 |
Healing Cancer With Light (3):
Sunlight, Skin Cancers & Vitamin D
"The simplistic idea of a sun/melanoma relationship is based more on a
belief than science.". . . "As with other neoplasms, the cause of melanoma remains an enigma and most probably the sun has little, if anything, to do with it." ... Newcastle dermatology professor, Sam Shuster
states that the main reason for the supposed increase in melanomas was a change in diagnostic beliefs: lesions previously regarded as benign became classified first as dubious then as malignant. "Melanomas are being
invented, not found," he says, " . . . exposure to screening and pigmented lesion clinics is a greater cause of melanoma than sun exposure."
Dr Anne Kricker and colleagues, looking at studies into skin cancer
other than malignant melanoma and exposure to sunlight, also say that the evidence linking skin cancers with sun exposure is weak. They note that most studies have not found statistically significant positive associations,
while the few that have lacked empirical evidence that sun exposure was the cause.
"Many questions remain about the relationship between sun exposure and skin cancer," they say.
Barry Groves quoting
medical researchers into melanoma, non-melanocytic skin cancer and sun exposure
Welcome to page 3 of Healing Cancer With Light!
Healing with light and color in my eyes will be among the great healing modalities of the future, as they
have been in the past - since we ARE “children of the light”.
For the complete list of Healing Cancer Naturally articles on healing & preventing cancer and other disease with light, click here.
Sunlight, Skin Cancers and Vitamin D
excerpted by Healing Cancer Naturally from article by Barry Groves
Introduction
For the past several decades the numbers of skin cancers, and particularly the deadly one, malignant melanoma, have risen dramatically among Caucasian
populations throughout the world. In the USA melanoma is the seventh most commonly diagnosed cancer with a rate of 14.2 cases per 100,000 population,1 while in 1987 Queensland, Australia, had 55.8 cases per 100,000, the world's highest rate.2 The incidence of the various types of skin cancer in the general British population has been increasing at an annual rate of two to eight percent over the past 2 decades.3 The contributory factors seem to be a light-skinned, northern European population living in areas of high ambient sunlight, and the incidence of the disease is seasonal, with more cases reported in summer than winter. Yet several clinical and epidemiological aspects of cutaneous melanoma seem anomalous because they contrast with other sunlight-associated skin cancers. For example, persons with the greatest risk of melanoma are not those with the greatest cumulative solar exposure; the anatomic areas that receive the most solar exposure are not preferentially affected; and not all light-skinned people suffer the same - albino Africans who have no pigmentation, are more likely to get sunburn and a number of other skin complaints as a result of exposure to the sun, but they don't get melanomas.4
...What has changed in the last forty years?
Skin cancers
There are three major forms of skin cancer:
• Basal cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer. It
forms small, fleshy bumps or lumps on the head, neck, and hands.
Named for the lowest layer of the epidermis (top layer of skin)
where the cancer originates. It occurs most frequently in men who
spend a great deal of time outdoors and is usually found on the
head and neck.5 Basal cell carcinoma is not particularly
dangerous as it rarely spreads throughout the body, although it can
extend below the skin to the bone.
• Squamous cell carcinoma is the second most common skin cancer.
It usually affects people who sunburn easily, tan poorly, and have
blue eyes and red or blond hair. Squamous cell carcinoma often
develops from actinic keratoses and can metastasise (spread) if left
untreated.6
• Malignant melanoma is the rarest form of skin cancer but it is the
most deadly. It originates in the melanocytes - the cells that
produce the skin colouring or pigment known as melanin - and can
be recognised by its black or grey colour. It usually grows from an
existing mole, which may enlarge, become lumpy, bleed, change
colour, develop a spreading black edge, turn into a scab, or begin
to itch. It is more prevalent among city and office workers than
among people who work out-of-doors and is thought to be linked
to brief, intense periods of sun exposure such as one might get on
annual holidays on sunny beaches and a history of severe sunburn
in childhood or adolescence. Malignant melanoma metastasises
readily and is almost always fatal if not caught in time7 as it
responds poorly to conventional therapy.8 Malignant melanoma
is growing at a rate of seven percent per year in the United States.
In 1991 cancer experts estimated that there would be about
32,000 cases during the year of which 6,500 would be fatal.9 In
Canada melanoma incidence rose by six percent per year for men
and by 4.6 percent per year for women during the period 1970 to
1986.10 In Australia the rate for men doubled between 1980 and
1987 and for women it increased by more than fifty percent.11
It is now estimated that, by the age of 75, two out of three
Australians will have been treated for some form of skin cancer.12
Who's at risk?
• Whites at greater risk than other groups.
• People who have had excessive exposure to UV radiation from the
sun without protection.
• People with fair skin are at more than twenty-times greater risk.
• Men are two to three times more likely than women to have basal
cell and squamous cell cancers.
• People with a family history of skin cancer.
• Workers exposed to arsenic, industrial tar, coal, paraffin, and
certain types of heavy oils.
How to detect skin cancer
Consult a dermatologist immediately if you have moles or pigmented spots with these characteristics:
• Asymmetrical (one half is not identical to the other)
• Borders that are irregular, uneven, or ragged
• Colour varies from one area to another
• Diameter is larger than 6 mm
Ultraviolet radiation
All types of skin cancer are attributed to exposure to the ultraviolet (UV) part of the spectrum of sunlight. UV is classified as three distinct wavebands: A,
B and C. They are all believed to contribute to the development of skin cancer.5
• UVA rays constitute between ninety and ninety-five percent of the
ultraviolet light that reaches the earth. It is not absorbed by the
ozone layer. UVA light penetrates furthest into the skin and is
involved in the initial stages of suntanning. UVA tends to suppress
the immune function and is implicated in premature aging of the
skin.5,13
• UVB rays are partially absorbed by the ozone layer. They do not
penetrate the skin as far as the UVA rays but are the primary cause
of sunburn. They are also responsible for most of the tissue
damage which results in wrinkles and aging of the skin and are
implicated in cataract formation5.
• UVC rays are almost completely absorbed by the ozone layer.
However, it is thought that as the ozone layer thins UVC rays may
begin to contribute to sunburning and premature aging of the
skin5.
But compare Light Supports Cell-Life-Extending Factors In DNA.
How strong is the evidence linking exposure to sunlight with melanoma?
During the 1980s and early '90s more than a dozen studies compared histories of sunburn in patients with melanoma and controls. But differences in design and
definition of sunburn make it difficult to quantify a single estimate of risk.
The most complete data on melanoma and sunburn come from six studies from Australia, Europe and North America. These studies suggest an association but say
that the effect is modest. They emphasise the point that episodic exposure seems to be more risky than constant exposure.14
British doctors R Marks and D Whiteman are unconvinced of the sunlight/melanoma link. They point out that:
Melanoma can be found on ovaries
Melanoma occurs less frequently on sun-exposed areas
In Japan forty percent of pedal melanomas are on the soles of the
feet
There is 5 times more melanoma in Scotland on the feet than on
the hands
And melanoma in Orkney and Shetland is ten times that of the
Mediterranean islands.
Other clinicians agree. Karnauchow says: "The simplistic idea of a sun/melanoma relationship is based more on a belief than science.". . . "As
with other neoplasms, the cause of melanoma remains an enigma and most probably the sun has little, if anything, to do with it."15 And Newcastle dermatology professor, Sam Shuster states that the main reason for the supposed increase in melanomas was a change in diagnostic beliefs: lesions previously regarded as benign became classified first as dubious then as malignant. "Melanomas are being invented, not found," he says, " . . . exposure to screening and pigmented lesion clinics is a greater cause of melanoma than sun exposure."16
Dr Anne Kricker and colleagues, looking at studies into skin cancer other than malignant melanoma and exposure to sunlight, also say that the evidence linking
skin cancers with sun exposure is weak. They note that most studies have not found statistically significant positive associations, while the few that have lacked empirical evidence that sun exposure was the cause.
"Many questions remain about the relationship between sun exposure and skin cancer," they say.17
The ozone hole
The stratospheric ozone layer is a delicate umbrella guarding us from the worst effects of solar radiation. One suggested cause of the recent increase in skin
cancers is our use of chemicals which interact with protective layers in our atmosphere that screen us from the sun's ultraviolet rays, of which the best example is a hole in the ozone layer which appeared over the Antarctic a
few years ago.
The history of skin cancers follows the increase in the use of many chemicals now known to be harmful to the environment. Manufacturing processes which use or
generate such synthetic chemicals as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and other perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) all of which tend to destroy the ozone layer as well as having other deleterious
effects on our atmosphere, have proliferated over the past half century.
Not only do these gases have a strong environmental effect, their chlorine and fluorine bonds make them exceptionally long-lived in the environment. For
example, data show that sulphur hexafluoride may persist in the atmosphere for up to 3,200 years.
Could our increasing release of these chemicals into the atmosphere be the cause of the dramatic increase in skin cancers? Unfortunately, it seems not. In 1991
Professor Johan Moan of the Norwegian Cancer Institute made an astounding discovery: He found that between 1957 and 1984 the annual incidence of melanoma in Norway had increased by 350 percent for men and by 440 percent for
women. But he also determined that there had been no change in the ozone layer over this period. His report concluded that: "Ozone depletion is not the cause of the increase in skin cancers".18
But if the ozone layer has not yet changed significantly, except at the poles, then what is causing the recent, enormous increase in skin cancer?
The sunscreen connection
The Australian experience might provide the first clue. The medical establishment in Queensland has vigorously promoted the use of sunscreens for many years -
and today, Queensland has more cases of melanoma per capita than any other place in the world. This is a trend seen worldwide.
Incidence rates of melanoma have risen especially steeply since the mid-1970s. The two principal strategies for reduction of risk of melanoma and other skin
cancers during this period were sun avoidance and use of chemical sunscreens. Rising trends in the incidence of and mortality from melanoma have continued since the 1970s and 1980s, when sunscreens with high sun protection
factors became widely used.
Sunscreens are designed to protect against sunburn which is caused by UVB; they generally provide little protection against UVA rays. There are two types of
sunscreen:
• Physical sunscreens contain inert minerals such as titanium
dioxide, zinc oxide, or talc and work by reflecting the ultraviolet
(UVA and UVB) rays away from the skin. This is the type seen as
white or coloured bands on the lips and faces of sportsmen.
• Chemical sunscreens contain chemicals such as benzophenone or
psoralen as the active ingredient. They prevent sunburn by
absorbing the (mainly UVB) ultraviolet rays. These are the
sunscreens used by those on the beaches wishing to tan. A
sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) of 15 filters out
approximately ninety-four percent of the UVB rays. Using one with
a SPF of 30 does not double to protection - filtering out
ninety-seven percent means that it only increases protection by
about three percent. And this quoted SPF applies to UVB rays only.
The protection provided against UVA rays in chemical sunscreens is
much less at about ten percent of the UVB rating.19 Drs Cedric
and Frank Garland of the University of California are the foremost
opponents of the use of chemical sunscreens. They point out that
the greatest rises in melanoma are in countries where chemical
sunscreens have been heavily promoted.20 They say that, while
sunscreens do protect against sunburn, there is no scientific proof
that they protect against melanoma or basal cell carcinoma in
humans.
Indeed, the Garland brothers strongly believe that the increased use of chemical sunscreens is the primary cause of the skin cancer epidemic. Recent studies by
them have shown a higher rate of melanoma among men who regularly use sunscreens and a higher rate of basal cell carcinoma among women using sunscreens.21,22 This was confirmed by another study group who found that 'always users' of sunscreens had 3.7 times as many malignant melanomas as those 'never using'.
The Garland brothers suggest that this is because people using sunscreens develop a false sense of security; that because they do not get a sunburn they are
encouraged to stay longer in the sun, but there may be other reasons why chemical sunscreens can be dangerous:
• Chemical sunscreens do little to stop UVA rays. These rays
penetrate deeper into the skin where they are strongly absorbed by
the melanocytes which are involved not only in the production of
the skin-tanning pigment, melanin, but also in the formation of
melanoma.20 UVA rays also have a depressing effect on the
immune system.23
• More importantly, however, may be the fact that most chemical
sunscreens contain up to five percent of benzophenone or its
derivatives oxybenzone or benzophenone-3 as their active
ingredient. And benzophenone, used in industrial processes to
initiate chemical reactions and promote cross-linking,24 is one of
the most powerful free radical generators known to man. Moreover,
benzophenone is activated by ultraviolet light. UV breaks
benzophenone's double bond to produce two free radical sites.
These free radicals desperately look for a hydrogen atom to make
them "feel whole again". While they may find this hydrogen atom,
harmlessly, in the sunscreen, they could equally find it on the
surface of the skin and thereby initiate a chain reaction which could
ultimately lead to melanoma and other skin cancers.
• Harvard Medical School researchers also discovered that psoralen,
another ultraviolet light-activated free radical generator, is an
extremely efficient carcinogen. They found that the rate of
squamous cell carcinoma among patients with psoriasis, who had
been repeatedly treated with UVA light after an application of
psoralen to their skin, was eighty-three times higher than among
the general population.25 This added weight to a study in
1991-2, in which scientists at the European Organisation for
Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) found that regular use
of sunscreens increased cancer risk by fifty percent but sunscreens
containing psoralen multiplied the risk by 228 percent. They also
showed that in people with a poor ability to tan, psoralen users had
almost four-and-a-half times the risk of malignant melanoma
compared to regular sunscreen users. There was no increase of risk
for those using self-tanning cosmetics. They say: "Serious doubts
are raised regarding the safety of sunscreens containing
psoralens".26
There is, however, some evidence that regular use of sunscreens helps prevent the formation of actinic keratoses, the precursors of squamous cell carcinoma.27
The dietary connection
In the 1970s, when kidney transplantation was pioneered, doctors first encountered the problem of tissue rejection. To combat it, they gave their transplant
patients linoleic acid. This suppressed their immune systems very effectively, preventing their transplanted kidneys being rejected. But it also caused a large increase in cancers and this treatment was stopped.
Since then, linoleic acid and oils that contain it, have been shown time and again to increase the risk of several types of cancer, including skin cancers.
Linoleic acid is the major fatty acid in all polyunsaturated vegetable margarines and cooking oils:
• Polyunsaturated margarines are around 40% linoleic acid
• Sunflower, safflower, corn and soya oils are all more than 50%
linoleic acid.
Drs B S and L E Mackie, working on Australia's Sunshine Coast have a great deal of experience in skin cancers. They say: "In view of the work of Black and
Erickson in mice and our own work in humans, we believe that human subjects who are at high risk of melanomas and other solar-induced forms of skin cancer should be advised to be moderate in their intake of dietary
polyunsaturated fats."28
Patricia Holborrow also points out that the increase in melanomas could be a result of dietary changes to PUFs."Recently, I followed up four families that
started in 1976 to use a diet with preferred oils as safflower and sunflower oil and low in salicylates and additives (that interfere with the metabolic pathway of these fats). There had been three cases of cancer resulting in
two deaths in these families."29 "The issue is further complicated by dietary factors that are cofactors for the metabolic pathways for the fatty acids and which may in addition favour or have a negative effect on the anticancer or cancer enhancing properties of the various prostaglandins (eg the negative effects of vitamin E and the positive effects of vitamin C)."30
The Australians are as paranoid about heart disease as the Americans. I was in Australia in 1995 and noticed that it is even their custom to remove the cream
from milk and replace it with polyunsaturated vegetable oil.
One of the recommendations for reducing the risk of skin and other cancers is to reduce intakes of fats and take vitamin supplements. But this approach doesn't
seem to work. The findings of a huge study by scientists at the Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; the Division of Human Nutrition and Epidemiology, Wageningen Agricultural
University, Wageningen, Netherlands; the Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York; and the Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard
Medical School, Boston, of 43,217 male participants of the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, did not support the hypothesis that diets low in fat or high in specific vitamins lower risk of basal cell carcinoma.31
It's usually saturated animal fats that get the blame for all diseases today. They are not the culprits -- 'healthy' vegetable oils are (see Polyunsaturated Fats in The Cholesterol Myth).
The benefits of sunlight
Although the medical establishment still strongly supports the use of sunscreens there is a growing consensus among progressive researchers that the use of
sunscreens and heeding the current advice to cover up when out doors may promote not only skin cancers but other cancers as well.
There is very little vitamin D in any of the food we eat. Most of the body's vitamin D supply is manufactured by the action of UVB rays on lipids on the skin.
(32) Using a sunscreen drastically lowers this production.33
Researchers at the Occupational Medicine Department, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego studied men in the US Navy during 1974-1984. They
discovered that personnel working indoors had 10.6 cases of melanoma per 100,000 while those who worked in occupations that required spending time both indoors and outdoors had the lowest rate at 7.0 per 100,000. They also
determined that there were more melanomas on the trunk than on the more commonly sunlight-exposed head and arms. Findings from this study suggest a protective role for brief, regular exposure to sunlight and fit with laboratory
studies that showed that vitamin D suppressed the growth of malignant melanoma cells in tissue culture.27
The same team found that lack of exposure to ultraviolet sunlight may place some populations at higher risk of breast cancer. The association between total
average annual sunlight energy striking the ground and age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rates in eighty-seven regions of the United States was evaluated. Annual age-adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer varied from
17-19 per 100,000 in the South and Southwest to 33 per 100,000 in the Northeast. Risk of fatal breast cancer in the major urban areas of the United States increased as intensity of local sunlight decreased. They conclude that
"Vitamin D from sunlight exposure may be associated with low risk for fatal breast cancer, and differences in ultraviolet light reaching the United States population may account for the striking regional differences in
breast cancer mortality".34
They also evaluated the association between total average annual sunlight energy striking the ground and age-adjusted breast cancer incidence rates in the USSR
and found that the pattern of increased breast cancer incidence in regions of low solar radiation in the USSR was consistent with the geographical pattern seen for breast cancer mortality in the USA and worldwide.35
A low blood level of vitamin D is known to increase the risk for the development of breast and colon cancer36 and may also accelerate the growth of melanoma.27,28,37 Because of this, Dr Gordon Ainsleigh in California believes that the use of sunscreens causes more cancer deaths than it prevents. He estimates that the seventeen percent increase in breast cancer observed between 1991 and 1992 may be the result of the pervasive use of sunscreens over the past decade.30 He also estimates that 30,000 cancer deaths in the United States alone could be prevented each year if people would adopt a regimen of regular, moderate sun exposure.
Prostate Cancer
That this could be so is confirmed by recent studies which have suggested that exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation may be protective to some internal
cancers including that in the prostate. One such is by scientists working at the Department of Urology, North Staffordshire Hospital, Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent, UK. They studied 212 prostatic adenocarcinoma and 135 benign
prostatic hypertrophy patients to determine whether previous findings showing a protective effect for UV exposure could be reproduced. Their data confirmed that higher levels of cumulative exposure, adult sunbathing, childhood
sunburning and regular holidays in hot climates were each independently and significantly associated with a reduced risk of this cancer.38
Cancer Prevention
So what should you do to protect yourself as much as possible against these cancers? Summarizing current research the following recommendations appear
reasonable:
• Most important: the best protection is a natural suntan.
• DO try to develop a moderate natural suntan unless you have
extremely sensitive skin and burn easily. Regular and moderate
unprotected sun exposure in the early morning or late afternoon
will help maintain a protective tan and keep your vitamin D stores
at an optimum level.
• DO build up a tan slowly over, say, a week. Aim for no more than
a slight pinkness each day. You should never tan so much that your
skin peels off.
• DO wear sunglasses that filter out 100% of the ultraviolet light to
protect yourself against the development of cataracts.
But compare Full-spectrum sunlight received through the eyes and cancer
• DO remember that sunlight is strongly reflected from sand, snow,
ice, and concrete and can increase your direct sunlight exposure by
10 to 50%.
• DO cut down on the polyunsaturated fat in your diet.
For detailed information on good and bad fats and their influence on the genesis
and healing of cancer, see Dr. Johanna Budwig’s diet & protocol.
• DO see your doctor if you spot any unusual moles or growth on
your skin -- particularly if they are irregular in shape, bleed, itch, or
appear to be changing. Most skin cancers can be cured if caught in
time.
• DO NOT use a sunscreen but DO use a moisturiser on your skin.
Put it on at least fifteen minutes before going into the sun to allow
it to penetrate the skin. It is a good idea to put this on all over your
body before you dress to go out. That way you don't miss bits such
as the 'bikini line'.
Note by Healing Cancer Naturally:
Please make sure to only use the purest available “nature-inspired” products
containing no questionable and possibly noxious or toxic chemicals whatsoever.
Personally, I prefer moisturizing my skin from the inside through optimised
nutrition and fluid intake. See Nutrition and Detoxification.
• DO NOT try to get a tan by visiting a tanning studio. The tan
produced does not have the protective effect of a sunlight-induced
tan.
• DO NOT shower in the morning before going out to sunbathe. The
oils naturally produced by your body during the night are a good
protection.
• DO NOT shower for at least an hour after you have sunbathed.
Vitamin D formed by the action of the sun on oils on the skin need
time to be absorbed.
• Forget 'aftersun' products. They are expensive and unnecessary if
you have followed this advice and not allowed your skin to be
burnt. But after you have showered, do use a moisturiser.
Dermatologists recommend that you do periodic self-examinations for any changes in the number, size, shape, and colour of pigmented areas of your skin, such as
freckles and moles.
However, consulting your doctor or a dermatologist may be the surest way to detect skin cancer early. Physicians are trained to recognise skin cancers and are
more likely to detect thinner melanomas, the most dangerous type of skin cancer, than patients who do self-examinations, increasing the likelihood that the skin cancer can be detected early enough to be treated effectively.
Having said that, however, Christopher Del Mar, Professor of General Practice, University of Queensland, Australia, may disagree. He notes that a worried public are the
initiators of surgery. Doctors perform excisions of benign pigmented tissue because of pressure from their patients. He says: "The benefits of early detection programs are uncertain; such programs need to be evaluated to
determine whether there are any benefits and, if so, whether they outweigh the costs."39
Conclusion
Johnathan Rees, Professor of dermatology, University Department of Dermatology, Newcastle upon Tyne, appraises the current melanoma "epidemic",
saying: "Once you excise a pigmented lesion and know its histology you forfeit the chance of knowing what would have happened if you had left it in situ". "Cohort analyses show, perhaps surprisingly, that
mortality from melanoma rose from the 1890s to the 1950s and then started to decline. Changes in leisure activity don't explain the 3-7% p.a. increase in melanoma incidence from mid-1950s to early 1980s.
". . . individuals with higher continuous sun exposure have lower rates than those exposed intermittently."
"There is after all no robust empirical evidence to defend most health promotion in this area. It has been suggested that the antithesis of science is not
art but politics; melanoma is perhaps an example of the two having become mistakenly intertwined. An amicable separation is required. The certainties of health of the Nation and "slip-slap-slop" already look a little
shaded: molecules care little for consensus."40
Some years ago, the vicar of a parish in Devon, who was not in favour of a nearby nudist beach, wrote in his parish magazine: ”If God had meant us to walk
around without clothes, we’d have been born naked”! Well, of course, He did and we are – perhaps it was for a very good reason.
References
1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 1998 . Atlanta, The
Society, 1998.
2. MacLennan R, Green AC, McLeod GR, Martin NG. Increasing incidence of cutaneous melanoma in Queensland, Australia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84: 1427-32.
3. Potten CS, et al . DNA damage in UV-irradiated
human skin in vivo: automated direct measurement by image analysis (thymine dimers) compared with indirect measurement (unscheduled DNA synthesis) and protection by 5-methoxypsoralen. Int J Radiat Biol . 1993; 63: 313-24.
4.
Diffey BL, Healy E, Thody AJ, Rees JL. Melanin, melanocytes and melanoma. Lancet 1995; 346: 1713.
5. Harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation. JAMA 1989; 262: 380-84.
6. Hacker SM, Flowers FP. Squamous cell carcinoma of
the skin. Postgraduate Medicine , 1993; 93: 115-26
7. Lee JAH. The relationship between malignant melanoma of skin and exposure to sunlight. Photochem Photobiol 1989; 50: 493-96
8. Malignant melanoma - Report of a meeting
of physicians and scientists, University College, London Medical School. Lancet 1992; 340: 948-51.
9. Skolnick AA. Revised regulations for sunscreen labelling expected soon from FDA. JAMA 1991; 265: 3217-20.
10. Statistics Canada . Canadian Cancer Statistics, 1991.
11. Reynolds T. Sun plays havoc with light skin down under. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84: 1392- 94.
12. Ozone depletion and health. Lancet 1988; ii: 1377.
13.
Fitzpatrick TB, Haynes HA. Photosensitivity and other reactions to light . In Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine , 7th ed, McGraw-Hill, 1974, 281-84.
14. Marks R, Whiteman D. Sunburn and melanoma: how strong is the
evidence? Br Med J 1994; 308: 75-6.
15. Karnauchow PN. Melanoma and sun exposure. Lancet 1995; 346: 915.
16. Shuster S. Melanoma and sun exposure. Lancet 1995; 346: 1224.
17. Kricker Anne, Armstrong B K, English D R.
Sun exposure and non-melanocytic skin cancer. Cancer Causes and Controls 1994; 5: 367-392.
18. Moan J, Dahlback A. The relationship between skin cancers, solar radiation and ozone depletion. Br J Cancer 1992; 65: 916-21.
19. Kaidbey K, Gange RW. Comparison of methods of assessing photoprotection against ultraviolet A in vivo. J Am Acad Dermatol Vol. 16, No. 2, Pt. 1, February 1987, pp. 346-53
20. Garland CF, et al . Could sunscreens increase
melanoma risk? Am J Publ Hlth 1992; 82: 614-15.
21. Garland CF, et al . Could sunscreens increase melanoma risk? Am J Publ Hlth 1992; 82: 614-15.
22. Garland CF, et al . Effect of sunscreens on UV radiation-induced
enhancement of melanoma growth in mice. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 798-801
23. Fuller, Cindy J., et al. Effect of beta-carotene supplementation on photosuppression of delayed-type hypersensitivity in normal young men. Am J
Clin Nutr 1992; 56: 684-90.
24. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. 1981; Vol 13, 3rd ed: 367-68.
25. Stern RS, Laid N. The carcinogenic risk of treatments for severe psoriasis. Cancer 1994; 73: 2759-64.
26. Autier P, et al . Melanoma and use of sunscreens: an EORTC case-control study in Germany, Belgium and France. Int J Cancer 1995; 61: 749-55.
27. Dover JS, Arndt KA. Dermatology. JAMA 1994; 271: 1662-63.
28. Mackie BS, Mackie LE. Dietary polyunsaturated fats. Med J Aust 1988; 149: 449.
29. Holborow P. Melanoma and polyunsaturated fat; cancer and diet. NZ Med J 1990; 103: 515-6.
30. Holborow P. Melanoma and fatty acids. NZ J Med 1991; 104: 19.
31. van Dam R M, et al. Diet and basal cell carcinoma of the skin in a prospective cohort of men. Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 71: 135-141
32. Garland FC, et al .
Geographic variation in breast cancer mortality in the United States: a hypothesis involving exposure to solar radiation. Prev Med 1990; 19: 614-22
33. Koh HK, Lew RA. Sunscreens and melanoma: implications for prevention. J
Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 78-9
34. Garland FC, Garland CF, Gorham ED, Young JF. Geographic variation in breast cancer mortality in the United States: a hypothesis involving exposure to solar radiation. Prev Med 1990; 19:
614-22
35. Gorham ED, Garland FC, Garland CF. Sunlight and breast cancer incidence in the USSR . Int J Epidemiol. 1990; 19: 820-4
36. Martinez ME, Willett WC. Calcium, vitamin D, and colorectal cancer: a review of the
epidemiologic evidence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev . 1998; 7: 163-8
37. Ainsleigh HG. Beneficial effects of sun exposure on cancer mortality. Prev Med 1993; 22: 132-40.
38. Bodiwala D, Luscombe CJ, Liu S, Saxby M,
French M, Jones PW, Fryer AA, Strange RC. Prostate cancer risk and exposure to ultraviolet radiation: further support for the protective effect of sunlight. Cancer Lett 2003;192:145-9
39. Del Mar C. Slip, slop slap and wrap.
Should we do more to prevent skin cancer? Med J Aust 1995; 163: 511-2.
40. Rees J L. The melanoma epidemic: reality or artefact. Br Med J 1996; 312: 137-8
The above article is part of “The Cancer Files” provided by Barry Groves, a cancer
victor himself, at www.second-opinions.co.uk/cancer_index.html with articles on ”cancer treatments, ways of detecting cancer and, most importantly, of preventing cancer, that have been reported in mainstream medical journals – data which are available to the medical profession and which, for that reason, they cannot claim not to know about.” Subjects include among other things “Polyunsaturated oils and cancer”, ”Fibre and Colon Cancer”, ”Less cholesterol = more cancer”, ”What's Behind The Screens? 'Prevention is better than cure' is the argument used when screening for disease. But screening for disease is not prevention, it is merely early detection. If a cancer, for example, is detected, that means it is there and hasn't been prevented. This technique is not without risk – it can do more harm than good.”, Cimetidine (Tagamet) ”Cimetidine, used for heartburn, has a better track record than chemotherapy against a range of cancers. Why is it not more used?”, Laetrile ”You will find a vast amount of information about laetrile on the Internet. Doctors have derided it as quackery for half a century – now conventional medicine has discovered it works and is cashing in.”, Digitoxin and other heart drugs ”Studies throughout the last century demonstrate that breast cancer deaths could be reduced by 90% with digitoxin, a cheap, generic heart drug. Other heart drugs have also shown remarkable benefits – yet oncologists refuse to use them even though they appear to be better than regular cancer chemotherapy drugs.”, Dipyridamole ”Dipyridamole is another cheap, generic drug that appears to have anti-cancer properties.”, Coley's Toxin ”Between 1891 and his death in 1936, Dr William Bradley Coley had a cancer cure success rate of over 50% and with terminal patients. This is much better than conventional medicine can achieve. His treatments are still used today – outside of regular medical circles.” and ”How to make and use Coley's Toxin”.
Compare Sunlight and Cancer Incidence - Can Sunlight Prevent Cancer?, Study Shows Sunlight Prevents Cancer, Cancer Prevention & Sunlight, Light : Medicine of The Future
(incl. cancer treatment), Solar Energy Against Cancer and The Fat's Syndrome & Photons As Solar Energy.
p. 1 • p. 2 • p. 4 • p. 5 • p. 6 • p. 7 • p. 8 • p. 9
go to top
Click here for complete list of Healing Cancer Naturally articles on Healing With Light.
|
|
|
