LOL...right. Like your opinion matters for sh.t. You don't even sign
your own name.

Of course, excessive exposure to UV light--from sun or otherwise--can
cause skin cancer. Sunlight is also very important for D3.

It's about balance. Fair-skinned? Bigger risk. Extent and duration of
exposure? Etc.

        George M. Carter

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)

In the 1960s I lived with my family in Singapore, just 1.5 degrees from
the Equator. I have blond hair, fair skin and blue eyes. It is a
combination not believed to be suited to the harsh sun of the tropics.
Nevertheless, I regularly went on the beach, to the swimming pool or
sailing on the South China Sea with little or nothing on, in the heat of
the midday sun. I don't go brown, the best I can manage by way of a tan is
a dark golden colour. I remember, in an effort to deepen my tan, I would
lie out for hours with the sun to one side of me and its reflection in a
mirror of cooking foil on the other to increase my exposure. Like everyone
else in the ex-patriot Singapore community, I didn't give skin cancer a
thought in those days; the phrase 'malignant melanoma' was unheard of.

I didn't use a sunscreen. They too were unavailable. If we used anything
at all, which most of the time we did not, it was usually a well-shaken
mixture of coconut oil and vinegar. This was a concoction used at the time
by naturists. We smelt like a fish and chip shop, but we didn't get burnt
in the years we lived there.

Today, it seems, all that has changed. Why? 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 time (7) 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 formation
(5) .
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 skin (5) .
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 cancer (36) 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 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.
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'.
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.
DO NOT wear sunglasses that filter out 100% of the ultraviolet light. They
may protect you against the development of cataracts, but they stop UV
entering the eyes – and that is much more important as UV through the eyes
prevents cancer.
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% pa
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

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/sunlight.html

As Benjamin Franklin advised.."Everything in moderation".

" We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell
of a mistake"
Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Laureate and inventor of Polymerase Chain
Reaction.