» NewsSunlight Institute » Spreading Sunshine

Uncategorized / 6.8.2013 / No Comment

Health Benefits of Sunlight far Outweigh the Risks

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Health Benefits of Sunlight Outweigh Risks of Overexposure: New Study

MAY 8 — A British dermatologist — armed with a new study showing how UV from the sun and sunlamps triggers the natural production of nitric oxide in the skin to reduce blood pressure and lower the risk of heart disease — is challenging the dermatology industry worldwide to step back and re-think its position on UV exposure.

Edinburgh University Dermatologist Dr. Richard Weller will present findings from his new study Friday at the International Investigative Dermatology conference in Edinburgh, one of the world’s largest dermatology conventions.

“We suspect that the benefits to heart health of sunlight will outweigh the risk of skin cancer. The work we have done provides a mechanism that might account for this, and also explains why dietary vitamin D supplements alone will not be able to compensate for lack of sunlight,” Weller said in a press statement this week. “If this confirms that sunlight reduces the death rate from all causes, we will need to reconsider our advice on sun exposure.”

Weller’s study, a randomized controlled trial considered the strongest evidence in science, used a sunlamp to demonstrate that UV exposure triggers nitric oxide production in the skin which lowers blood pressure and reduces the risk of heart disease, which kills 60-100 times more people than skin cancer.

There are no randomized controlled trials connecting sun exposure to skin cancer. Dermatology’s blanket condemnation of sun is based on survey studies and inferences that, properly analyzed, target sunburn but not regular UV as a potential risk factor for skin cancer.

“It’s time to revisit how dermatology groups have mischaracterized skin cancer’s complex relationship to UV while denying that there are benefits of sunlight,” said Dr. Marc Sorenson, founder of the Sunlight Institute. “Dr. Weller’s new study should put this center-stage.”

According to Medical News Today, “This new study is important because until now it was thought that sunlight’s only benefit to human health from sunlight was production of vitamin D, which rises after exposure to the sun. Previous studies have found that while increased vitamin D levels link to lower cardiovascular disease, oral supplements do not have an effect on this. ”

The Sunlight Institute believes overzealous sun avoidance is the biggest public health mistake of our time. For more information visit www.SunlightInstitute.org.

Click here to visit Medical News Today’s article on the Weller study.

Click here to view Weller’s talk about the study on www.Ted.com.

Uncategorized / 6.8.2013 / No Comment

Youngsters Should have at Least TEN HOURS of Sunlight Exposure per week to prevent myopia.

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Research from the University of Sidney in Australia suggests that children under the age of six should spend at least 10 hours per week in the sunlight. This is another in a series of research studies that show that sunlight exposure is vital to the visual health of children; it profoundly reduces the risk of myopia, or short-sightedness. Without sunlight, the eye develops an oval rather than a round shape.

One of the researchers also noted that “prevention of myopia is important for future eye health as even low levels of the condition place you at higher risk of cataracts and glaucoma in adulthood.” This is an important statement, since many physicians believe that sunlight exposure leads to cataracts and other eye disorders.

This is an excellent article and belies the idea that sunlight exposure is harmful to children.

Uncategorized / 4.17.2013 / No Comment

Worried about a Hysterectomy? Sunlight Exposure Reduces Risk of Uterine Fibroids.

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Hysterectomy, or the removal of the uterus, is an extremely common surgery among women in the United States, second only to childbirth by cesarean-section.[i]There are many experts such as Dr. Stanley West who believe that up to 90% of hysterectomies are unnecessary, since they are usually done in response to the presence of uterine fibroids, which are not cancerous.[ii]

Nevertheless, if uterine fibroids lead to hysterectomies, anything that would prevent fibroids from forming would lead to a dramatic decrease in these procedures.

According to one recent research report, women who spent at least an hour outdoors daily, had a 40% reduced risk of uterine fibroids.[iii] Dr. Donna Baird the leader of the research team, stated, “It would be wonderful if something as simple and inexpensive as getting some natural sunshine on their skin each day could help women reduce their chance of getting fibroids.”

Once again, we see the power of sunlight. It reduces the risk not only of a benign fibroid, but also the risk of unnecessary surgery. Perhaps we should also mention the reduction in health-care costs.

Since sunlight is free, it seems irrefutable that a daily dose of sun would be far superior to an expensive and unnecessary surgery. What do you think?

[i] http://womenshealth.gov/publications/our-publications/fact-sheet/hysterectomy.cfm

[ii] http://www.repmed.com/hysterectomy.html

[iii] http://news.yahoo.com/exposure-sunlight-lowers-risk-uterine-fibroids-100815575.html

Uncategorized / 4.3.2013 / No Comment

Sunlight and Vitamin D Deficiency in India

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Rekha Sharma, president of the Indian Dietetic Association, states that “Close to 40 per cent of Indians are vitamin D deficient.” He blames the condition on the modern lifestyle that is becoming more and more common. Dr. Sharma then goes on to list a few of the causes, including lack of sunlight, that are correlated to vitamin D. He is doing a great service with this article, but states that exposing the face and arms for a few minutes per day is adequate to optimize blood levels of D. He is totally wrong on that statement.

Another Dr. in the article states that those with dark skin may need 10-30 times the exposure time to sunlight to produce the same amount of vitamin D that a light skinned person would require. There is a large disconnect between the statement that a bit of exposure to the arms and face is sufficient, compared to the idea that dark-skinned people need profoundly large quantities of sunlight to make sufficient vitamin D. Notwithstanding the differences between these two docs, It is an interesting an worthwhile article.

Read the article.

Uncategorized / 3.28.2013 / 1 Comment

Exceptionally important findings on Sunlight Exposure, Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Brain Volume, Independent of Vitamin D

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

It has been known for decades that those who live closer to the equator have a lower risk of multiple sclerosis (MS).[1] In various pieces of research, Vitamin D produced by sunlight, has been suggested as the factor responsible for the decreasing risk of MS based on proximity to the equator. However, a recent study shows that sunlight, while obviously being critical in the production of vitamin D, has its own profound influence in lessening the degeneration of nerves (neurodegeneration) in those with MS.[2]

By measuring whole brain volume (WBV) and grey-matter volume (GMV) by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the scientists determined that greater summer sunlight exposure predicted greater WBV and GMV in MS patients. Interestingly though, when vitamin D levels were measured, they had no influence on the positive effects of sunlight exposure with WBV or GMV. The researchers concluded: “Sun exposure may have direct effects on MRI measures of neurodegeneration in MS, independently of vitamin D.”

This research opens the door to a whole new area of research on vitamin D. The idea that brain volume is correlated to sunlight exposure independently of vitamin D blood levels causes one to wonder how many other research papers, touting the benefits of vitamin D, might be reassessed to determine if sunlight exposure had its own benefits beyond its ability to cause the production of vitamin D in skin.

The idea that WBV and GMV are greater in those exposed to sunlight also brings up the possibility that IQ could be influenced positively by sunlight exposure. It has also been shown that autism is more prevalent in areas of less sunlight exposure and more common to occur in children with wintertime births. Could the pregnant mother’s sunlight exposure have an influence on fetal-brain development beyond the level of vitamin D produced in her body? Could that influence improve IQ? Could factors such as nitric-oxide production by the UVA portion of sunlight play a role? And, beyond brain and nerve protection and development, could there be independent protective influences of sunlight on the myriad diseases correlated to vitamin D deficiency—diseases such as heart disease, hypertension and cancer?

As Dr. Bernard Ackerman once stated, “the sun, now incriminated as the major culprit responsible for an “epidemic” of melanoma, will be rehabilitated from its status current of pariah, our worst enemy, to its place rightful, all things considered, namely, humankind’s best friend.”[3]

The fact—that research is proving sunlight has beneficial effects beyond vitamin D production—shows that the rehabilitation has begun.

[1] Acheson ED. Some comments on the relationship of the distribution of multiple sclerosis to latitude, solar radiation, and other variables. Acta Neurol Scand 1960;35:132-47.

[2] Zivadinov R, Treu CN, Weinstock-Guttman B, Turner C, Bergsland N, O’Connor K, Dwyer MG, Carl E, Ramasamy DP, Qu J, Ramanathan M. Interdependence and contributions of sun exposure and vitamin D to MRI measures in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013 Feb 5. [Epub ahead of print]<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

[3] A Bernard Ackerman, dermatologist. The Sun and the “Epidemic” of Melanoma: Myth on Myth! 2008.

Uncategorized / 3.19.2013 / No Comment

Sunlight, Vitamin D and Muscle Recovery

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

An excellent article from Science Daily discusses a new piece of research from the journal, Endocrine Abstracts, which has provided evidence that vitamin D supplementation (in persons who are deficient) can provide increased muscle efficiency. The mechanism occurs in the mitochondria, which are the power-generating engines in all body cells. Vitamin D replenishment may help the mitochondria to use glucose and oxygen to make the ATP, which is a ready source of energy. Part of the process of producing ATP is accomplished by a chemical called phosphocreatine. If phosphocreatine cannot be replenished quickly after muscle work, then recovery from muscle fatigue will be slow, and the person experiencing this slow recovery will experience an inability to feel energetic.

This research showed that after 10-12 weeks of vitamin D treatment among patients with muscle fatigue, the replenishment of phosphocreatine occurred about 20% faster, and all patients reported improvement in symptoms of fatigue. The article also mentioned that a parallel study, the group demonstrated that low vitamin D levels were associated with reduced mitochondrial function. The takeaway from this research is that chronic fatigue may be lessened by optimizing vitamin D levels.

The authors of the Science Daily article described vitamin D as “…a hormone produced in the skin using energy from sunlight, and to a lesser extent derived from dietary sources.” We all know that sunlight is the only natural way to produce vitamin D, so it was good to see them give sunlight its due. In the future, I believe it will be confirmed that chronic fatigue can be relieved in people who are deficient in vitamin D, simply by getting in the sunlight!

Read the Science Daily article.

Uncategorized / 3.10.2013 / No Comment

Sunlight has Cancer-Prevention Effects Beyond the Effects of Vitamin D

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Vitamin D has a multitude of health benefits, and the only natural way to obtain vitamin D is from sunlight exposure, which causes the skin to produce vitamin D3. The D3 is then is converted to a potent hormone that “turns on” more than 1,000 genes in the genetic engine. As I studied the scientific literature regarding vitamin D and sunlight, I noticed, however, that the strongest and most consistent health benefits were often related more closely to sunlight exposure per se, than to vitamin D supplementation or vitamin D blood levels. Some of my earliest observations regarded prostate cancer and osteoporosis, where vitamin D supplementation and high blood levels of vitamin D seemed generally effective, but exposure to sunlight was profoundly effective.

I also noted that vitamin D supplementation seemed to decrease osteoporotic fractures, but sunlight exposure could actually reverse the disease. (See my previous post). And of course, we know that sunlight or other ultraviolet light exposure dramatically enhances mood.

One of the latest studies to corroborate my observations was published in the European Journal of Cancer in December, 2012, and was entitled, is prevention of cancer by sun exposure more than just the effect of vitamin D? A systematic review of epidemiological studies.[i] In their review, the authors noted that regular sunlight exposure correlated to a reduced risk of colorectal cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). However, vitamin D levels correlated to a reduced risk of colorectal, and to a lesser extent, breast cancer, but were not correlated to a significant risk reduction in prostate cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The authors concluded with this statement: “Particularly in prostate cancer and NHL, other sunlight-potentiated and vitamin D-independent pathways, such as modulation of the immune system and the circadian rhythm, and the degradation of folic acid, might play a role in reduced cancer risk as well.”

The authors could have also mentioned the effect of sunlight on vasodilation, mediated by the production of nitric oxide (produced by the skin after sunlight exposure). They could also have discussed the influence of sunlight on production of serotonin and endorphins. These effects have nothing to do with vitamin D, and future research will determine whether these “beyond-vitamin D” effects also reduce the risk of various cancers.

Vitamin D is an exceptionally important product of sunlight, but it is hardly the only product. I predict that a whole new field of research on other photoproducts of sunlight exposure will soon emerge and provide impressive new knowledge regarding the life-and-health giving benefits of our most precious friend, the sun.

[i] van der Rhee H, Coebergh JW, de Vries E. Is prevention of cancer by sun exposure more than just the effect of vitamin D? A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Eur J Cancer. 2012 Dec 10. pii: S0959-8049(12)00885-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.11.001. [Epub ahead of print] <?xml:namespace prefix = o />

Uncategorized / 3.8.2013 / No Comment

Dr. Sato has now Proven, Three Different Times, that Sunlight Exposure can Reverse Osteoporosis and Prevent Hip Fracture. Is Anyone Paying Attention?

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

In 1997, Dr. Y Sato and colleagues showed that sunlight deprivation (due to being hospitalized) in Parkinson’s patients resulted in compensatory hyperparathyroidism, which in turn led to reduced bone mass and excessive hip fractures.[1] In 1998, he made the same observation regarding elderly women with Alzheimer’s disease.[2] Then, in 2003, he reported that sunlight deprivation was also a cause of hip fractures in elderly women who suffered from stroke.[3] This time, however, he studied the effects of sunlight—or the lack thereof—on the bone mass of elderly women who were either exposed to sunlight or were kept inside a care facility. Over twelve months, 129 women were exposed to regular sunlight and another 129 received no sunlight exposure. The results were startling: in these sedentary women, the sunlight group increased bone mass by an average 3.1%; in the non-sunlight-exposed group, it decreased by 3.3%, a swing of 6.4%.

Of course, one might ask why a small increase in bone density in one group and a loss of bone density in the other makes any difference; the real question is whether it prevented hip fractures. Now consider this: as proof of the efficacy of improving bone mass, the women who had the benefit of sunlight had only one bone fracture in their group. The sunlight-deprived group had six fractures! This is obviously a reversal of osteoporosis and a reversal of fracture risk.

Sato was not through with his research; in 2005, he and his colleagues exposed a group of Alzheimer’s patients to sunlight for one year, and another was kept in a typical indoor hospital setting.[4] In the sunlight group a 220% increase in vitamin D levels was found, and bone mass increased by 2.7%. In the indoor group, bone mass decreased by 5.6%. That is a difference of 7.3% in only one year! The final proof, of course, is with fractures. In the sunlight group, there were three fractures; in the sunlight-deprived group there were eleven, or 3.7 times more.

Finally, in 2011, Dr. Sato and his group did a similar study on elderly patients with Parkinson’s disease.[5] A two-year program of sunlight exposure was compared to a two-year program of continued sunlight deprivation. This time, the sunlight group experienced an increase of 3.8% bone mass, whereas the sunlight-deprived group lost 2.6% bone mass. The sunlight group experienced three fractures and the sunlight deprived group, eleven fractures, as in the aforementioned study.

One more thought: An investigation in Spain concluded that women who actively participated in sun exposure had one-eleventh the chance of a hip fracture as those who stayed indoors.[6]

The conclusion: sunlight exposure not only prevents, but can also reverse osteoporosis and fractures. Every physician who treats this disease should have sunlight exposure as his number-one treatment protocol. But is anyone listening?

[1] Sato Y, Kikuyama M, Oizumi K. High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and reduced bone mass in Parkinson’s disease. Neurology. 1997 Nov;49(5):1273-8.<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

[2] Sato Y, Asoh T, Oizumi K. High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and reduced bone mass in elderly women with Alzheimer’s disease. Bone. 1998 Dec;23(6):555-7.

[3] Sato, Y. Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in stroke patients. Neurology 2003;61:338-42.

[4] Sato Y, Iwamoto J, Kanoko T, Satoh K. Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis d by sunlight exposure in hospitalized, elderly women with Alzheimer’s disease: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res. 2005;20:1327-33.

[5] Sato Y, Iwamoto J, Honda Y. Amelioration of osteoporosis and hypovitaminosis D by sunlight exposure in Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2011;17(1):22-6.

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

Uncategorized / 2.28.2013 / No Comment

Foolishness from IOM exposed by the Vitamin D Society of Canada

By: Marc Sorenson–

The Institute of Medicine (IOM), in 2010, put forth its recommendations for daily supplementation of vitamin D. They suggested that infants under a year old ingest 400 IU per day, that adults ingest 600 IU per day and that those over 70 years of age take 800 IU per day. Since the sunlight can stimulate the production of up to 20,000 IU per day, it can easily be seen that such recommendations are abysmally low for those addults who are not receiving any sunlight, or where winter conditions prevent any vitamin D production by the sun.

The Vitamin D Society (VDS) of Canada has just posted a press release that illustrates the incongruity of the IOM recommendations based on weight. Perry Holman, Executive Director of the Society, correctly points out that it is counterintuitive to recommend so much more vitamin D per pound to an infant than an adult. The IOM recommendations would provide a 10-pound baby 40 units of vitamin D per pound, whereas a 200-pound adult would receive only 3 IU per pound. Vitamin D scientists suggest that 1000 IU for every 25 pounds of bodyweight is best, so why should the IOM be so prejudicial as to allow adults only about one-thirteenth the amount of vitamin D per pound as an infant? These are supposed to be intelligent people, no?

In reality, The IOM recommendation of 400 IU is right on target for the 10-pound infant, considering the recommendation of the vitamin D scientists for 1,000 IU per 25 pounds of bodyweight. The problem lies in the fact that for the other two age groups, it is woefully inadequate. Thanks to Perry Holman and the VDS for pointing out the lack of consistency and clear thinking on the part of the IOM.

And remember, we do not need to worry about any of this nonsense if we simply get out in the summer sun, or, when sunlight is not available, use some other source of UVB light to produce our vitamin D. The body will self-regulate its production, and we will never need to worry about how many units are necessary. Just remember never to burn either the infant or the adult! Moderation and common sense is the key.

Read the press release.

Uncategorized / 2.17.2013 / No Comment

Lack of Sunlight Exposure may Lead to Blindness

By: Marc Sorenson, Sunlight Institute–

Among the many other horrors associated with lack of sunlight, myopia (nearsightedness) is now becoming of scientific interest. In the latest article written on the subject, Robin Wuffson, MD, discusses the research from Denmark, showing that deterioration of the eye leading to myopia (in children aged 8-14) is more common in the winter than in the summer months.[1]

Another piece of research, reported only a few months ago, showed that actual exposure of the eye to sunlight was protective against myopia in people aged 15 to 50 years.[2] If you search this site, you will find several other posts on sunlight and myopia. In my opinion the link is now irrefutable: Lack of sunlight can now be added to the list of environmental and nutritional mistakes that can lead to blindness.

“Do not take my Sunshine Away!”

[1] http://www.emaxhealth.com/11306/sunlight-exposure-reported-decrease-vision-deterioration-children

[2] Sherwin JC, Hewitt AW, Coroneo MT, Kearns LS, Griffiths LR, Mackey DA. The association between time outdoors and myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Jul 1;53(8):4363-70.