Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's definitely not true. It varies from person to person (melanin content of their skin) and the latitude where they live.
Rule of thumb, if you're burning, you over did. Otherwise, enjoy the sun, it's good for you. Many more people die from causes linked to too little sun exposure than they do to skin cancer.
I WAS referring in my post to the latitude here in sunny Florida. I believe I mentioned that in the post you quoted. The reference is to the intensity of the sun in Florida, especially south Florida, common sense would dictate that the sun's intensity varies with the location relative to the equator, but I was speaking of Florida. Contrasting it,if you will, with Parnassia's post about the lack of sunlight in Alaska making it difficult for people there to get enough sunlight to make their own vitamin D
Obviously the amount of exposure to the sun relative to vitamin E production is an individual process and depends on a number of factors. I'm also very aware, especially after 47 years in Florida, that I must take the sun in small doses to avoid burning, burning means I overdid it ( thank you, Ms. Obvious). My point was also that vitamin D deficiency may occur even in areas where there is plenty of sun, and might be at least partially due to wearing a good sunscreen product that effectively blocks out enough of the sun's harmful UV rays to prevent burning.
Perhaps you'd be good enough to provide a link documenting the claim in your last sentence. Thank you.
I used to believe this too, until I was plagued by skin cancers. I'm fair and blue-eyed (Swedish) and now being told to stay out of the sun altogether. I can see blotches form after just a few minutes.
Now that we retired on the beach, at the equator, lol.
So I take Life Extension Vit. D with K and sea-iodine. 5,000 units. We both take it and DH is b-12 deficient so he takes LE sub-lingual B-12. We trust LE and have taken their supplements for over a decade.
I wear sunscreen on my face and just cover up everything else with sun-protective clothing. Yeah, it's too hot, but what can ya do.....
If you're fair and live on the equator, that is one extreme. And in your case, that advice might be close to the truth. OTOH, if you have black skin, and live in the northern USA, that advice is horrible. Which was my point all along, it's wrong because it's too generic.
As an aside, I live in the tropics (not equator), used to have fair skin as a child, but now am fairly tanned. I only put on sunscreen when I will be in the sun for prolonged periods of time, to prevent burning. I think that balance will work for most people. Avoid burning, don't avoid the sun.
Perhaps you'd be good enough to provide a link documenting the claim in your last sentence. Thank you.
Gladly,
Quote:
This article aims to alert the medical community and public health authorities to accumulating evidence on health benefits from sun exposure, which suggests that insufficient sun exposure is a significant public health problem. Studies in the past decade indicate that insufficient sun exposure may be responsible for 340,000 deaths in the United States and 480,000 deaths in Europe per year,
If you're fair and live on the equator, that is one extreme. And in your case, that advice might be close to the truth. OTOH, if you have black skin, and live in the northern USA, that advice is horrible. Which was my point all along, it's wrong because it's too generic.
As an aside, I live in the tropics (not equator), used to have fair skin as a child, but now am fairly tanned. I only put on sunscreen when I will be in the sun for prolonged periods of time, to prevent burning. I think that balance will work for most people. Avoid burning, don't avoid the sun.
I was not speaking for anyone else, NOT offering advice, just relating my own anecdotal experience in a sunny climate with fair, freckled skin- a redhead complexion, if you will. One more time, the post was intended to point out that one can experience a vitamin D deficiency even in an intensely sunny climate, by following recommendations to protect the skin by using an effective sunscreen, clothing and limiting sun exposure ( especially in the times of day where the sun's rays are most intense). Of course how much of that is needed is dependent on the individual, that is also obvious and was never in question.
If you interpreted my comments as offering advice, then you read that into those comments, it was NOT intended by me. Far as I'm concerned, you don't get to read your own interpretation into my posts.
I was not speaking for anyone else, NOT offering advice, just relating my own anecdotal experience in a sunny climate with fair, freckled skin- a redhead complexion, if you will. One more time, the post was intended to point out that one can experience a vitamin D deficiency even in an intensely sunny climate, by following recommendations to protect the skin by using an effective sunscreen, clothing and limiting sun exposure ( especially in the times of day where the sun's rays are most intense). Of course how much of that is needed is dependent on the individual, that is also obvious and was never in question.
If you interpreted my comments as offering advice, then you read that into those comments, it was NOT intended by me. Far as I'm concerned, you don't get to read your own interpretation into my posts.
Calm down. This is what you wrote.
Quote:
the experts recommend that people wear sunscreen to protect against the skin-cancer causing UV rays from all that sunlight. It's been said that there is enough sunlight to get one's required levels of Vitamin D over time just by spending a short amount of time outside, ie, incidental times in getting from one place to another ( house to car, doing tasks that take one outside, for instance). I don't know that this is true
I simply said it's not true. Because it's not. I never ascribed that advice to you, and I've heard it before. And it's incorrect so I'm adding my 2 cents so some people don't get scared and avoid the sun.
I simply said it's not true. Because it's not. I never ascribed that advice to you, and I've heard it before. And it's incorrect so I'm adding my 2 cents so some people don't get scared and avoid the sun.
Hard to tell where you get your information, but the links below show what medical professionals and other skin care professionals have to say on the topic of skin protection from the sun:
If they aren't advocating for the use of sunscreen or other skin protection from too much sun you could have fooled me, LOL.
And here's a link for an article by the American Academy of Dermatology, showing US annual statistics for skin cancer incidence, survival, mortality rates, and risk factors for skin cancer. Note they also make a case for the use of sunscreen and other sun protection under the section labeled Prevention and Detection
Now, seems to me this inane argument against the recommendation/use of skin protection for too much sun exposure has gotten the subject of this thread way off track. You can keep it going if that suits your fancy, but I am done, and done with you.
Hard to tell where you get your information, but the links below show what medical professionals and other skin care professionals have to say on the topic of skin protection from the sun:
I was talking about this statement:
Quote:
It's been said that there is enough sunlight to get one's required levels of Vitamin D over time just by spending a short amount of time outside,
Which is, to put it politely, crap. I know you didn't come up with it. Some "experts" did, but they pulled it out of their butt. And it needs to be stated its over 100% incorrect. If you need to supplement with Vit D, chances are because you're not in the sun enough. For some, depending on their complexion and latitude they live in, this maybe impossible due to the fact they will simply burn. But it's not true for others.
And I know experts will recommend wearing sunscreen to prevent skin cancer, but in reality there is really only weak evidence for this in the form of a well done RCT. There is some evidence that sunblock prevents skin aging, and prevents cellular damage in animals, but mixed that it prevents skin cancer that I have come across.
Quote:
1383 participants underwent full skin examination by a dermatologist in the follow-up period. 250 of them developed 758 new skin cancers during the follow-up period. There were no significant differences in the incidence of first new skin cancers between groups randomly assigned daily sunscreen and no daily sunscreen (basal-cell carcinoma 2588 vs 2509 per 100 000; rate ratio 1·03 [95% CI 0·73–1·46]; squamous-cell carcinoma 876 vs 996 per 100 000; rate ratio 0·88 [0·50–1·56]). Similarly, there was no significant difference between the betacarotene and placebo groups in incidence of either cancer (basal-cell carcinoma 3954 vs 3806 per 100 000; 1·04 [0·73–1·27]; squamous-cell carcinoma 1508 vs 1146 per 100 000; 1·35 [0·84–2·19]). In terms of the number of tumours, there was no effect on incidence of basal-cell carcinoma by sunscreen use or by betacarotene but the incidence of squamous-cell carcinoma was significantly lower in the sunscreen group than in the no daily sunscreen group (1115 vs 1832 per 100 000; 0·61 [0·46–0·81]).
If you know of a well designed RCT that shows suncreen prevents skin cancer across the board, please share with people. I don't consider observational studies, which are highly confounded, as evidence.
Quote:
We included 29 studies (25 case-control, two cohort, one cross-sectional, and one controlled trial) involving 313,717 participants (10,670 cases). The overall meta-analysis did not show a significant association between skin cancer and sunscreen use (odds ratio (OR) = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.91-1.28, I2 = 89.4%). Neither melanoma (25 studies; 9,813 cases) nor non-melanoma skin cancer (five studies; 857 cases) were associated with sunscreen use, with a pooled OR (95% CI) of 1.10 (0.92-1.33) and 0.99 (0.62-1.57), respectively. The cumulative evidence before the 1980s showed a relatively strong positive association between melanoma and sunscreen use (cumulative OR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.66-3.33). The strength of the association between risk of skin cancer and sunscreen use has constantly decreased since the early 1980s, and the association was no longer statistically significant from the early 1990s. While the current evidence suggests no increased risk of skin cancer related to sunscreen use, this systematic review does not confirm the expected protective benefits of sunscreen against skin cancer in the general population.
Last edited by WaikikiWaves; 12-14-2023 at 08:46 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
