Dr. Mercola, whose natural-health website is probably the most popular in the world, just posted an article that corroborates my beliefs regarding sunscreens, sunlight exposure, and the misguided advice of the dermatological industry. In it he makes several important points:
(1) The Canadian Cancer Society (CCS) has been “bought” by cosmetics giant Neutrogena for $200,000, with the supposed goal of helping to educate the public about the importance of sunscreens. In reality, it is a marketing ploy for Neutrogena which will help them to increase their sunscreen sales by $millions.
(2) Regular sunlight exposure is inversely correlated to many diseases, including cancer (one is melanoma), heart disease, dental diseases, muscle weakness, high blood pressure, kidney disease, osteoporosis and weakened immunity.
(3) Some well-known dermatologists have said stated that sunlight exposure is not an efficient method of increasing vitamin D levels–an obvious falsehood.
(4) Tanning beds have taken a bad rap; they are capable of increasing health benefits, provided the correct type of bed is used–one with the correct ration of UVA to UVB.
(5) Typical chemical sunscreens can actually increase the risk of developing skin cancer and may have many other deleterious effects.
(6) Antioxidants from food can dramatically reduce the risk of skin damage from sunlight.
Dr. Mercola’s comments about the cozy relationship between Neutrogena and the CCS did not come as a surprise to me, since Neutrogena for years has paid $300,000 per year to the American Cancer Society (ACS) for the right to use the ACS logo in their advertising. What a great way to sell sunscreens! As Dr. Bernard Ackerman (a famous and enlightened dermatologist) stated in his scathing attack on his own profession, ” The American Academy of Dermatology, the Skin-Cancer Foundations and the American Cancer Society sold their seals of recommendation to sunscreen manufacturers, the price being substantial in terms of dollars, but incalculable in regards to tarnish of honor.” (A Bernard Ackerman, dermatologist. The Sun and the “Epidemic” of Melanoma: Myth on Myth 2008.)
So Kudos to Dr Mercola, who is helping to expose the truth about sunlight’s marvelous health benefits, and the fraud behind the anti-sun movement. Be sure to read his entire article.
The article at the link discusses the fact that Manchester United, a very good soccer team from Britain, exposes its players to ultraviolet radiation from sun lamps in order to keep vitamin D levels high. The author of the article, surprisingly, does not mention increased athletic performance; nevertheless, sun-lamp expsoure has been known to enhance athletic performance since the 1940s. I co-authored a research paper on this subject with Dr. John Cannell. (Cannell JJ, Hollis BW, Sorenson MB, Taft TN, Anderson JJ. Atheltic performance and vitamin D Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009 May;41(5):1102-10.) In that publication, we noted that the Germans, who dominated the Olympic Games for many years, used sun-lamp treatments to decrease reaction time and to increase strength, endurance and speed.
The Manchester Club probably used the sun lamps to protect health, but the same treatment may have led to much of their success on the playing field!
Another in a line of studies on sunlight and myopia (near-sightedness) demonstrates that people who spend more time is the sun are less likely to have this pandemic vision problem. Other research on the relationship of sunlight exposure and myopia, some of it reported in my book, primarily considered the risk of myopia in children. This new investigation, however, surveyed young adults, and found that those who had the lowest exposure to sunlight were twice as likely to contract myopia.
Myopia is not an insignificant problem; when severe, it may lead to blindness. Obviously, we need to make sure that our eyes receive some sunlight regularly to help prevent this widespread disorder.
A new study from McGill University in Montreal, Canada, has shown that vitamin D has the ability to inhibit both the production and function of a cancer-enhancing protein called cMYC. This protein drives cell division, thereby accelerating cancer growth, a process known as proliferation. It has been known for many years that vitamin D could inhibit the proliferation of cancer, but this particular mechanism was not known. According to Dr. White, the lead researcher, vitamin D strongly stimulates the production of a cMYC antagonist, MXD1, which essentially shuts down the function of cMYC.
This is important information, because scientists who oppose the idea that vitamin D can prevent cancer are more likely to be persuaded when the mechanisms of that process are understood.
Remember that the most natural way to obtain vitamin D is by sunlight exposure. Also remember that sunlight exposure produces many other metabolites that have nothing to do with vitamin D: serotonin, which elevates the mood, endorphins, which also increase a sense of well-being, and nitric oxide, which lowers blood pressure and may play a part in reducing or reversing erectile dysfunction. My opinion is that non-burning sunlight exposure reduces the risk of many maladies including, but not not limited to, those maladies correlated to vitamin D deficiency.
Dozens of observational studies have shown a correlation of sunlight and vitamin D deficiency to an increased risk of MS. It had been thought that babies and youngsters would be the hardest hit by these deficiencies, and many scientists encouraged pregnant mothers to keep their vitamin D levels high. This new research indicates that the real benefit may be a reduction in MS among the women who had the highest levels of D–in fact, a 61 percent reduction compared to those who had the lowest levels.
My opinion? The highest levels were probably not high enough; in other words, they were not optimized levels, which might have lowered risk much more. Although that is conjecture, the research on many diseases such as cancer and heart disease show that very high levels of vitamin D correlate to much lower rates of disease than the levels that are considered “normal” by the “experts.” How many diseases could be dramatically reduced by a return to the sunlight?
The article is a must read for those who want to know more about the influence of sunlight on one of the world’s fastest growing and most dangerous diseases.
By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–
A physician from Japan, Dr. Sato, proved several years ago that osteoporosis is reversible and that fracture risk is profoundly reduced by sunbathing (Sato, Y. Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in stroke patients. Neurology 2003;61:338-42). Research from Spain has also shown that women who actively seek the sun have about 1/11 the risk of a fracture as those women who stay indoors (Larrosa, M. Vitamin D deficiency and related factors in patients with osteoporotic hip fracture. Med Clin (BARC) 2008;130:6-9).
Considering that sunlight exposure is established as a preventer and reverser of osteoporosis, it is good to see that others in the medical field have recognized that lack of sunlight is leading to terrible bone weakness, in this case, osteopenia (what I call “osteoporosis light”). Because of a tendency of women in Dubai to cover up and avoid the sun, the risk of osteopenia is seen at much younger ages than in the rest of the world. The take-away is that the human race needs to return to its sunlight roots or risk crumbling and falling apart. Please read the studies and help spread the word about how bone diseases can be prevented and reversed by regular sun exposure.
By: Marc Sorenson, EdD Sunlight Institute–
I have often stated that melanoma is more common in people with type-1 (non-tanning, pale) skin, and that moles correlate to a higher risk of skin cancer regardless of sunlight exposure. Now, new research shows that the genetic makeup that accompanies red hair–not the amount of sun exposure–also correlates to an increased risk of melanoma. Read the article.
So what does this mean? Let’s stop attacking the sun and start addressing the real causes of skin cancers: 1. the presence of many moles on the skin[i], 2. Underexposure to sunlight[ii], 3. Lack of colorful fruits and vegetables in the diet[iii], 4. Drinking alcohol[iv], 5. Consumption of dairy products[v] and 6. Environmental pollutants such as PCBs.[vi] (see below for references). And of course, we have just established red hair as a risk factor for melanoma.
Exposure to sunlight has decreased dramatically in the last century, and sunscreen sales have exploded. During that same time there has been a concomitant exponential increase in melanoma. How then, can anyone in their right mind say that sunlight exposure causes melanoma? GET SERIOUS! The idea that sunlight causes melanoma, of course, is great way to sell sunscreens. Follow the money and you will discover the reasons for the promulgation of the sunlight/melanoma nonsense. Non-burning sunlight is our greatest friend and health enhancer. Check with your doctor before you make any changes in lifestyle.
[i] Green, A, et al. Risk factors for limb melanomas compared with trunk melanomas in Queensland. Melanoma Res 2012;22;86-91.
[ii] Godar DE, Landry RJ, Lucas AD. Increased UVA exposures and decreased cutaneous Vitamin D3 levels may be responsible for the increasing incidence of melanoma. Med Hypotheses 2009;72:434-43. Garland FC, White MR, Garland CF, Shaw E, Gorham ED. Occupational sunlight exposure and melanoma in the USA Navy. Arch Environ Health 1990; 45:261-67. Garsaud P, Boisseau-Garsaud AM, Ossondo M, Azaloux H, Escanmant P, Le Mab G. Epidemiology of cutaneous melanoma in the French West Indies (Martinique). Am J Epidemiol 1998;147:66-8.
Le Marchand l, Saltzman S, Hankin JH, Wilkens LR, Franke SJM, Kolonel N. Sun exposure, diet and melanoma in Hawaii Caucasians. Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:232-45.
Armstong K, Kricker A. The epidemiology of UV induced skin cancer. J Photochem Biol 2001;63:8-18
Crombie IK. Distribution of malignant melanoma on the body surface. Br J Cancer 1981;43:842-9.
Crombie IK. Variation of melanoma incidence with latitude in North America and Europe. Br J Cancer 1979;40:774-81.
Weinstock MA, Colditz,BA, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ. Bronstein, BR, Speizer FE. Nonfamilial cutaneous melanoma incidence in women associated with sun exposure before 20 years of age. Pediatrics 1989;84:199-204.
Tucker MA, Goldstein AM. Melanoma etiology: where are we? Oncogene 2003;22:3042-52.
Berwick M, Armstrong BK, Ben-Porat L, Fine J, Kricker A, Eberle C. Sun exposure and mortality from melanoma. J Nat Cancer Inst 2005;97:95-199.
Veierød MB, Weiderpass E, Thörn M, Hansson J, Lund E, Armstrong B. A prospective study of pigmentation, sun exposure, and risk of cutaneous malignant melanoma in women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1530-8.
Oliveria SA, Saraiya M, Geller AC, Heneghan MK, Jorgensen C. Sun exposure and risk of melanoma. Arch Dis Child 2006;91:131-8.
Elwood JM, Gallagher RP, Hill GB, Pearson JCG. Cutaneous melanoma in relation to intermittent and constant sun exposure—the western Canada melanoma study. Int J Cancer 2006;35:427-33
[iii] Hughes, M. et al. Food intake and risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the skin in a community: The Nambour skin cancer cohort study. Int J Cancer 2006; online publication ahead of print.
[iv] Millen et al,. Diet and Melanoma in a Case-Control Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13(6):1042-51
[v] Hughes, M. et al. Food intake and risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the skin in a community: The Nambour skin cancer cohort study. Int J Cancer. 2006;15;119:1953-60.
[vi] Gallagher RP, Macarthur AC, Lee TK, et al. Plasma levels of polychlorinated biphenyls and risk of cutaneous malignant melanoma: a preliminary study. Int J Cancer 2011;15;128:1872-80.
This is the latest of several studies indicating that women who receive less sunlight exposure are at greater risk for breast cancer. This time the research comes from Australia, and shows that women living in the southern part of the country, which is colder and has less sunlight, are more likely to contract the cancer. The research keeps coming, but is anyone in medical circles or government agencies paying any attention?
This timely article reviews the evidence that vitamin D correlates to reduced risk of many cancers, and also presents the evidence that sunlight exposure not only builds vitamin D, but results in a decreased risk of melanoma. Particularly impressive is the inclusion of the research on which these statements are based.