Skin Cancer

[offshore1]

Roy's really only calling for moderate sun exposure, reducing toxins, and using safe sunscreen. All laudable goals. It's just the way he goes about putting forth his ideas that tend to attract controversy. i think Roy enjoys the attention.
Gotta say too Roy is a damn fine looking healthy specimen, so he's doing many things right..
If Nick doesn't arse rape 'im i will.

[Animal_Chin]

All talk of arse raping aside, I've got issues with the use of the word 'toxins'.

Anything can be toxic to human health. Too much water can be lethal. Too much oxygen in the air can kill us. etc..

It's all about dose and how much the individual human can safely cope with. I'm still waiting for information on what part of sunscreen is a 'toxin'.

[Chillin]

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/skinc ... ent/fact-2 According to the governments website, 1272 people died of scin cancer in oz in 2005. Not exactly dropping like flies really, and it is the 4th most deadly cancer. And this quote "Sunscreen is not adequate protection on its own and should not be used to extend the time you spend in the sun." Is that a sidestep?
Also found this on this website: http://consumerist.com/2008/07/is-your- ... ctive.html Yesterday several news outlets published the results of a study that said "four out of five brand-name sunscreens either provide inadequate sun protection or contain chemicals that may be unsafe." The report comes from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and has been heavily criticized by sunblock makers, although their complaints are of the general sort ("they don't understand sunblock!") or vaguely hysterical ("they'll convince people to stop using sunblock!").
And this: "Some sunscreens absorb into the blood and raise safety concerns. Our review of the technical literature shows that some sunscreen ingredients absorb into the blood, and some are linked to toxic effects. Some release skin-damaging free radicals in sunlight, some could disrupt hormone systems, several are strongly linked to allergic reactions, and others may build up in the body or the environment. FDA has not established rigorous safety standards for sunscreen ingredients that fully examines these effects."
I also found out that Sunblock and suncsreen are the same thing: "Sunscreen (also commonly known as sunblock[1] or sun cream[2]) is a lotion, spray, gel or other topical product that absorbs or reflects some of the sun's ultraviolet (UV) radiation on the skin exposed to sunlight and thus helps protect against sunburn. Skin lightening products have sunscreen to protect lightened skin because light skin is susceptible to sun damage. Meanwhile, sunscreen products have skin whitening ingredient."
And this: "It can be easily concluded that Zinc oxide sunblock is an effective measure to curb sunburns and skin damages that tend to occur, as a result of the harsh heat of the sun. However, there is no guarantee that zinc oxide sunblocks provide a hundred percent protection against the rays of the sun. A lot many features like the nature of your skin, amount of lotion applied and the heat, play a crucial role in the formation of the shield for your beautiful skin."
So, five minutes of roaming the net turns up pages of information garuanteed to leave me none the wiser, but I will continue to use the stuff even though I am FAR from convinced that it is protecting me from skin cancer.

[Royboys]

I've gotta fleck's of the chocolate dust on my pastry.

It's like the crust has broken and now the meat is
mixed in with the tomato sauce and the flakey pastry
is crisping on me body-sausage.

We are the greatest animal on the planet so why
should we be putting sunscreen on our meat-pies.

We are all headed to the Oven and will be made.

[offshore1]

My dermatologist told me recently to avoid sunscreens with titanium dioxide in them. Like you, chillin, a quick check of google brought up many links, including this:


" ... sunscreen ingredients... contain avobenzone, ecamsule (Mexoryl), titanium dioxide, or zinc oxide for significant UVA protection [2].

[edit] The ingredients that hurt
Benzophenone is easily absorbed by the skin.
This chemical is present in most sunscreens. It tends to cause skin irritations and allergies.
Benzophenone- 3 behaves like the hormone oestrogen and increases the numbers of oestrogen sensitive breast cancer cells. It also has the potential to disrupt the hormonal balance of users.
Other products that harm include
Homosalate and octyl-methoxycinnamate (also called octinoxate): this also acts like oestrogen in test tubes
Padimate-O is a derivative of PABA. PABA was earlier widespread in sunsreens but caused irritations and was discontinued. Padimate-O is said to cause damage to the DNA which could cause cancer.
Titanium dioxide application also indicates DNA damage. These last two are as yet only lab and not human and living animal experiments
Diethanolamine (DEA) and associated compounds like triethanolamine or TEA may lead to cancer causing compounds if the sunscreen contains nitrites. The FDA agrees that this is possible and is attempting to examine this. They do not as yet acknowledge risk to users.
Parabens including butyl-, ethyl-, methyl-, and propyl-paraben are used as preservatives in almost all sunscreens. They, like benzophenone act like oestrogen and therefore carry similar risk. Not using them means cutting out all sunscreen use.
Synthetic fragrances could cause allergies or asthma.



[edit] What can I do about it?Use sun block rather than sunscreen. Sunblock lies on top of the skin rather than getting absorbed by it.
Do not used micronised titanium products. Smaller particles of titanium tend to enter the skin and cause damage. Stick with the un-micronised stuff.
Use broad spectrum sunblocks.
Eat for sun protection: load up on natural anti-oxidants in your diet. Include fresh berries, green tea, spirulina and as many other natural anti-oxidants as you can.
Cover up in the sun: the clothing, hats and glasses with afford lots of protection.
Use natural sunscreens like shea butter.
Use natural anti tanners like real lemon juice.
Sunscreens should not be used on infants under 6 months of age because of the risk of side effects.
. "


Personally, I've always been a bit skeptical of sunscreens, thinking anything that powerful's got to have some kind of down side; plus so often even the "greaseless" ones are slippery on a board. I'll always wear a rashie, and on really sunny mid-days a hat (need to wear the hat more :? )

[Jimi]

All talk of arse raping aside, I've got issues with the use of the word 'toxins'.

Anything can be toxic to human health. Too much water can be lethal. Too much oxygen in the air can kill us. etc..

It's all about dose and how much the individual human can safely cope with. I'm still waiting for information on what part of sunscreen is a 'toxin'.

Agree on the toxin thing. Its like the lemon detox and that sh!t, most docs will tell you the word detox itself is misleading.
Anyway, Roy, you do have a point but f@ck your an idiot the way you go about it. People who tan regularly have the skin type that does tan in the first place, meaning they are naturally more resistent to skin cancers, so of course they will have less incidents of skin cancer.
My grandmother for one grew up with no sunscrean, and in an era when of course they wore quite covering swimmers. She is 92, and has been getting cancers cut off for over 20 years, ALL being on areas that were exposed to the sun ALL THE TIME, eg, face, arms, legs. The skin on he stomach looks like she could be 50 years younger, and quess what?! her stomach never saw the sun.
I believe suncreams are probably doing damage too, but to say the sun isnt an issue is just plain dumb

Keep your fu@king ridiculous and potentially damaging alternative ideas to your self mate, your in a very small minority. The things you say that cause skin cancer also DO cause it, but the sun is skins biggest enemy, no question.
And 30 mins a day is more than enough exposure for vitamin D requirements in most people, (yes darker skin people need more exposure, but of course more exposure is not as dangerous to their skin as fairer people).
Its about balance. You can get enough exposure without burning for vitamin D requirements. Lets remember that the body (skin) burns and/or hurts to warn us that something is WRONG, therefore, too much sun exposure=burnt skin=pain=the body does not like it!!

One more time, the way you put your arguement makes you sound like a fu@king imbecile

[roy Stewart]

If the world could reduce cancer rates by 30% by simply ensuring vitamin D was sufficient, surely this is Nobel Prize winning medical research.

.

In order to get a nobel Peace prize one must first start a war. . . this BB spat probably doesn't qualify

.

[roy Stewart]

Roy's really only calling for moderate sun exposure, reducing toxins, and using safe sunscreen. All laudable goals.

Yup

.

[roy Stewart]

The cancer councils of both Australia and the USA are saying the opposite of what Roy is saying.

Cancer societies could not exist without cancer.



.

[roy Stewart]

Hi offshore,

The safest course of action is to get enough sun to get vitamin D ( Exposing as much skin as possible is the most effficient way to do it ), avoiding as many toxins as possible ( in food etc and by using non toxic sunblock ) and avoiding overexposure to the sun.

As one tans the amount of sun the skin can take and the amount of time it takes to get the necessary vitamin D can increase up to 5 or ten times.

Vitamin D requirements are much higher than was previously thought, 5,000 to 10,000 iu per day rather than the insignificant 200 suggested by some sources.

Keep in mind that saying that skin cancer is no joke should not be a way of convincing oneself that the 'it's caused by the sun' propaganda is correct. In my opinion ( and I'm not alone in this opinion ) most skin cancer is caused by toxins, and the current 'it's all caused by the sun' line is just another scam like global warming/Co2

Lack of vitamin D does cause cancer, and the need for vitamin D is being downplayed by those with an anti sun/pro toxins agenda to the piint where if one takes their advice one will definitely be severely, chronically and dangerously vitamin D deficient. The idea that one can get enough vitamin D by walking from one's car to the office while fully dressed is a lie ! Also the advice I read in the link posted earlier by someone was that sunbathing for vitamin D should be done in the morning and evening. That is not true, at those times UVA is predominant, vitamin D producing UVB is there mostly in the middle of the day.

I've read that a lot of skin cancers are found on parts of people's bodies which do not get exposed to the sun, also people who tan regularaly get less skin cancer.


Sufficient vitamin D reduces the risk of all cancers by 30% !


.




.

All I want is ONE source Roy. Just one. Please.

Your entire argument is made worthless as it appears to all originate in your own mind.

I really want to argue with you but you are giving me nothing but mindless nonsense.

I'm not your secretary and I don't care what you think of my opinon, it was nice of you to say 'please' though.

You know perfectly well that you can do some online research yourself, but you want me to do it so that you can scoff at my sources. . .. it's an old tactic.

If on the other hand you posted articles supporting what I'm saying then you would be promoting what you don't believe in.

In spite of this you could easily have a look for yourself, even if you can't accept what I'm saying you'd soon find that there are intelligent people out there who agree. At the very least that should stop you using some of the abusive terms you've been posting so far.

.

[mustkillmulloway]

All talk of arse raping aside,.

damn

i'm always too late read the arse raping threads

and now bondage butts will lock it i guess

p.s why don't we all just wear a fu.cking hat

p.p.s Benzophenone is a agent that some people use too remove skin cancers :?

p.p.ss ranga loves a good arse rapin

[Trev]

The cancer councils of both Australia and the USA are saying the opposite of what Roy is saying.

Cancer societies could not exist without cancer.

.

And they would happily fade into the sunset if there were no more cancers. But in any case your reply doesn't have any relevence to my comment.

[Chillin]

With all this talk of arse rapin, perhaps we should also look into the incidence of colon, rectal and prostate cancers in the gay community........

[mustkillmulloway]

look into the incidence of colon, rectal and prostate cancers in the gay community........

u go look yourself....i just ate

[Trev]

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with Roy at all, for the most part I disagree with him myself, but as I said, why the vitriol, if he wants to believe that then let him.

You honestly think someone is gonna stumble across these websites, reads Roy's theories and stop wearing sun protection?? If they do, well then, fark, are they really worth saving???

Well I hope not, but the point I'm trying to make is that there are a lot of visitors to this site, many of whom just read and move on but Roy puts his case very forcefully and uses terms like
"Most 'sunscreens' also cause cancer.
and....
The whole thing is a scam. "
I still think those two comments are incredibly irresponsible, especially given that when you go searching for information, the sites with the most cred are in favour of sunscreens and the sites which "back up" Roy's views are generally much more circumspect, merely suggesting there should be more research - which is happening.
But I can't find any sites which back up Roy's "The whole thing is a scam. "
as animal chin says,
"I've got issues with the use of the word 'toxins'.

Anything can be toxic to human health. Too much water can be lethal. Too much oxygen in the air can kill us. etc..

It's all about dose and how much the individual human can safely cope with."

[roy Stewart]

Your argument is regarding the credibility of sources is circular.

I'm advocating sunblocks with non toxic ingredients, sunbathing for vitamin D, and avoidance of toxins

I did not advocate using no sun protection. . . . read more carefully before you accuse people, or you wind up arguing with an opponent of your own creation.

.

[Trev]

^^^
Most 'sunscreens' also cause cancer.

The whole thing is a scam.

That is all you wrote.
No explanations.
No in-depth information.
That all came later when people challenged you.
THe other info in that post related to Vitamin D and its' benefits.

So my argument stands

[roy Stewart]

You are not being logical

I said MOST not all.

By pointing out that most sunblocks are toxic I'm endangering the public ? Hahahahaha

.