Sunlight Reduces the Risk of Death!

By: Marc Sorenson, EdD Sunlight Institute–

More than two years ago I read of ongoing research by Dr. Pelle Lindqvist—reasearch indicating that greater exposure to sunlight resulted in longer life. I made several attempts to contact Dr. Lindqvist, but was unsuccessful. However, one of his colleagues answered my query and informed me that the research would not be completed later on and then be published. The results are now available, and they are impressive.[1]

During a 20-year period, the subjects in the study who avoided sun exposure were twice as likely to die of any cause compared to those who had the highest sun exposure, and the researchers made this statement: “In both models the summary sun exposure variables showed a ‘dose-dependent’ inverse relation between sun exposure and all-cause death.”

Read More

Is Australia Waking Up? Could their Stringent Sun-Avoidance Programs be Causing Bone Problems in Young People?

By: Marc Sorenson, EdD Sunlight Institute–

Hallelujah! At least some scientists in Australia are realizing that their sun-avoidance programs, probably the most draconian in the world, are causing health problems, particularly musculoskeletal disorders (bone, joint and muscle problems). According to this article, those maladies cause more disability than any other group of medical conditions and cost the Australian economy $9.15 billion per year.

The scientists are suggesting an increase in sun exposure; unfortunately, the amount of exposure they suggest is woefully inadequate to produce optimal health, but at least it is a step in the right direction. The scientists also state that ultraviolet radiation is the main risk factor for skin cancer. If they are talking about malignant melanoma, they are dead wrong. However, we must compliment them for suggesting regular sun exposure, a habit that could save millions of lives yearly.

Read the article.

Read More

Sunlight and Tanning-Lamp Exposure Reduces the Risk of Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

 

Sunlight exposure has been shown to correlate to a reduced risk of numerous cancers, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, but results with Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) are mixed. The most recent research shows that there is an inverse correlation between HL and the highest vs. lowest lifetime, childhood and adulthood experience with the following three factors: sunlight exposure, sun-lamp exposure, and sunburn. [1] The pooled analysis showed an odds ratio of .56, or in other words, a 44% reduced risk of contracting the disease. 

Two items particularly stand out in this research: (1) Sun-lamp use correlated to a reduced risk of the diseasea positive result for the much maligned tanning industry—and (2) sunburn also correlated to a reduced risk. Of course, no one would recommend sun-burning; it simply serves a surrogate measurement for a high degree of sunlight exposure. Sunlight exposure can easily be used in high quantities—without burning—by moving out of the sun when the skin begins to redden and then coming back later after the skin has adjusted and started to tan.

This research once again points out the efficacy of sunlight in reducing cancer. Don’t expect the American Academy of Dermatology to mention this vital information in their next newsletter!



[1] Monnereau A, Glaser SL, Schupp CW, Ekström Smedby K, de Sanjosé S, et al. Exposure to UV radiation and risk of Hodgkin lymphoma: a pooled analysis. Blood 2013;122(20):3492-9

 

Read More

Sunlight does not Cause Melanoma. Why Must we keep Fighting this Battle?

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

 

An article on the ABC website[1] poses the following question: “If sun exposure causes skin cancers, how is it that some skin cancers grow in body parts that never see the light of day?” It then follows up by listing several areas where skin cancers occur: “Between the toes, on the soles of the feet, even around the genitals … skin cancers can appear on body parts that rarely or never see the sun.”

They then quote the CEO from Cancer Council Australia, Professor Ian Oliver, who tells us that the sun’s ultraviolet light (UVR) is by far and away the major cause of skin cancers. If he is talking about melanoma, he is dead wrong. And if he is talking about common skin cancers, how many of those cancers are found in or on the aforementioned areas of the body? This is a misguided effort to “frighten the daylights out of the people to frighten them out of the daylight” as said Dr. Michael Holick, a great vitamin D researcher.

Let’s make it clear that this effort is aimed at melanoma, the deadly skin cancer that does indeed occur in areas that are seldom or never exposed to sunlight. To say that UVR (sun exposure) is far and away the major cause of skin cancer (melanoma) is simply untrue. Mr. Oliver is not a liar, but he has obviously not read the research. He is terribly misguided if he believes that sunlight is the causal factor in the disease. Let’s look at the facts:

Sunlight exposure dramatically decreased in the US during the 20th Century, and Melanoma increased by at least 30-fold during that time.[2] Concomitantly, the percentage of outdoor workers, those most likely to be exposed to sunlight, decreased dramatically; for example, the outdoor occupation of farming decreased from 33% to 1.2% of total employment[3], a 96% reduction. Further information from the EPA determined that as of 1986, about 5 percent of adult men worked mostly outdoors, and that about 10 percent worked outside part of the time. The proportion of women who worked outside was thought to be lower. It becomes quite obvious that as sunlight exposure has profoundly decreased, the risk of melanoma has skyrocketed.

Furthermore, other research demonstrates that outdoor workers, while receiving 3-9 times the sunlight exposure as indoor workers, have had no increase in melanoma since 1940, whereas melanoma incidence in indoor workers has increased exponentially.[4] [5] From that information, one could reasonably conclude that regular, outdoor sunlight exposure protects against melanoma. There are at least a dozen more studies in the professional literature that corroborate that those who live indoors have far more melanoma than those who live outdoors.[6]

If sunlight exposure is the reason for the increase in melanoma, we would expect that areas of the body that receive the most exposure would also be the areas of greatest occurrence of the disease. Mr. Oliver believes that this is the case, but it is not. As to the distribution of melanomas in “unexpected” areas, the scientific literature points out that there are higher rates on the trunk (seldom exposed to sunlight) than on the head and arms (commonly exposed to sunlight).[7] Others research demonstrates that melanomas in women occur primarily on the upper legs, and in men more frequently on the back—areas of little sunlight exposure.[8] In African Americans, melanoma is more common on the soles of the feet and on the lower legs, where exposure to sunlight is almost non-existent.[9] According to these facts, if there is a relationship between sunlight exposure and melanoma, the relationship is inverse—the greater the exposure, the less the risk of melanoma

For more information on this subject, see my earlier blog: Exposing-sunlightmelanoma-fraud-part-1

My hope is that you will learn the facts presented here and become a good soldier in the battle to protect the Sun, our greatest friend.

 

 


[2] Melanoma International Foundation, 2007 Facts about melanoma.

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

[4] 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 hypothesis (2009), doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2008.09.056 –

[5] Godar D. UV doses worldwide. Photochem Photobiol 2005;81:736–49.

[6] Lee J. Melanoma and exposure to sunlight. Epidemiol Rev 1982;4:110–36.
Vågero D, Ringbäck G, Kiviranta H. Melanoma and other tumors of the skin among office, other indoor and outdoor workers in Sweden 1961–1979 Brit J Cancer 1986;53:507–12.
Kennedy C, Bajdik CD, Willemze R, De Gruijl FR, Bouwes Bavinck JN; Leiden Skin Cancer Study. The influence of painful sunburns and lifetime sun exposure on the risk of actinic keratoses, seborrheic warts, melanocytic nevi, atypical nevi, and skin cancer. Invest Dermatol 2003;120:1087–93.
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. Kaskel P, Sander S, Kron M, Kind P, Peter RU, Krähn G. Outdoor activities in childhood: a protective factor for cutaneous melanoma? Results of a case-control study in 271 matched pairs. Br J Dermatol 2001;145:602-09.
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 20f03;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

[7] 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.

[8] Rivers, J. Is there more than one road to melanoma? Lancet 2004;363:728-30.

[9] Crombie, I. Racial differences in melanoma incidence. Br J Cancer 1979;40:185-93.

Read More

Sunlight is the Best Blood Pressure Med: the Positive Evidence Mounts, Part One.

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

 

From Science Daily, research is reported on the ability of sunlight exposure to effectively lower blood pressure.[i] The research, reported earlier by Dr. Richard Weller, is not really new, but it is good to see that it is receiving more press. Even more important is the fact that Dr. Weller is a dermatologist. The study was conducted by exposing the skin of 24 healthy volunteers to ultraviolet light from tanning lamps for two sessions of 20 minutes each. In one session, they were exposed to both ultraviolet A (UVA) and the heat from the lamps; in another, the UVA rays were blocked so that only the heat was applied. Blood pressure was lowered by UVA exposure, but not by heat alone.

It has been known for some time that nitric oxide (NO) is produced by the skin in response to sunlight. NO is a potent vasodilator that relaxes the vessels and allows blood pressure to drop. Therefore, the sunlight, or tanning lamps, both of which emit UBA, become useful tools for lowering blood pressure.

It is important to note that these results were achieved with no increase in vitamin D levels. Therefore, sunlight stands on its own in reducing blood pressure. This is not to negate the positive influence of vitamin D; it is a critical factor in reducing the risk of myriad diseases. My ongoing searches of the medical and scientific literature, however, have persuaded me that most studies that assess the influence of sunlight alone are more impressive in preventing disease than those that assess only vitamin D blood levels or supplementation.

Dr. Feelisch, one of the investigators, stated the following: “These results are significant to the ongoing debate about potential health benefits of sunlight and the role of Vitamin D in this process. It may be an opportune time to reassess the risks and benefits of sunlight for human health and to take a fresh look at current public health advice. Avoiding excess sunlight exposure is critical to prevent skin cancer, but not being exposed to it at all, out of fear or as a result of a certain lifestyle, could increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.”

More on this subject will follow. In the meantime, allow yourself safe, non-burning exposure to the sun.



[i] University of Southampton (2014, January 17). Here comes the sun to lower your blood pressure. Science Daily. Retrieved January 18, 2014, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2014/01/140117090139.htm.

Read More

Sunlight is the Best Blood Pressure Med: the Positive Evidence Mounts, Part Two.

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

 

In the last post, I made the point that sunlight, through the stimulation of nitric oxide (NO) production in the skin, created a vasodilating effect in healthy volunteers that led to lower blood pressure. It was also noted that the effect of sunlight on blood pressure was not due to vitamin D production and circulation, since there was no change in vitamin D levels during the investigation.

High blood pressure is also known as hypertension, and a recent study from China demonstrates that exposure to sunlight correlates to a lowered risk of that disease.[1] In a randomly selected population of Chinese residents from Macau (where the rate of hypertension is very high), the following risk factors for hypertension were assessed: lack of sunlight exposure, low intake of fish, smoking, obesity and lack of exercise. An average of more than one-half hour of sunlight exposure per day compared to none predicted a 40% reduced risk for hypertension. Oily fish consumption more than four times per week predicted a 60% reduced risk; daily moderate physical activity compared to no physical activity predicted a 20% reduced risk; being obese compared to normal weight predicted 4.6 times the risk of hypertension, and heavy smoking predicted 1.4 times the risk.

Hypertension is a major risk factor for heart and other vascular diseases, which are the number-one killers in western societies. Isn’t it time we made a few lifestyle changes that could profoundly reduce the risk of these diseases? The efforts to Frighten people out of the sunlight, coupled with the move to indoor living, have created unquestionable health disasters. We need to once again learn to enjoy safe, non-burning sun exposure.


[1] Ke L, Ho J, Feng J, Mpofu E, Dibley MJ, Feng X et al. Modifiable risk factors including sunlight exposure and fish consumption are associated with risk of hypertension in a large representative population from Macau. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2013 Nov 1 [Epub ahead of print].

Read More

Sanitizing with Sunlight: the Best Disinfectant Know

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Is sunlight the best disinfectant? Through serendipity, I happened on an article called Natural Alternatives to Bleach for Disinfecting.[1] It discussed pros and cons of such disinfectants as bleach, vinegar, hydrogen peroxide and yes, sunlight. The article stated that bleach could be dangerous, causing irritation to the eyes, mouth, lungs and skin, and when mixed with ammonia could result in the release of toxic fumes.

The authors suggested three alternatives: vinegar, which is non-toxic, hydrogen peroxide, which can cause burns at high concentrations, but when used safely is reasonably safe, and sunlight, which like vinegar is nontoxic. The article states “In fact, scientists have found that exposing a bottle of water to sunlight for 6 hours is an economical way to provide developing countries with safe drinking water (see References 2). The disinfecting properties of sunlight can also be useful around the house. If you have an object that you can move outside, the sun’s rays can help disinfect it. A stained piece of white laundry can be effectively brightened and disinfected by spraying the stain with lemon juice or vinegar and then hanging it in the sun.”

Imagine that—no wonder my mother hung her clothes out on a line in the summer sun to dry, although I don’t recall any use of vinegar or lemon juice.

The mention of water also took me back a few years to the time I spent a week with a Mexican friend of mine in a small town near Guadalajara called Juchipila. As most of you know, the drinking water in Mexico is often contaminated with noxious bacteria, and the sale of bottled water to prevent “Montezuma’s revenge” is big business. While there, my friend Miguel and I visited a bottled-water plant. Interestingly, the only method of purification was the exposure of the water to ultraviolet light. It obviously did a terrific job, because the proprietor did a good business with no reported problems of related bacterial diseases.

There was a time when sunlight was used to disinfect hospitals, and such should be the case now, considering the superbugs that have developed a resistance to antibiotics. The legendary humanitarian Florence Nightingale observed that sunlight helped heal wounded soldiers and insisted that hospitals be constructed to allow the free entry of sunlight.[2]

In reality, it has long been known that sunlight is a powerful disinfectant and bactericide. As early as 1877, researchers discovered that sugar water left in the shade became cloudy, indicative of bacterial growth, but if exposed to sunlight, it remained clear.[3]  In 1890, the German microbiologist Robert Koch (who had isolated and described the tuberculosis bacterium in 1882), showed that sunlight killed TB bacteria.[4] Later on, research showed sunlight also killed E. coli bacteria in twelve feet of seawater and in waste stabilization ponds.[5] [6] [7]

In the aforementioned article comparing alternative disinfectants with bleach, the authors mentioned that exposing the armpits to sunlight would kill the bacteria that caused odor. There is little that I enjoy more than sunbathing with my hands behind my head and my armpits exposed to the sun. Lots of vitamin D, nitric oxide and endorphins produced, and later on I am more popular with my friends!

Sunlight exposure has been shown to heal Tuberculosis, psoriasis and a host of other diseases. To protect against a multitude of diseases, infectious and otherwise, be sure that you and your environment are exposed to plenty of sunlight,  but also be sure not to burn. Any reddening of the skin indicates that you have had enough.

 


[1] http://homeguides.sfgate.com/natural-alternatives-bleach-disinfecting-79312.html

[2] Nightingale, F.  Notes on Hospitals (third edition) Longman, Roberts and Green 1863.

[3] Downes, A.  Researches on the effect of light upon bacteria and other organisms. Proc Roy Soc Med 1877;26:488.

[4] Hobday, R. The Healing sun. Findhorn Press 1999:132.

[5] Hart, D.  Sterilization of the air in the operating room by special antibacterial radiant energy.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1936;6:45.

[6] Gameson, A. et al. Field studies on effect of daylight on mortality of coliform bacteria.  Water Res 1967;1:279.70.

[7] Calkins, J. et al.  The role of solar ultraviolet radiation in natural water purification.  Photochem Photobiol 1976;24:49.

Read More

The Evil Men Do. Is it Due to Vitamin D Deficiency, Sunlight Deficiency, or both?

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

One of the more interesting articles to appear lately is a hypothesis regarding the “good guys vs. the bad guys” in fantasy literature.  What makes it unique is that the hypothesis was published in a major medical journal, The Medical Journal of Australia.[1]The researchers did an interesting analysis of the characters’ personalities and living patterns, especially the quantity of sunlight exposure, and then predicted the mythical vitamin D levels of the good, the bad and the ugly. The vitamin D scale ran from 0-4, with 0, of course, being the lowest level and 4 the highest.

The authors noted that the good (and victorious) characters had mean vitamin D levels of only 3.4, whereas the evil (and defeated) characters had mean D levels of only 0.2, or in other words, the vitamin D levels were 17 times higher in the good guys. When assessing lifestyle habits, the authors note that “sun avoidance is a recurring theme among the evil characters.” It is also interesting to note that the greatest and strongest of the “good-guy” warriors is a character called Beorn: he is also a vegetarian. The good guys enjoy sunlight exposure, whereas the evildoers shun it, even going so far as to have a cloud of bats shade them while they do battle.

Unfortunately, the authors give credit to the vitamin D levels only and totally ignore the greater likelihood that vitamin D levels play only a miniscule part. Sunlight exposure stimulates the production of serotonin in the brain,[2] which elevates mood, as do endorphins—also stimulated by sunlight.[3] Neither of these products have anything to do with vitamin D. As long as we are talking fantasy, I opine that it is sunlight per se, and not vitamin D, that makes the underground dwellers evil. Vitamin D is a wonderful hormone produced by exposure of the skin to the UVB portion of sunlight, but the real lifting of the mood is cause by other attributes of the sun.

All of this reminds me of a statement made by a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), Dr. Wilma Bloomberg, who said, “In some vision as I grow older I see us moving to more shelters and perhaps underground living because of these hazards (meaning sunlight).”[4] I have always referred to the AAD as the Powers of Darkness, and this research, along with the Dr. Bloomberg’s statement, prove that the moniker is well-deserved. It is no wonder that dermatologists have the lowest levels of vitamin D of any profession,[5] and with their lack of sunlight caused by living in caves, they could probably play the part of the evil characters in the next edition of The Hobbit. Sunshine and happiness go together. Embrace the sunshine, but don’t burn. Regular, non-burning sunlight exposure will dramatically improve both your physical and mental health.

 


[1] Joseph A Hopkinson and Nicholas S Hopkinson. The Hobbit — an unexpected deficiency. Med J Aust 2013; 199 (11): 805-806.

[2] Lambert GW, Reid C, Kaye DM, et al. Effect of sunlight and season on serotonin turnover in the brain. The Lancet. 2002;360:1840-1842

[3] Asta Juzeniene and Johan Moan. Beneficial effects of UV radiation other than via vitamin D production. Dermato-Endocrinology 2012;4(2):109–117

[4] Dr. Wilma Bergfeld, then-president of the American Academy of Dermatology at Derm Update, the AAD’s 1996 annual media day, Nov. 13, 1996.

[5] Czarnecki D et al. The vitamin D status of Australian dermatologists. Clinical and Experimental Dermatology 34; 624-25.

Read More

Was Lack of Sunlight Responsible for Anderson Silva’s Terrible Leg Fracture?

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Anderson Silva, probably the best UFC fighter in history, suffered a horrible career-ending lower-leg fracture in his latest fight. As he executed a simple kick to the knee of his opponent, his lower leg shattered. Obviously, his bones were fragile. Mike Adams, AKA the Health Ranger, posits that the injury was likely due to low vitamin D levels.[i] Anderson Silva is dark-skinned, and most training for UFC is done indoors, so I would agree with Mike Adams’ assessment. Even when out in the sunlight, dark skin can take up to 6 times as long as white skin to produce the same quantity of vitamin D.[ii] Therefore, dark athletes who train indoors would be even more likely to have weaker bones.

Several studies have shown the efficacy of vitamin D in reducing fractures of various kinds. Stress fractures caused by physical training among military recruits is 3.6 times higher in those whose vitamin D levels are low compared to those whose levels are in “normal” ranges.[iii] Women in Spain who are continually seeking the sun have about one-eleventh the risk of hip fractures as those who have little sunlight exposure.[iv] It has also been proved several times by a Japanese physician, Dr. Sato that sunlight exposure can halt brittle bones and profoundly reduce the risk of hip fracture in women who already suffer from osteoporosis.[v]

Sunlight is necessary for stimulating the production of vitamin D in the skin, and vitamin D is absolutely essential for the absorption of calcium in the gut and for the maintenance of calcium stores in the bones to prevent bone diseases. One investigation showed that when serum levels of vitamin D increased from an average of 20 ng/ml to 34.6 ng/ml, calcium absorption increased by 65%, and the risk of hip, wrist, forearm or vertebral fracture was reduced by 33%.[vi] My opinion is that vitamin D levels should be between 60 and 70 ng/ml. Had that level been achieved in the subjects, it is likely that fractures risk would have been decreased more impressively.

We don’t know what Anderson’s serum levels of vitamin are, but he should find out. If they are low, he may be able to heal his injuries much faster by doing a lot of sunbathing.



[ii] Harris SS, Dawson-Hughes B. Seasonal changes in plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations of young American black and white women. Am J Clin Nutr 1998;67:1232-36

[iii] Ruohola JP, Laaksi I, Ylikomi T, Haataja R, Mattila VM, Sahi T, Tuohimaa P, Pihlajamäki H. Association between serum 25(OH0d concentrations and bone stress fractures in Finnish young men.  J Bone Miner Res 2006;21:1483-88.

[iv] Larrosa, M.  Vitamin D deficiency and related factors in patients with osteoporotic hip fracture.  Med Clin (BARC) 2008;130:6-9.

[v]¨Sato, Y. et al.  Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in stroke patients.  Neurology2003;61:338-42.

[vi] Heaney RP, Dowell MS, Hale CA, Bendich A. Calcium Absorption Varies within the Reference Range for Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D.  J Am Coll Nutr 2003;22:142-46.d

Read More

Menopause Society: Stop using Sunscreens, Soak up Midday Sun

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

The Indian Menopause Society (IMS), is an organization whose motto is to keep women fit at 40, active at 60 and independent at 80. One of their suggestions is that women stop soaking up sunscreen and start getting outside at peak sunlight time–for at least 15 minutes daily. The idea is to use the most natural manner possible to optimize vitamin D levels and thereby reduce the risk of osteoporosis and other bone diseases.

It is gratifying to see that there are women’s health organizations that understand the life-saving importance of sunlight. India is to be congratulated for cutting past the anti-sun nonsense and leading the world back to enlightenment. This is an excellent article from the Times of India.

Read the article

Read More
1 32 33 34 35 36 53
Alzheimer’sBDNFblood pressurebonebreast cancercancercircadian rhythmCovid-19deathdepressiondiabetesendorphinhealthheart diseaseHypertensioninflammationkidsmelanomametabolic syndromeMSmultiple sclerosismyopianitric oxidenutritionobesityosteoporosispregnancypsoriasisserotoninskin cancerSleepStrokesunsunburnsun exposuresunlightSunlight exposuresunscreensunshinetanning bedsUVUVAUVBvitamin dvitamin D deficiency