Sunlight PREVENTS skin cancer
#31
Posted 29 September 2009 - 12:38 PM
Studies can be very useful, but it may not be so wise to throw out millions of years of evolution so quickly.
Like most things in life, having balance without going to either extreme is usually best.
#32
Posted 29 September 2009 - 07:17 PM
This, as kismet has pointed out, has nothing to do with whether or not UV radiation is carcinogenic. If vitamin D could be ingested by smoking cigarettes, it might provide a net reduction in some diseases compared with no smoking and no vitamin D. However, cigarettes would still be carcinogenic and vitamin d would still be better obtained from sources that don't damage the body.
Nowhere have I advocated avoiding the sun AND not supplementing. If it were between no sun exposure/no supplementation or sun exposure/no supplementation, I would advocate sun exposure. However, sunlight, as I have already amply demonstrated, and as the evidence-based medical world believes, damages DNA, melanocytes, leads to mutations, aging, and cancer, compared with sun avoidance coupled with vitamin D supplementation.
Seriously, are you just going to cherry-pick my cites for something that you can twist to make your point sound more credible, or are you prepared to actually refute the carcinogenicity of UV radiation, it's immuno-suppressive and pro-aging effects, or even provide one single advantage to sun exposure over vitamin D supplementation?
#33
Posted 29 September 2009 - 07:21 PM
Is it not possible that there are more benefits to UV exposure that we are not yet aware of?
Studies can be very useful, but it may not be so wise to throw out millions of years of evolution so quickly.
Like most things in life, having balance without going to either extreme is usually best.
We also evolved drinking water that was frequently contaminated with bacteria. This water led to diseases, which are debilitating or fatal. So, as a modern society, should we avoid chlorinating our water for fear of mocking evolution? What about antibiotics in the treatment of life-threatening infections?
It is possible that sun exposure has unexplored benefits. However, those are purely speculative. The harms of sun exposure are well documented, and the only obvious benefit (vitamin D) can be cheaply and easily attained through supplementation. Ergo, the balance of evidence currently available to us supports supplementation and sun avoidance with broad-spectrum sunscreen use.
edit: Just articles? What have you posted, a naturopath expressing his opinion on youtube? Do you actually dispute the accuracy of these articles, or are you just denigrating them on such a flimsy pretext?
Oh, and again with your false assumptions about me: I eat a high-fat paleo diet with an abundance of both saturated and monounsaturated fat. Baaaaah, Johann says I'm a sheep; it must be true.
Edited by VespeneGas, 29 September 2009 - 07:26 PM.
#34
Posted 30 September 2009 - 12:36 AM
Ya know, once the Establishment used to say eggs were unhealthy.
And they issued blanket statements about cholesterol being bad. Somewhere along the way they changed it to good cholesterol and bad cholesterol. The same thing w/ bacteria. They said BACTERIA BAD. Then they saved face and said there are some bad bacteria and some good.
But anyway, I'm very controversial and I don't mind the heat.
God created the earth and all the creatures on it some 6000 years ago.
Saturated Fat is healthy.
Global warming is not caused by man.
HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
Nicotine is a great and wonderful drug.
Hormone replacement therapy causes breast cancer.
Need I say more?
#35
Posted 30 September 2009 - 01:48 AM
#36
Posted 30 September 2009 - 01:53 AM
Well, that explains a lot. Isn't there some creationist wingnut site that you would be more at-home at? ImmInst just doesn't seem like your kind of place, what with our acceptance of the scientific method and all...But anyway, I'm very controversial and I don't mind the heat.
God created the earth and all the creatures on it some 6000 years ago.
Global warming is not caused by man.
#37
Posted 30 September 2009 - 07:30 AM
The truth is that because sunlight is warm and goldeny, that means it's good for you. A suntan is a sign that you've absorbed the suns healing nurturing rays. Don't listen to "scientists" who claim that "science" can "prove" that the sun is bad for you. People have known for thousands (if not millions!) of years that the sun is good for you. It's mother nature's way of showing she loves you. If you want to look young and fresh and youthful... catch some rays down the beach sometime, your body will thank you.
Also, pm me for my patented colon cleanse system. It'll get that colon of yours clean as a bell. You'll have a colon clean enough to eat off. Stop hiding your dirty colon, free yourself from the hideous shame and anguish of a colon you know is up to standard!
#38
Posted 30 September 2009 - 11:06 AM
God created the earth and all the creatures on it some 6000 years ago.
wake up matthew..... wake up...
im dreaming?
Edited by Matt, 30 September 2009 - 11:06 AM.
#39
Posted 30 September 2009 - 11:43 AM
lolzAlso, pm me for my patented colon cleanse system. It'll get that colon of yours clean as a bell. You'll have a colon clean enough to eat off. Stop hiding your dirty colon, free yourself from the hideous shame and anguish of a colon you know is up to standard!
#40
Posted 30 September 2009 - 12:57 PM
#41
Posted 30 September 2009 - 01:41 PM
You guys crack me up. I suppose now you'll respond even less to my new-post-every-day regarding Aniracetam? Its okay. I'm not offended. I know that I got the cooties from my wicked evil UVB lamp.
#42
Posted 30 September 2009 - 01:57 PM
#43
Posted 30 September 2009 - 03:44 PM
#44
Posted 30 September 2009 - 05:05 PM
#45
Posted 01 October 2009 - 01:54 AM
#46
Posted 01 October 2009 - 12:37 PM
Johann is an example of a very dangerous kind of person. He's wrong, but he is absolutely convinced that he is right. No amount of evidence will change his mind, since he's been conditioned to believe that he must keep the faith lest he go to Hell. Next he'll probably become a political "commentator".
Funny you say that because I have looked at both sides of the evidence. Who is really closed minded and dogmatic are the academics that can't see beyond their own researcher's biases.
As Ben Stein showed, there are mini Hitlers operating within the institutions of higher learning. A scientist can have in his credentials the discovery of new planets. But if he mentions for a moment any idea of entertaining the theory of Intelligent Design, bam, he's gone and blacklisted.
Edited by Johann, 01 October 2009 - 12:37 PM.
#48
Posted 01 October 2009 - 03:32 PM
However, that's correct: Hormone replacement therapy causes breast cancer (so I think you need to change your opinion otherwise you'd go with the flow and you surely do not want to be mainstream, right?). Interestingly you fullfilled both Godwin's & Poe's law with just one post, touché.
Edited by kismet, 01 October 2009 - 03:34 PM.
#49
Posted 01 October 2009 - 07:33 PM
#50
Posted 01 October 2009 - 08:29 PM
#51
Posted 02 October 2009 - 01:14 AM
Maybe modern sunlight is much different. But right now I'm assuming skin cancer has a lot to do with high (& refined) polyunsat n-6s. It's hard to believe it generically happens.
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"> </h3>
#52
Posted 02 October 2009 - 02:31 AM
That's an interesting link. I don't find it at all hard to believe that skin cancer just happens, particularly in light-skinned people living in places they aren't adapted for. However, I find it quite reasonable that n-6/n-3 fatty acid ratio alters the rate of cancer in general. Both of these things can be true at the same time.Are there studies on skin cancer in cultures that eat high (hopefully unrefined) saturated fat diets? I know of one analysis: Skin Texture, Cancer and Dietary Fat
Maybe modern sunlight is much different. But right now I'm assuming skin cancer has a lot to do with high (& refined) polyunsat n-6s. It's hard to believe it generically happens.
#53
Posted 02 October 2009 - 04:14 AM
God did create the universe. But we know your too smart for that. One thing is for certain, you'll find out one day. And eternity is a VERY long time.
#54
Posted 02 October 2009 - 04:27 AM
Are you a Young Earth Creationist too? God put the dinosaur bones there to test our faith...He's right about global warming. It's actually global cooling. But we know you'll still continue to drink the Kool-aid.
God did create the universe. But we know your too smart for that. One thing is for certain, you'll find out one day. And eternity is a VERY long time.
#55
Posted 02 October 2009 - 01:23 PM
Niner speaks of faith? What takes faith is to believe in evolution and I just don't have that much faith.Are you a Young Earth Creationist too? God put the dinosaur bones there to test our faith...He's right about global warming. It's actually global cooling. But we know you'll still continue to drink the Kool-aid.
God did create the universe. But we know your too smart for that. One thing is for certain, you'll find out one day. And eternity is a VERY long time.
It takes blind faith to believe that there is no contradiction when a T-Rex thigh bone reported to be 68 million years old yields soft and flexible tissue. I don't have that much faith.
The academics of the modern age are the descendants of the catholic priests that Martin Luther had to rebel against. The modern priests/academics will burn you at the stake for mentioning creationism.
#56
Posted 02 October 2009 - 06:20 PM
Why not just let this thread die, from this point on?
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users