Principles of Natural Posture for Health and Pain Relief
Mango Man's Avocado Supreme Salad Recipe
Documentary Discusses Challenges in the Legalization of Marijuana
5 Reasons Why GMOs Should Be Labeled
Burn Fat FAST With Intermittent Fasting
Dr. Mercola & Zoe Harcombe Discuss The Obesity Epidemic
View All Health Videos
hmm that is nice. I guess if I really want to keep it simple, I could eat all the neurotoxic chemicals, soak myself in pthalate-laden air fresheners and swim in the xenoestrogenic plastics that Madison Avenue and K street are conspiring to soak me in from every direction. That way, I won't have to take any responsibility for my own health.
Simply go along, wearing my hat and just take it off every so often, I mean, c'mon people.
Well, I'm glad that at least one person has it all figured out. Now I feel like an idiot for having an intellectual interest...
I,,hmm that is nice. I guess if I really want to keep it simple, I could eat all the neurotoxic chemicals, soak myself in pthalate-laden air fresheners and swim in the xenoestrogenic plastics that Madison Avenue and K street are conspiring to soak me in from every direction. That way, I won't have to take any responsibility for my own health.
I
I was always getting UVA and UVB mixed up as to which is good for you and which is bad for you. Especially, when I try to point this out to someone else. So my new names are UV(Avoid) for the bad radiation and UV (Bake) for the good radiation.
I certainly won't speak for anyone else, but I have a bit of a problem with the idea that we should be exposed only just long enough to get a little pink and then no more. It doesn't seem natural to me. True, a burn must be avoided. But the more tanned I am, the more time I can spend in the sun without becoming burned. I stopped tanning for several years after really overdoing it in my 20's. When I tried again, it took me some time to be able to stay in the sun for any length of time. It's actually taken a few years and I like being able to take a long walk somewhere in the summer and not worry about my face being burnt OR about putting on sunscreen.
Beht, I have the same question.
I always thought that gradually increasing the time spent in the sun should be the way to go. If say one was to spend less then half hour in the sun one day and then gradually increase the time to two or more while being careful not to burn.
Somehow few minutes here and there wouldn't be enough for a nice tan and beneficial amount of vitamin D. At least not for me.
In my case, my reaction time is so short - and my skin is so sun sensitive - I should probably intake more folic acid and wear a hat.
Quite possibly, those with the fairest skin (decendants of the persons from countries with long and dark winters) might be better adjusted to dietary vitamin D.
Gradual tanning is safest. The more (naturally) tanned you become, the longer it takes to develop that slight flush of pink.
isn't it funny how man has been walking around the earth for thousands of years, WITHOUT sunscreen, and now there is a melanoma epidemic??? Hmmm let's get this right...sunscreen...been around for how long? epidemic..what else is "new" since this epidemic has started? or who has been telling us thing since the "epidemic" started? hey maybe trans fat and vegatable oils - they've been around for a few decades right?? ohh yeah maybe the doctors will say it's genetic. Find the answer to the question...and stop blaming it on uva or uvb...maybe the earth is closer to then sun...hmmm
There have been many dietary changes since the birth of mankind. I have no doubt this contributes to our problems.
Some of our dietary adjustments HAVE been neccessary. The further away from the equator one lives, the longer and darker the winters - and the more neccessary it is to have a dietary source of vitamin D.
On the earth possibly being closer to the sun......no - but we are apparently approaching our closest approach to the galactic equator, and the amount of gamma radiation that does strike the earth will continue to increase until the end of 2012.
alignment2012.com/whatisGA.htm
Sad but possibly true. I have melanoma,there is no cure,don't have insurance anyway. However, I'll bet the sunscreen and their ad agencies are doing well ...follow the buck$$$.
I am curious why you say Vitamin D3 supplements are not good for you. Here is the northeast, it is impossible to get all the sunlight needed all year!
I think someone is reading biased studies
Here is something to consider, I have lived in Phoenix, AZ and Las Vegas, NV. You would think there would be no problem getting sun there, right? Well it is so hot in the summer (especially Phoenix) that it literally hurts your skin to go out in midday sun. NOBODY sunbathes! You would cook! In Las Vegas, the summers are hot too, but the winters are freezing although there is a fair amount of sun. There is a 16 year old black boy in my neighborhood who has quite obviously suffered from rickets. It breaks my heart to see him. Between the extreme heat that prevented him from staying out, and his very dark skin, he could have really used that D3 that is "no good for you". Could be his parents read the same ridiculous studies Steve did.
I think there's still a lot we don't know about sun and skin. I burn easily and don't like sunbathing; never use a sunscreen. Many years ago I spent 18 months in Norway and because it was chilly even in the summer, I had clothing covering me most of the time. People have said that sun can cause dark ("liver") spots but I found quite a few formed on my totally unexposed thighs during that time. I was only 30, so they weren't age spots. They're still there but have never changed in size or shape. Incidentally, I am now taking 4,000 units of D3 daily and it seems to be protecting me from viruses striking down people around me. While in Norway I did get hit by some nasty strep throat infections, unlike any I'd ever had before.
I have read a lot of studies about D3 supplements, and they are not good for you. You should increase your sunlight to get natural vitamin D.
NEWS FLASH!
Melanoma is the 'healing phase' of a "separation conflict". If the melanoma is on the 'outside facing' part of your body, one does not want to be 'touched' by an individual. If the melanoma is on the part of the skin facing toward the 'inside', one is 'missing' the touch of a favorite individual. -
The 'biological conflict' causes a "flat tumor" to grow under the surface of the skin in an effort to protect the area from further (perceived/possible) harm. Upon conflict resolution, the 'tumor' stops growing, is caseated and tuberculosis bacteria remove the surplus cells. Because this happens very near the surface of the skin, this activity causes the appearance of the melanoma and this is not pretty to see ! While it is being healed, the bacterial activity caues it to be inflamed and to bleed. -
By providing the body with as full a spectrum of nutrients as possible, this will heal of its own accord and furthermore, this positive change in a good diet will minimize a recurrent episode.
Dr. Hamer has identified the causes and the cures of all dieases, however in order to heal, or better yet, to stay healthy, one needs to provide the body with ALL the nutrients it requires.
A Dr. Schnitzer of Germany has developed an eating protocol, which he calls Species Specific Food, to that end.
Dlarah, that's a bit too woo for me! When you hear hoofbeats down the road, think horses...not zebras.
Hi! I had a melanome about 23 years ago, which was in a low sun damaged area. While I believe the sun may aggravate it, I believe it is like a fruit that reflects a bad tree inside you. Deal with the tree, whether it be unforgiveness, or bad diet (there's a whole miriad of things) and you don't have to worry about the fruit it'll all be good.3 John 2
Heatheranne
As a breast cancer survivor, and choosing not to have radiation or chemotherapy, we did lots of research on anti-cancer lifestyles and I learned to get vitamin D-3 on a budget...All winter long i would open my family room sliding glass door midday and sit in my loungechair midday Southern exposure whenever the sun was out and little or no wind...Would wrap in a dark blanket over my bathing suit and as the sun warms, you can gradually expose more skin to the 40-60% suggested skin exposure...It is amazingly warm and could easily get 10 to 20 or even 45 minutes this way and as cold as 20 degrees was still doable unless the wind started blowing...It improves my disposition as well as makes me feel healthier.... I can remember seeing articles in magazines when I was growing up about health spas for people suffering from tuberculosis in Denver where the air was pure and cold and people would line up in their wheel chairs wrapped in blankets and sit on the large porches in the midday sun....They knew back then how important the sun was in healing....Just not burning, everything in moderation....Another example of less is more beneficial....Most cancers are discovered in the cold of winter.....
I have a problem with kind of science claiming danger of UVA or UVB. How about the fact that species on this planet (including human) evolved under UVA and UVB radiation for millions of years? By the way, ozone layer problem relates only to UVC, not to UVA and UVB which operated on this planet since the very beginning. Does Nature or God made such a big mistake? or rather our science is mistaken? Please read excellent book "Light - Medicine of the Future" by Jacob Liberman. Among other things on UV radiation, the book describes the "scientific" study, from which the conclusion that you should wear UV blocking sunglasses was drawn. A fragment goes: "... Monkeys were tranquilized; then their eyelids were pried open with lid clamps. With the monkeys pupils fully dilated, researchers beamed light into their eyes from 2500-watt xenon lamp for sixteen minutes. This intense light contained high levels of UV radiation...."
I do not know how it is for you, but for me that kind of science is made by idiots. Unfortunately, we rarely have access to study assumptions and methods. Instead we got Big Shiny Headlines - UV or This or That is dangerous, so you must by product A, B or C to protect yourself...buy more...
Yes, I think the key word here is $$$$$$ buy more, more sunscreens, more "research"
(government grant?$$)......more "science"??...Poor monkeys.
I live in Queensland, australia. I also have MS and was wondering how much Vit D do I need? I've been reading so much about MSers being deficient in this vitamin from birth. I am intrigued as I have spent so much time in the sun all year round all my life, does that mean no matter how much sun I get my body can't make enough of this remarkable vitamin, or should I be using supplements as well. My level is 50ng/ml, which I don't think is nearly as much as I need for this disease. Is there anyone that can help me on this matter, I would be greatful.
I have had a tanning salon prescribed by a dermatologist in hopes of healing a rash I have had for three months. I imagine it would be quite helpful as well to increase energy level in the winter
THIN CLOTHING BLOCKING UVB BUT NOT UVA?
Assume you only wear a white T-shirt during a sunny day. Is the
T-shirt letting the UVA through while blocking the UVB?
Maybe thin loosly woven clothing is a health hazard.
What happened to the rest of my post? It looks like it was accidentally (??) deleted in mid sentence! Weird! I took a lot of time to look up the info and share it on this website. I tried explaining the excellent sun protection benefits of Fern Block and where one can buy it and also SODzyme: Life Extension Foundation at www.lef.org, a very credible and excellent organization for antiaging health information. If this website is predjudiced against other health organizations and deletes reference to them, then I am extremely shocked and disappointed!
The likely problem was the length of the post - was it over 2000 characters including spaces?
Hmmm - and still the debate continues. My own personal theory is that melanoma is caused by the carcinogenic breakdown products that accumulate on our skin from rancid polyunsaturated fatty acids from out diet. Polyunsaturated fats are not particularly stable and decompose when exposed to heat or UV light. Most polyunsaturated fats are rancid when we eat them in popcorn, chips, crisps, margarine and the plethora of other fatty foods. Our skin is oiled by these rancid fats, and the UV striking these fats produce carcinogens. To add insult to injury, the sunscreen we add to our skin chemicals also probably contains carcinogens. This would explain the 'coincidence' of an increase in melanoma with an increase in dietary polyunsaturated fats.
So the answer is to use saturated fats (only a small percentage of what we eat of these is actually absorbed by your body, compared with a high percentage of unsaturated fats), no sunscreen and build up the tolerance to the sun over a period of time. I work in the outdoors, have an overall year-long tan, never use sunscreens, have had no melanomas and am in my sixties. I also avoid polyunsaturated fats like the plague!
You avoid polyunsaturated fats? Such as in nuts, cheese, fish, krill? I thought these foods were good to eat! Can you explain maybe I'm missing something.
Timing the sun exposure is something very complicated and unpractical for me.
Here in Québec, the weather is not always nice and very varying. It could rain for 7 days in a row at 15°C, then the next week 28°C with perfect sunshine.
After a long winter, when we get good weather and warm days, we want to stay outside the whole day, have some beers and relax or work on the house if something has to be fixed. I will certainly not wear long clothes at 28°C and I don't want to check my watch.
Furthermore, I can get signifant sun exposure only during the weekend and during my vacations typically in july and august.
If we have several rainy weekends or if I don't have the time to go out enough in june, I am usually still too pale in july to avoid sunscreen at the beginning of my vacations. It's not realistic, I would burn. I can usually stop using sunscreen completely only in August with the tan I have got.
Typically, I use sunscreen with a low factor and I don't use a lot. After some time in the pool or simply with the sweat, must of it is gone and I get a tan slowly. I usually protect only the most exposed parts of my body.
This winter, for the first time, I spent a week in the south (Cuba) with my spouse. In the goal of getting the most vitamin D I could, I tried to stay a little amouth of time without sunscreen at the beginning with only turtle oil as tanning oil. I have been distracted somewhat and exeeded slightly the correct time and I got a sunburn on my chest the very first hour.
Note, that I am a caucasian but not really pale. Compared to the average, I would say I have a good tolerance to the sun.
Like I have already said, what we would need is a non toxic sunsceen with a factor of about 12 that filter out mostly UVA and let a good amouth of the UVB pass. That kind of cream could be used at the begining of the summer until we get a protective tan or all summer for those with very pale skin who never really tan. That would be very practical
And now, the all-new, innovative SunSplash Renew combines the extraordinary benefits of the SunSplash Tanning and D-Lite Systems into one.
This 10-lamp system provides you with both UVA and UVB rays. Plus, you get all the advantages of red visible light pioneered in the D-Lite System.
Whenever I see someone that is over 100 years old, they have sun aged skin. I believe the reason why they are alive is that they have had a lot of exposure to UV sunlight throughout their life. The ones that avoided the sun died frequently from Vitamin D deficiency issues. Get naked and frolick in the sun. Ok you can wear a hat!
From what i have read, it is certain Vit D supplements that are bad for you, such as the vit D that is added to milk, because it is almost impossible for your body to assimilate it for beneficial use. I think this is what Steve is referring to. That is why it is better to let your body manufacture it naturally from regular controlled exposure to the sun.
I was fascinated to read Dlarah's comments - it sounds like what is perceived as "dangerous" visible changes to moles, may in fact be the body healing the tumour. Can anyone tell me where i can read up more on the subject? My husband has just visited a dermatologist who insisted on burning away a mark on his face with acid, in case it was going to become problematic in the future. Two weeks later he has been left with even more of a mark on his face! Could his body have taken care of it on its own, with regular exposure to the sun, rather than be subjected to being burnt away?
Apart from all that I am learning about UVA and UVB rays, i am horrified to read about the poor creatures that have been subjected to "scientific" studies on our behalf... as Paulito says, all we are told is what they want us to believe - the true facts are hidden from us just as the horrific methods they have used are kept quiet. I would be interested to know how many of the white coated lab assistants, who are closetted away from the sun, spending their days trying to prove how dangerous it is for you, have developed melanomas... now that would be a worthwhile and conclusive study... hmmm... perhaps we could even devise something that would cause a bit of pain whilst garnering the information...
This may help your husband with the mark on his face. There is a light device by Luminere (sp?) that used two wavelengths, 830 and 633 nm to heal and repair skin. Dermalogists or spas may have this device. However the most inexpensive way to get this treatment is to find a tanning salon that uses Rejuvasun with Omnilux. It also treats sun damaged skin and that's why it's incorporated into this type of machine.
High Omega 3 intake, low to no saturated animal fats, virgin coconut oil in the diet AND (before sun exposure) on the SKIN (Mercola's Body Butter), lots of vegetables and fruits (especially tomatoes), antioxidants such as SOD (I use SODzyme), and a great new supplement called Fern Block,
I have found that Astaxanthin gel caps keep me from burning...has also improved my skin greatly
I did a research paper on this (I should be working on it right now!)
There are three types:
UVA - Gives you skin diseases
UVB - This one provides you with Vitamin D (rhymes with B) and also gives you sunburn. Sunscreen blocks this one. It blocks sunburn, so it appears to be working, but it doesn't block cancer, and it blocks vitamin D absorption.
UVC - Doesn't penetrate the atmosphere, or else it would be the most dangerous.
Food for thought. I have figured out that a really hot shower day after day can and will cause melanoma. Anybody else agree?
Interesting. You have a good point. A study has just been published indicating that drinking piping hot drinks every day increases the prospects for esophageal cancer by four times. I guess their is no free lunch after all, duh. Anything unnatural will have a downside. We already know many cancers are caused simply by physical irritation by foreign substances that have no chemical action; for example asbestos and silica both cause lung cancer through persistent irritation. The anti-sun plus wholesale sunscreen promotion by medical professionals may turn out to have caused more deaths due to cancer than did post menopausal hormone replacement.
Interesting point raised by Garyo : "daily hot showers can cause melanoma". Yes I agree it's quite possible.
There was a comment elsewhere from a woman who'd developed melanoma. She had been a swimming coach or something earlier in her life. She blamed it on CHLORINE compounds in the water.
Hot water will allow the release of the chlorine more effectively. But it's probably not the chlorine by itself that is the culprit. Chlorine is a highly reactive chemical elemet, especially at higher temperatures. In the presence of organic elements such as carbon and oxigen (in your skin for instance), chlorine can produce some of the most toxic chemical compounds known to science. So even if highly toxic chlorine compounds are not present in the water to begin with, they could form as a result of a chemical reaction on your skin, catalized by the heat of the water.
Google "polychlorinated dioxins". Notice that the safety threshold of these substances is ZERO, which leads me to conclude that the safe level of chlorine in tap water should also be considered to be zero, instead of the 1 part per million (or whatever) that our public water utilities consider "safe".
People should be aware, too, that most commercial sunscreens have estrogen-mimicking chemicals. Nasty stuff! There was a German study done on them, perhaps ten years ago. Haven't got the particulars at hand, but they should be easy enough to track down. If you really must protect yourself from the sun, there are more natural products that use titanium dioxide, green tea, and other less toxic materials, but I don't know how effective they are against UVA. I think common sense should prevail here. Reasonable levels of sun exposure aren't that hard to achieve during the warm months of the year.
So, does this mean that we should use a sunscreen that protects from UVA all the time when exposed to the sun, as long as it doesn't also protect from UVB?
No, just go out in the sun during the right time of day. The safest time to get UVB is about an hour before noon to an hour after noon. The first two hours and the last two hours of sunlight every day are safe as well. In fact those are a great time to go sun gazing. Start slowly with sun gazing and build up over time with it. Google "HRM" and learn about a man who lives on sunlight and water. He was verified by several universities over several years as only drinking water and sun gazing for vitamins. It's pretty amazing stuff. Talk about fixing the world's hunger problems.
Like most new ideas on health, the article contains the "may" word quite a few times, indicating that perhaps the jury is still out. We must show caution and moderation towards the sun and remember there is more than just melanoma to be concerned of (I've had two squamous cell cancers dug out of my face - not fun)......probably from all the unprotected sun exposure as a child and young adult.
Aloha Readers
I read all the replies posted here, some for, some against=. Yes we are all on this planed, Yes we are exposed to UV and various forms of energy bombardment. Yes we all require nutrients related to out launching pad of life, be it genetic, spiritual, the stars. In light of how one interacts w/the UV or the intake of any nutrients or exposures. How each and every life form takes in, assimilates or uses the element of exposure is more the key, as I see it. In the case of sunlight, there are many ppl I personally know that will get a reaction in some way to sun or florescent bulbs, be it queasiness, rashes, dizziness.
Example; all humans take in the sun (direct or indirect), full time or part time. What out bodies do w/the rays and the ability of the cells to process said rays as intended can make or break ones health. YES, I do believe most ppl do protect them selves for the sun. WHY, you may ask. because there is an underplaying problem(s) left undressed in their bodies that may be compounding. issues that prevent the use of the rays as they should be used. If mankind body was in tune w/the universe, the planet, and w/the foods they eat and them selves there may be no need to protect our selves from good things to off set another malfunction. Companies want to perpetual reasons to sell more external fixes (making problems worse in the long run). Pixibob69 at the Y.
Comment deleted violating the aspect of our terms of use