Author Topic: I think we've been had...again  (Read 3660 times)

Offline Wilko

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: 3
    • View Profile
I think we've been had...again
« on: August 06, 2007, 12:52:58 PM »
I know for a fact I'm not the first person to question the party line on skin cancer, specifically melanoma and sun exposure - http://www.westonaprice.org/moderndiseases/sunlight-melanoma.html

If I buy into the common wisdom, minimize my sun exposure and apply sunscreens religiously that seems to imply that evolution failed to build in an adequate defence against solar radiation, a pretty glaring and obvious oversight if you ask me, and one that would incur a massive survival penalty. Unlikely.

I would wager that the SAD diet has a much stronger correlation with melanomas than sunlight exposure. Additionally, what's with dogs getting skin cancer when they're protected by an opaque layer of fur? Hmmm, as I understand it, dogs fed a biologically appropriate raw diet typically don't develop skin tumors, this is one of the major benefits advocated by supporters of the BARF diet. I think you can probably see the direction I'm heading in.

I'm going to suggest that a diet rich in antioxidants and proper fats has a greater prophylactic effect against skin cancer than sunscreen in the long term. In a nutshell I'd say the SAD diet, deficient in antioxidants, is leaving people unable to sufficiently neutralize the free radicals caused by UV light, resulting in the cellular damage which leads to cancer.

Why have sunscreens suddenly become necessary at this point in our history? You're going to hear that it's because of historically high UV levels, particularly at some latitudes but I don't think that stacks up, largely because atmospheric conditions have not been constant over the periods of time we're talking about, we lived through an ice-age fergawdsake! Guess what, the use of sunscreens is up, people are minimizing their exposure but incidences of melanoma haven't gone down.

http://www.geology.wisc.edu/~chuck/Geo106/lect27.html
http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html

Damn, I wonder how many really unpopular ideas I can cram into this one rant! Forgive me Chokeartist, but your sign off sprang to mind - "Realize that 95% of your opinions were poured into you by your parents, your schools, and your friends. Realize too, that there’s a good chance that they were wrong. Keep learning. Keep reading. Try to keep the "game" even." -TC Luoma

You can probably tell this business about skin cancer pisses me off a bit, I haven't been affected personally but I live in Australia where it is a HUGE issue and we're educated to live in absolute fear of the Sun. As with the Paleo WOE, there is far too much money to be made and too many vested interests for a sensible analysis to even take place let alone gain widespread acceptance.

Cheers, Wilko




Offline Lord Snoolington

  • Sergeant
  • **
  • Posts: 201
  • Karma: 9
    • View Profile
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2007, 03:27:42 PM »
I am very skeptical about the whole thing as well. I'm kind of disgusted with the whole dermatologist thing, where supposedly everyone has to go down to the dermatologist's offices so that they can be informed that if such-and-such tumor (mole) isn't removed then BadStuff will happen, and they have to pay the dermatologist to have it removed.

Quote
evolution failed to build in an adequate defence against solar radiation, a pretty glaring and obvious oversight if you ask me, and one that would incur a massive survival penalty.

The issue here is that you, for example, live in Australia, while your genes are (making an assumption here) some mixture of northern European genes, and there is supposedly a large difference between the level of danger from the sun in northern Europe and that of Australia. That is why aborigines have melanin concentrations much higher than you. Aborigines would not have any trouble with the sun in Australia, because they are specifically genetically adapted to the sun there.

Not saying I agree that anyone needs to wear sunscreen or avoid the sun, however. We do have a tanning mechanism, and I think that with the substances in a paleo diet, malignant cancers should be prevented.

Toxic substances in sunscreens and lack of outdoors physical activity are far more worrying than over exposure to the sun.

EDIT:

Holy mackerel, I just happened to read this:
http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/sunglasses-get-thumbs-up-from-students/20071931-qoo.html

Australia really is crazy about the Yellow Face...
« Last Edit: August 06, 2007, 04:16:33 PM by Lord Snoolington »


Offline suze

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 346
  • Karma: 26
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2007, 06:40:53 PM »
Read this:

http://chetday.com/skincancersun.htm

It's just another case of the establishment toeing a strict line, and punishing those who dare to disagree.  But I think it is rather ironic that those people busily slathering sunscreen on themselves every time they go outside might actually be increasing their chance of skin cancer, as well as a host of other cancers.

Being in the sun is good for us--physically, mentally and even, I believe, spiritually.  Suze

Offline Wilko

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: 3
    • View Profile
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2007, 11:48:32 PM »

It's just another case of the establishment toeing a strict line, and punishing those who dare to disagree.

Good article Suze, my trust in the orthodoxy has been crumbling pretty rapidly this last month, liberating to be sure but it riles me up.

Think about the fact that tans are widely regarded as attractive. I believe this is because we innately recognize it as a sign of evolutionary fitness and healthy genes. Similar perhaps, to the fact that men universally find women with a waist to hip ratio of 0.7 attractive, it's strongly correlated to fertility and easier pregnancies. I think that our bodies 'know' what's good for them, it's hard-wired, why wouldn't it be, I just wonder what else it's trying to tell me eh?

The issue here is that you, for example, live in Australia, while your genes are (making an assumption here) some mixture of northern European genes, and there is supposedly a large difference between the level of danger from the sun in northern Europe and that of Australia.

I conveniently left that out didn't I...yeah there's no question that my caucasian genes are better suited to milder sun of northern europe. Dad has worked outside most of his life and is a nice shade of walnut on his arms, legs and face but lilly white where he's covered by his t-shirt.

I'm getting some more sun, starting today.

Cheers, Wilko

Offline 21st-century caveman

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
  • Karma: 21
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2007, 08:23:42 AM »
We spent most of our time outdoors in paleolithic times, probably without much skin coverage with clothes, at least in the milder climates..  Ever since I've understood that we function best in a paleolithic environment, I've contended that we should be spending more time outdoors, getting sunshine; that it is unnatural to be cooped up indoors all day in temperature-controlled rooms with flourescent lighting.

Yes, people in the lower latitudes generally have more melanin and darker skin tones than people who have spent thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of years in the higher latitudes.  But, as has been stated, even pale Northern Europeans are capable of tanning..  I'm somewhere between mildly amused and ticked off, when I hear people say, "Nooooo, I can't be in the sun- I don't tan, I BURN."  I think that the key is to gradually increase sun exposure.  It's a no-brainer that if you have pale skin, and you spend 5 hours at the beach, in the middle of the day, of course you're going to burn!  But I'll wager that the same pale person, if they get out in the sun for 10 minutes each day for a week, then increase the exposure by 5 minutes a day the second week, another 5 minutes/day the third week, etc.., eventually they will be tanned and less succeptible to burning.  Call me crazy..

A lot of "clothed people" look askance at nudists; however, it appears that the nudists have it right, and they are correct to look at people, who shut out the beneficial sunshine by covering themselves with cloth, and keeping themselves imprisoned in buildings with dim artificial light, like we're nuts.  Not that I'm ready to join a nudist colony (yet), but when I go out and wog, I definitely take my T-shirt off and soak in those marvelous rays and make all kinds o' Vitamin-D.    :)

« Last Edit: August 07, 2007, 08:28:53 AM by 21st-century caveman »


Offline Wilko

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: 3
    • View Profile
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2007, 08:55:38 AM »
[I think that the key is to gradually increase sun exposure.  It's a no-brainer that if you have pale skin, and you spend 5 hours at the beach, in the middle of the day, of course you're going to burn!  But I'll wager that the same pale person, if they get out in the sun for 10 minutes each day for a week, then increase the exposure by 5 minutes a day the second week, another 5 minutes/day the third week, etc.., eventually they will be tanned and less succeptible to burning.  Call me crazy..

Progressive resistance training for the skin, specific adaptations to applied stresses? You're a madman with dangerous ideas and must be stopped at all costs! I'm calling the thought police right now.

Cheers, Wilko

Offline 21st-century caveman

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
  • Karma: 21
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2007, 09:58:56 AM »
Progressive resistance training for the skin, specific adaptations to applied stresses? You're a madman with dangerous ideas and must be stopped at all costs! I'm calling the thought police right now.

They'll have to catch me first.  I run at the speed of logic.  They're bogged down in dogma. 
 ;D

Offline suze

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 346
  • Karma: 26
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2007, 03:50:35 PM »
My karma has run over their dogma anyway.  ;D ;D ;D Suze

Offline 21st-century caveman

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
  • Karma: 21
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #8 on: August 11, 2007, 08:23:03 AM »
Read this:

http://chetday.com/skincancersun.htm

It's just another case of the establishment toeing a strict line, and punishing those who dare to disagree.  But I think it is rather ironic that those people busily slathering sunscreen on themselves every time they go outside might actually be increasing their chance of skin cancer, as well as a host of other cancers.

Being in the sun is good for us--physically, mentally and even, I believe, spiritually.  Suze

Exactly right, Suze.  The f00d/pharma/medical establishment, as it stands now, has a vested interest in keeping us hooked on their f00ds, drugged, and sick.  There is too much money to be made in these interlocking industries, for this to change anytime soon.  So, we have to take control of our own health as best we can, and that includes a healthful amount of "sun worship". 

Yet more evidence of the benefits of sunshine-
http://www.hormonalfitness.com/vitamin-d-cancer-sunlight.htm

Offline slbridges

  • Sergeant
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Karma: 9
    • View Profile
    • SCD Girl
    • Email
Re: I think we've been had...again
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2007, 07:58:46 PM »
That was a great article! But man, do they have it right about the establishment being afraid of challenges. I've told my doctors that I've cut out grain and experienced a dramatic reduction in pain and symptoms from my rheumatoid arthritis. I am met by silence the majority of the time.

I just recently found out that there is an institute that is a two hour drive away that specializes in managing RA with antibiotic therapy. There are fascinating papers implicating mycoplasmas as an infectious agent in RA. I plan to pursue this treatment once I get new insurance. Yeah, like my RA docs would have ever mentioned any of this.