3 ms·

Sorry, what? Please provide some sources for these claims. As far as I'm aware melanoma is most definitely related to sun exposure and there is no consensus op

by mikecsh 11y ago

Sorry, what? Please provide some sources for these claims. As far as I'm aware melanoma is most definitely related to sun exposure and there is no consensus opinion on vitamin-D and cancer prevention, with the most evidence being for it being protective against certain bowel cancers.. Edit: Here's a source for my view: http://www.nhs.uk/livewell/summerhealth/documents/concensus_statement%20_vitd_dec_2010.pdf http://www.nhs.uk/livewell/summerhealth/documents/concensus_... [3rd and 4th bullet points for example]

rogeryu 11y ago
See my updated comment!
erkkie 11y ago
There's some data to speculate that chronic non-burning levels of sun exposure is protective against melanoma while acute burning exposure is inductive. Until the data becomes more clear get some sun exposure but do not burn. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2082713/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2082713/
- rogeryu 11y ago
  This is exactly what I mean. Burning is not good, never. It damages the skin and that can cause cancer. Getting 1 MED of sun / UVB a week is however OK it seems. What 1 MED is for you depends on where you live, what time of the year it is, and what skintype you have. If you take a sunbath of one hour in New York in July, and the next day your skin if mildly rose but not burnt, than 1 MED = 1 hour of sun for you, under those circumstances. Then you can divide that into two or three parts spread out over the week. So for 1 hour, you can sit in the sun for 20 minutes three times a week. That will give you enough vitamin D without causing nonmelanoma skin cancer. In Mexico the sun is brighter, so that would shorten your 1 MED period. In november in NY the sun is less bright, so that would make it longer and probably even harmless.
  - erkkie 11y ago
    Yes, absolutely, also of note is that it's not just only vitamin d that is good for you but nitric oxide related effects as well: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24445737 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24445737 (ted talk about this topic: https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_weller_could_the_sun_be_good_for_your_heart?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_weller_could_the_sun_be_go...)

by mikecsh 11y ago

rogeryu 11y ago

See my updated comment!

erkkie 11y ago

There's some data to speculate that chronic non-burning levels of sun exposure is protective against melanoma while acute burning exposure is inductive. Until the data becomes more clear get some sun exposure but do not burn. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2082713/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2082713/

rogeryu 11y ago
This is exactly what I mean. Burning is not good, never. It damages the skin and that can cause cancer. Getting 1 MED of sun / UVB a week is however OK it seems. What 1 MED is for you depends on where you live, what time of the year it is, and what skintype you have. If you take a sunbath of one hour in New York in July, and the next day your skin if mildly rose but not burnt, than 1 MED = 1 hour of sun for you, under those circumstances. Then you can divide that into two or three parts spread out over the week. So for 1 hour, you can sit in the sun for 20 minutes three times a week. That will give you enough vitamin D without causing nonmelanoma skin cancer. In Mexico the sun is brighter, so that would shorten your 1 MED period. In november in NY the sun is less bright, so that would make it longer and probably even harmless.
- erkkie 11y ago
  Yes, absolutely, also of note is that it's not just only vitamin d that is good for you but nitric oxide related effects as well: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24445737 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24445737 (ted talk about this topic: https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_weller_could_the_sun_be_good_for_your_heart?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_weller_could_the_sun_be_go...)