Re: Sun exposure = skin cancer? Not likely.

On Jul 11, 9:30 pm, NoOptio...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 11, 8:48 am, TC <tunder...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 10, 9:08 am, TC <tunder...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 9, 6:55 pm, Tim <T...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What is the difference between sunburn and suntan? Not much. One is a
slower "damage", one is a little faster "damage". Do either cause skin
cancer? Doubt it.
Let's see... go with your 'doubts' OR the advice of dermatologists/
doctors...? Hmmmm... I think it's probably wiser to go the latter,
with people who actually STUDY the effects, and say it's best to limit
your exposure to early morning/very late afternoon sun (less than 30
minutes will get you all the vitamin D you need) and keep the skin
covered or try to stay out of it as much as possible the rest of the
day.
I don't want skin/face that looks like a prune.
Let's see.... go with what makes sense in the real world or go with
what doesn't make sense in the real world.... hmmmmm?

Makes sense is what I wrote above.

Dermatologists don't *study* sun, sun exposure and skin cancer. They
study conditions and treatments. They treat patients and conditions
according to what they've been taught in med school.

Sure. There aren't any on the research side.

And virtually all
the universities where medical doctors are taught the subject is
heavily funded by either the food industry or the pharmaceutical
industry or both.

Everything is a conspiracy with you. No one is going to talk you out
of your heavy meat and fat consumption, limited exercise, and basking
in the sun.

It is not a conspiracy and I've never put it in those terms. It is an
economic and educational fact. It is quite naive to think that these
universities would not serve thsoe that either paid to create them
initially or are now currently paying to fund them. They are not
independent from those who fund them. And pharma pays billions for
research that keep most of the universities financially afloat. That
is the simple reality.


Again here is what makes sense.
1) We evolved as an organism with the sun, why would moderate exposure
over a lifetime become dangerous to us.

"Moderate" sun exposure?

Umm... you wrote, " What is the difference between sunburn and suntan?
Not much. One is a slower "damage", one is a little faster "damage".
Do either cause skin cancer? Doubt it."

You're not defending "moderate". You're defending sunburn and
suntan. "Moderate" is what I wrote above.

2) Skin cancers do not commonly occur on the parts of the body that
gets the most exposure.

Where are you getting these stats from?

It is a fact. Check any resource you wish to. Try Google. Melanomas
are more commonly found on the back. Why is Melanoma not more commonly
seen on the face or the hands, where we sunburn the most? If skin
cancer is caused by sun exposure, then we should see skin cancers
mostly where the skin is more exposed. Right? The face and the hands,
right? Simple cause and effect. Sun exposure causes sin cancer
therefore skin cancers should occur on the skin that gets the most sun
exposure, the face and the hands, right? That is simply not the case.

3) The states where there is more chance of sun exposure has less skin
cancers than states with less chance of sun exposure.

Again, I don't know where you're getting your data, but let me say
this. In the South, many people get out of the mid day sun because
it's freaking hot. Up North, they can bask in the sun longer because,
generally, it's cooler and the sun isn't as hot.

Nonsense. The fact is that there are more sunny days and more
sunworshippers Florida and California and the people that work
outdoors will get more sun and more intense sun than people in
Washington state and in Maine. Yet, there is more skin cancer in Wash.
state and Maine than in California and Florida.

http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/Table.aspx?Group=3f&Year=2002&Display=n

Here is the results of a few quick data searches.

Age-Adjusted Invasive Cancer Incidence Rates for the 10 Primary Sites
with the Highest Rates within Race- and Ethnic-Specific Categories
(Table 3.27.MF1)
Rates are per 100,000 persons and are age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S.
standard population (19 age groups - Census P25-1130).

Melanomas of the skin - male and female - white

Massachusetts - 21.5
Seattle - 24.7
Rhode Island - 27.4
New Hampshire - 27.3
Connecticut - 21.3

Texas - 12.8
California - 20.4
Florida - 17.0
Louisiana - 13.2
New Mexico - 17.7

As you can see the numbers show that people further north have more
skin cancers than those from the states known for a lot of sun. People
flock to the southern states specifically for the sun.


"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever
remains, however improbable, must be the truth." (Sherlock Holmes)

Okay, Sherlock...

Patrick

Sometimes the reality differs from the reported. And an advanced
degree does not guarantee true intelligence. Simple observations
overule book learning.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Distance Running Is Tied to Skin Cancer Risk - Dougie Freese, whats up with that?
    ... If sun exposure is the main problem, then ought we not to see ... see significantly less skin cancers among those living in northern ... And if sun exposure is the main factor, ... problems eating throughout the race. ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Sun exposure = skin cancer? Not likely.
    ... We evolved for millions of years in the direct light of the sun. ... It is essential for life. ... If sun exposure causes the damage that leads to skin cancer, ... Skin cancers are predominantly on the ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Naturism and skin cancer
    ... I use moisturisers if I spend all day on a beach but hardly ever feel a need to use a sun screen, and if I do it is never above factor 8. ... The human body needs a minimum amount of sun exposure to generate vitamin D. Sun tan is an evolutionary response to sun exposure and should not be confused with skin damage due to sun burn. ... At least one study has suggested that the risks of prostate cancer in men and breast cancer in women are reduced by sun exposure. ...
    (uk.rec.naturist)
  • Too little sun causes harm, cancer specialists say
    ... Jeremy Laurance, "Too little sun causes harm, cancer specialists say", ... because of fears about vitamin D deficiency, ... deficiency is likely to be significantly worse in Britain. ...
    (sci.med.diseases.cancer)
  • Re: Swine Flu Deaths
    ... who claim that sunblock causes melanoma. ... correlation between sunblock use and rate of cancer, ... The research does indicate that sun exposure does some ... other types of skin cancer. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)