutat Res 2005;571(1-2):207-19.

[4] Alouf B, Grigalonis M. Incidental finding of vitamin-D deficient rickets in an otherwise healthy infant—a reappraisal of current vitamin-D supplementation guidelines. J Natl Med Assoc 2005;97:1170-73.

[5] Bauer M, Glenn T, Alda M, Andreassen OA, Angelopoulos E, Ardau R, Baethge C, Bauer R et al. Influence of light exposure during early life on the age of onset of bipolar disorder. J Psychiatr Res. 2015 ;64:1-8.

[6] Zhou Z, Zhou R, Zhang Z, Li K. The Association between Vitamin D Status, Vitamin D Supplementation, Sunlight Exposure, and Parkinson’s disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Med Sci Monit. 2019 Jan 23;25:666-674.

[7] Melanoma International Foundation, 2007 Facts about melanoma. Sources: National Cancer Institute 2007 SEER Database, American Cancer Society’s 2007 Facts and Figures, the Skin Cancer Foundation, the American Academy of Dermatology.

[8] American Cancer Society. Melanoma Skin Cancer Overview 9/16/2014. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/skincancer-melanoma/overviewguide/melanoma-skin-cancer-overview-key-statistics.

[9] Ian D. Wyatt and Daniel E. Hecker. Occupational changes in the 20th century. Monthly Labor Review, 2006 pp 35-57: Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

[10] Stephen J Merrill, Samira Ashrafi, Madhan Subramanian & Dianne E Godar. Exponentially increasing incidences of cutaneous malignant melanoma in Europe correlate with low personal annual UV doses and suggests 2 major risk Factors. Dermato-endocrinology 2015;7:1.

[11] Marc Sorenson and William Grant. Embrace the Sun 2018. P 65.

Read More

Parkinson’s disease and sunlight. A magnificent finding!

Parkinson's Embrace the SunParkinson’s disease prevented by sunlight. By Marc Sorenson, EdD

Parkinson's prevented by sun exposureParkinson’s disease is a common nerve disease, and it is caused by deterioration of brain cells that produce dopamine. It is characterized by tremors, muscle rigidity, shuffling gait, slow speech, and a mask-like facial expression. In addition, even simple movements may become difficult for the person suffering from the disease. And, the disease is a killer that takes the lives of 14,593 per year.[1] So how do we prevent it? In this blog, I will explain the disease, show what the research says about sunlight, and make recommendations for prevention.

Research points out that Sun exposure is the key to prevention of Parkinson’s disease.

Several studies have shown that there is a close association between sunlight exposure, blood Parkinson's prevented by sun exposurevitamin D levels and Parkinson’s. First of all, one paper showed that when vitamin D levels are low, there is a tripling of the risk.[2] Another study from China demonstrated that persons with highest levels of blood vitamin D had a 48% decrease in risk. And, that same research demonstrated that those receiving the greatest sun exposure had about a 47% decrease in risk.[3] So, based on those findings, one might think that vitamin D supplements could prevent the disease. Yet, that thought is erroneous. Sun exposure is the direct key for preventing this debilitating disease.

Vitamin D supplements do not stop Parkinson’s, so how can that be?

Recent research, a systematic review and meta-analysis, is most noteworthy. And it explains this interesting paradox.[4] It showed that sun exposure was significantly associated with a reduced risk of Parkinson’s. Especially relevant is the fact that those persons with plenty of sun exposure had only 1/50 the risk of Parkinson’s. That is an astounding figure! However, although vitamin D supplements were effective in raising vitamin D levels, they had no significant benefits for Parkinson’s disease.

Vitamin D and sun exposure are not the same.

While sun exposure and supplements both raise vitamin D levels, supplements are no help to Parkinson’s sufferers. Hence, we must look beyond vitamin D for an answer. Sun exposure leads to the production of vitamin D, but it also leads to the production of dopamine. Dopamine, as previously mentioned, is a vital chemical for the brain as regards Parkinson’s. Vitamin D is a marvelous, vital photoproduct and is due to sun exposure. It is vital for human health. However, it appears that vitamin D does nothing for Parkinson’s. Most of all, we must remember that sun exposure produces many essential photoproducts beyond vitamin D.

Vitamin D blood levels, in the case of Parkinson’s and some other diseases, are simply surrogate measurements of sun exposure. We simply cannot substitute a vitamin D pill for sun exposure and expect to reap all the benefits of sunlight. The “holistic” sun will never be supplanted by a capsule. The sun stimulates the production of vitamin D, dopamine, nitric oxide, serotonin, endorphins, brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) and other photoproducts. And, all of these photoproducts play their roles in human health. For some diseases, vitamin D is vital for prevention. In others such as Parkinson’s, it is just along for the ride.

The takeaway regarding sun exposure and Parkinson’s.

To help prevent this disease, be sure to obtain plenty of non-burning sunlight. And In lieu of that, when there is no sunlight available, use a low-pressure sunbed (tanning bed) in a salon. Always remember not to burn. For more information, read my new book, Embrace the Sun, available at Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Sorenson/dp/069207600X Parkinson's Embrace the Sun

Happy sunning!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] ttps://www.rightdiagnosis.com/p/parkinsons_disease/deaths.htm

[2] Knekt P, Kilkkinen A, Rissanen H, Marniemi J, Sääksjärvi K, Heliövaara M. Serum vitamin D and the risk of Parkinson disease. Arch Neurol. 2010 Jul;67(7):808-11.

[3] Wang J, Yang D, Yu Y, Shao G. Wang Q. Vitamin D and Sunlight Exposure in Newly-Diagnosed Parkinson’s Disease. Nutrients 2016;8:142.

[4] Zhou Z, Zhou R, Zhang Z, Li K. The Association between Vitamin D Status, Vitamin D Supplementation, Sunlight Exposure, and Parkinson’s disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Med Sci Monit. 2019 Jan 23;25:666-674.

 

Read More

Sunscreens and toothpaste? Please, no!

Sunscreens are not toothpaste. By Marc Sorenson, EdD.Beware the sunscreens

Sunscreens, in Australia and New Zealand, are being touted as absolutely indispensable to prevent of skin cancer. And, this has been the mantra for decades. So, experts from the two countries convened to obtain opinions and produce a statement regarding use of sunscreens.[1] Much as I expected, they concluded people should apply sunscreen daily when the UV index reaches 3. And for much of Australia, that means every day.

Thus, as a result of this declaration, a major Australian newspaper weighed in. They stated “Make it like brushing your teeth:”[2] https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/make-it-like-brushing-your-teeth-experts-urge-daily-sunscreen-use-20190124-p50thn.html.  Rather convenient for those who produce sunscreens, no? If this advice is taken to heart by the people, sunscreen manufacturers and their stockholders will make a fortune. However, I guarantee that the people will suffer.

Increasing use of sunscreens and skin cancer through Slip, Slop, Slap.

It is especially relevant that Australians have been using a campaign called Slip, Slop Slap for decades. The campaign pushes everyone to avoid the sun and use sunscreens. And, according to Cancer Council Australia (the biggest manufacturer of sunscreens in Australia and New Zealand), it is remarkably effective.[3] Thus they state, “The Slip Slop Slap slogan has become institutionalized as the core message of Cancer Council’s SunSmart program.” And, they say the campaign has played a key role in the shift in sun protection behavior over two decades. (The program has actually been used for about three decades.) Because of this program, Australians and New Zealanders use more sunscreens than any other countries on earth, and the use of sunscreens continues to rise. But as a result of this sunscreen use, has skin cancer diminished?

How are the sunscreens promotions working for the health of the Australian people?

First of all, this is not new information; it has been known for decades. Dr. David Myers, a dermatologist, thus wrote an article that contains this statement: “The Australian experience provides the first clue. The rise in melanoma has been exceptionally high in Queensland where the medical establishment has long and vigorously promoted the use of sunscreens. Queensland now has more incidence of melanoma per capita than any other place. Worldwide, the greatest rise in melanoma has been experienced in countries where chemical sunscreen have been heavily promoted.”[4] [5]

And Dr. Cedric Garland echoed that statement, saying that Queensland, Australia has vigorously promoted sunscreens for decades. And he also says that Queensland now has one of highest rates of melanoma in the world.[6] [In addition, the rate of vitamin D deficiency there is becoming critical.[7]]Sunscreens lead to melanoma?

Does the Australian sunscreen declaration run up against some inconvenient truths?

So, we have a declaration suggesting that we should use sunscreens regularly like toothpaste.  The declaration obviously implies that sunscreens are protective against skin cancer in Australia. It is hard to explain that conclusion. Why? Because the long-term, exponentially increasing use of sunscreens has been accompanied by an exponential increase in skin-cancer incidence. Therefore, if sunscreens are protective against skin cancer, there is something very wrong with that history.

And, unfortunately, skin cancer also continues to rise. Hence, Australia and New Zealand have more skin cancer than any other country on earth.[8] [9] It seems like this emphasis on sunscreens has not worked. So we come up with this new formula. More use of sunscreens over the years=higher risk of skin cancer. And, it appears that they want to continue using this formula!

But of course, the “experts’” solution is to ignore the historical facts and promote the use of more sunscreens. It seems like these people have not heard the old saying: “Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results, is the definition of insanity.” So, shall we be as dedicated to sun screen use as we are to brushing our teeth?  Shall we make the use of sunscreens like the use of toothpaste? I have a secret for the people who promote sunscreens: Sunscreens are nothing like toothpaste, because toothpaste may actually accomplish something.

Should North America adopt this Australian recommendation of daily use?

First of all, according to the main research used for this recommendation, the answer is a big NO. One of the Australian researchers, Adele Green, made this statement:  “Although the results are directly relevant to people who live in sunny climates like Australia’s and who receive relatively high levels of ambient sun exposure as a matter of course, they also have implications for white people living in temperate climates in North America and Europe who are at increased risk of melanoma because of increased solar UV exposure caused by the predilection for holidays in sunny places.” So they are saying sunscreens are NOT required unless on sunny holidays or if you have a sunburning risk. This doesn’t sound like a recommendation for daily use in North America. And, as European research demonstrated, it is certainly not a useful recommendation for Europe. (See the heading below regarding Europe.)

North American research on sunscreens and skin cancer

Another piece of research[10] looked at sunscreen use in North America and stated the following; “In contrast, for people who live at higher latitudes where UV radiation is weaker and less constant, regular sunscreen use may provide less protection against skin cancer, or even increase the risk of carcinogenesis.” The paper goes on to say “While the current evidence suggests no increased risk of skin cancer related to sunscreen, this systematic review and meta-analysis does not confirm the expected protective benefits of sunscreen use against skin cancer in the general population.” So again, this is NOT a recommendation for daily use of sunscreens. And, it indicates they may do more harm than good.

Are sunscreens counterproductive?

So it appears, based on what has been written so far, that sunscreens may be worthless at best and dangerous at worst. Another recent scientific study on sunscreens and sunburns corroborates this conclusion.[11] The authors of this study expected an outcome opposite of the facts. The goal was to discover which sun-protection behavior, including use of sunscreens, was most effective in preventing sunburn. Hence, they designed a cross-sectional investigation using a nationally representative sample of about 32,000 U.S. adults. And, those conducting the research interviewed each participant in person. This is especially relevant when attempting to achieve the most accurate results possible. We can conclude, therefore, that their findings regarding sunscreen use and other “sun-protective” behaviors have validity. Those other sun-protective behaviors included seeking shade, wearing a hat or visor, and wearing long sleeves and pants.

Sunscreens and sunburn results

In addition, the subjects were identified as sun-sensitive individuals or non-sun-sensitive individuals. Fifty-four percent of the subjects were women, and 15,992 of all individuals were considered sun-sensitive. It is most noteworthy that among sun-sensitive individuals, those who used only sunscreens had the highest sunburn likelihood (62.4%). The group with lowest likelihood of sunburn did not use sunscreens but engaged in the other protective behaviors (24.3% sunburned). In addition, among 12,566 non–sun-sensitive individuals, those engaged in all 4 protective behaviors had the lowest sunburn risk (6.6%). And in that group, the highest likelihood of sunburn was among those who only used sunscreen (26.2%). According to Dr. Kasey Morris, who led the study, “the most surprising and counterintuitive finding was that regular sunscreen use, in the absence of other protective behaviors, was associated with the highest likelihood of sunburn.”[12] 

What do dermatologists believe about sunscreen and sunburn?

I have never heard of a dermatologist who didn’t believe that sunburns led to skin cancer. And I have only seldom heard of dermatologists who didn’t believe that sunscreens prevented sunburns. This research turns their beliefs about sunscreen upside down.

I have also been told that the reason sunburn occurs with the use of sunscreens, is this: People get a false sense of safety while using sunscreens. Consequently, they stay out in the sun for excessively long times. To me that doesn’t matter. If sunscreen leads to sunburn, which leads to skin cancer, who cares what the reason is? When using a poison, does it matter what the mechanism of poisoning is if the patient dies? Why use a product that causes harm?

Other sunburn results with sunscreens

Finally, it has been known since 2014 that sunscreen use associates closely with sunburning.[13] Therefore, sunscreens are not good products. We should protect ourselves from overexposure to the sun the way God (or Mother Nature, if you prefer) intended it.  1. Cover up when you start to redden, 2. seek shade or 3. go indoors. And remember that good health depends on obtaining regular, non-burning sun exposure.

Another reason to avoid sunscreens

The state of Hawaii has now banned this noxious product. This is because of the destruction of the coral reefs caused by certain ingredients in this chemical soup. In addition, we know that since the first sunscreens were introduced, the risk of melanoma skin cancer has increased. How much? By about 3,000%. And yes, you read that correctly. If you have other questions, read the sunscreen section of my new book, Embrace the Sun,.https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Sorenson/dp/069207600X 

Use of sunscreens in Europe

Another important study demonstrates that sunscreens do not help prevent melanoma.[14] The researchers’ goal was to determine the efficacy of sunscreens in preventing melanoma. Hence, they compared melanoma rates with sales in 24 countries in Europe, during the period of 1997-1999 to 2008 and 2012. They found that higher income people had significantly higher melanoma incidence. And, increased sunscreen use had not prevented higher income populations from being at higher risk of melanoma. Consequently, we see this equation again: Higher sunscreen use=higher melanoma risk! One of the reasons for this little-known relationship is most noteworthy. Up to 99% of vitamin D production is stopped by sunscreen.[15] Therefore, many of the health benefits of sun are voided.

Summary on sunscreens and sunlight:

The best sunscreen, when you need it, is covering your skin with clothing, or going indoors. Stay away from the noxious chemicals. Be sure to obtain some non-burning sunlight whenever possible.

Happy sunning!

 

[1] David C. Whiteman, Rachel E. Neale, Joanne Aitken, Louisa Gordon, Adele C. Green, Monika Janda, Catherine M. Olsen, H. Peter Soyer, on behalf of the Sunscreen Summit Policy Group. When to apply sunscreen: a consensus statement for Australia and New Zealand. When to apply sunscreen: a consensus statement for Australia and New Zealand.

[2] https://www.theage.com.au/national/queensland/make-it-like-brushing-your-teeth-experts-urge-daily-sunscreen-use-20190124-p50thn.html

[3] https://www.cancer.org.au/preventing-cancer/sun-protection/campaigns-and-events/slip-slop-slap-seek-slide.html

[4] http://www.yourhealthbase.com/sunscreens.htm

[5] Garland, Cedric F., et al. Could sunscreens increase melanoma risk? American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 82, No. 4, April 1992, pp. 614-15

[6] Garland CF, Garland FC, Gorham ED. Could sunscreens increase melanoma risk? American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 82, No. 4, il 1992, pp. 614-15.

[7] Van der Mei IA, Ponsonby AL, Engelsen O, Pasco JA, McGrath JJ, Eyles DW, Blizzard L, Dwyer T, Lucas R, Jones G. A high vitamin D insufficiency across Australian populations and latitude. Environmental Health Perspect 2007;115:1132-39.

[8] https://www.rightdiagnosis.com/news/skin_cancer_rate_increasing_in_australia.htm.

[9] https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/1329-nz-skin-cancer-statistics

[10] Elizabet saes da SILVA, Roberto TAVARES, Felipe da silva PAULITSCH, Linjie ZHANG. Use of sunscreen and risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Dermatol 2018; 28(2): 186-201.

[11] Kasey L. Morris, PhD; Frank M. Perna, EdD, PhD. Decision Tree Model vs Traditional Measures to Identify Patterns of Sun-Protective Behaviors and Sun Sensitivity Associated With Sunburn. JAMA Dermatol. Published online June 27, 2018

[12] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-sunburns/sun-sensitive-people-need-more-than-sunscreen-to-avoid-sunburn-idUSKBN1K02RB

[13] https://www.webmd.com/beauty/news/20110714/sunscreen-users-more-likely-burn#4

[14] Williams SN, Dienes KA. Sunscreen Sales, Socio-Economic Factors, and Melanoma Incidence in Northern Europe: A Population-Based Ecological Study. SAGE Open October-December 2014: 1–6.

[15] Matsuoka LY, Ide L, Wortsman J, MacLaughlin JA, Holick MF. Sunscreens suppress cutaneous vitamin D3 synthesis. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1987; 64:1165-68.

Read More

Sunlight exposure for health: Vitamin D Society.

Canadians need sunlight exposureSunlight exposure for Canadian health promoted by Vitamin D Society. By Marc Sorenson, EdD.

The essential need for sunlight exposure.

Sunlight is essential for human survival and human health. So, common sense would dictate that the current counterintuitive message—that sun exposure is harmful—is in error. First of all, without the sun, the earth would not have existed. And, without sunlight exposure for humans, humans could not have existed. In fact, rather than a world teeming with life, an earth without sunlight exposure would be a cold, lifeless mass.

A recent message on sunlight exposure reemphasized

On January 7, 2019, I posted a blog regarding new research regarding public health and the need for sunlight exposure. http://sunlightinstitute.org/sunlight-public-health-common-sense/. The research was authored by Drs. David G. Hoel and Frank R. De Gruijl.[1] And in it, they proved through research review that sunlight was healthful. And they also stated that the erroneous public health message about sunlight exposure needed to change.

Perry Holman realized the need to promote this sunlight exposure information.

Due to this research paper by Hoel and De Gruijl, my sunlight colleague Perry Holman took action. He understood the exceptionally low sun exposure among Canadians, and, their consequent suffering. Mr. Holman, the director of the vitamin D society of Canada, therefore wrote a press release that everyone should read: http://www.vitamindsociety.org/press_release.php?id=61

Here are some of the salient points of the press release:

First of all, the paper pointed out that the public is confused regarding sunlight. This is especially because terms such as “overexposure” are not clearly defined.

In addition, the authors stated that “The public is led to believe that all sun exposure should be avoided and that the avoidance of sun exposure is free of risk from a health perspective. That is not the case.”

Also, the paper reported that approximately 12% of U.S. deaths per year may be linked to inadequate sunlight.Sunlight exposure improves the mood.

The conclusions about sunlight exposure:

Perhaps this comment was most noteworthy: “Vitamin D supplementation is not always an adequate substitute for sun exposure. [This is also something I realized before Dr. William Grant and I wrote Embrace the Sun.]

In conclusion, the authors stated “non-burning UV exposure is a health benefit and – in moderation – should be recommended as such.”

And although this press release was written with Canadians in mind, it is appropriate for the entire world. Why? Because the world is becoming deficient in sunlight exposure due to the false messages of the powers of darkness.

So, use the links above to peruse this must-read press release. In addition, find more information at the Sunlight Institute site: http://sunlightinstitute.org/. Also, read my new book, Embrace the Sun, available at Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Embrace-Sun-Marc-B-Sorenson/dp/069207600X

 

 

 

safe sun exposure explained

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Hoel D, de Gruijl, F. Sun Exposure Public Health Directives. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018;15:2794

Read More
1 2 3 4 45