Thursday, July 29, 2010

Professor states: why we can't give up our tan, and more importantly why we shouldn't try




For those of you who know us personally – or those who feel they are getting to know us from our blogs, Facebook or Twitter, you will no doubt by now, know how passionate we are about getting things right – and how long we have spent researching sunlight, vitamin D, Sunbeds and Tanning. We are well aware of the folk out there who like to jump on their bandwagon and have their say – even if it hasn’t a fragment of truth in it and they no nothing about the subject matter. On the other side of the coin, there are some very dedicated professionals out there who DO know what they are talking about and it’s about time we all listened to them very carefully if we want to stay healthy and prevent numerous diseases and disorders and of course keep the public cost of health to a minimum too.

One such person we need to take note of is the eminent Professor Emeritus Sam Shuster from Newcastle in England. We worked next door to Sam when he was at the RVI hospital and both of us have spent many an hour making special concoctions for Sam’s patients over the years we were there. He was instrumental in us taking an interest in all things related to vitamin D, disease prevention, tanning and all things related to UV exposure – and one of the reasons we take such painstaking care with what we do.

Sam has recently sent out a letter to newspapers in the UK as well as numerous other people and places, to explain why we must NOT give up tanning or controlled UV exposure on a good quality sunbeds. {we assume from what we know of Prof Shuster he would only approve of operators who know what they are doing, why and how!}

His excellent work is outlined on our website and the crux of the article is:
Skin cancer statistics are used to scare, not educate. Almost all of the 84,000 skin "cancers" that appear each year are in fact benign: they don't spread or kill; their cancerous name is a historical misnomer. Of course, sun exposure increases facial wrinkling, as does smoking, but the black ace in the fear game is melanoma, because the real thing is vicious.

The poor relationship of melanoma to cumulative UV dose had solarphobics running for cover in the idea the article quotes, that a one-off sunburn "could develop into a melanoma". But that doesn't happen: unlike the benign tumours that really are caused by UV, melanomas do not predominate in sun-exposed skin. There are commonsense reasons to avoid sunburn, and for use of sunscreens - but not, to prevent melanoma, for which they have been shown to be totally ineffective.

Self-image is measurably increased by a tan, and we will learn much from understanding the mechanism of this wellbeing. UV initiates the synthesis of vitamin D, essential for our bones, and sunscreen promotion has led to problems. It also has a profound effect on our immune function. Strangely, the bastard science of descriptive epidemiology that masterminded the melanoma myth now claims that UV lowers the incidence of many internal cancers and melanoma, thereby outweighing any harmful effects.

Plants and animals owe their existence to the sun, and it is hardly surprising that we've learned to adapt and use it. That's why we can't give up our tan, and more importantly why we shouldn't try.

0 comments: