July 25, 2012 by MARCO TORRES
Researchers Now Claim That Not Just A Sunburn, But Tanning Itself Causes Skin Cancer
We've been on the planet for at least hundreds of thousands of years, working and playing all while taking in the sun's rays. However, according to new research, not only are sunburns contributing to cancer, but tanning is also now a culprit. That's right--if you happen to get a nice tan at the beach, melanoma may be creeping around the corner. At least that's the claim by a group of researchers who have published their findings in the journal Nature Communications.
Sunlight has been demonized by the scientific community for as long as the media has existed. Those controlling the media know that not only does the sun increase beneficial levels of critical vitamin D in the body, but it is responsible for a diversity of biological mechanisms controlling everything from hormones to behavior.
Exposure to sunlight and ultraviolet light has been repeatedly shown to NOT be the cause of skin cancer.
Scientists from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center reported UVA exposure is unlikely to have contributed to the rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past 30 years.
The idea that sunscreen prevents cancer is also a myth promoted by pharmaceutical companies, conventional medicine and the mainstream media for one purpose...profit. The sunscreen industry makes money by selling lotion products that actually contain cancer-causing chemicals. It then donates a portion of that money to the cancer industry through non-profit groups like the American and Canadian Cancer Societies which, in turn, run heart-breaking public service ads urging people to use sunscreen to "prevent cancer."
Numerous studies have linked vitamin D levels to a reduction in the risk of certain cancers, including breast cancer, but much debate has focused on the means to boost vitamin D levels -- supplements or sunlight.
Spending an average of three hours a day exposed to sunlight can slash the risk of breast cancer by up to 50 percent.
The link between vitamin D intake and protection from cancer dates from the 1940s when Frank Apperly demonstrated a link between latitude and deaths from cancer, and suggested that sunlight gave "a relative cancer immunity".
Since then there have been numerous studies suggesting associations between vitamin D and lower risks of certain cancers.
However, in perfect timing to fear monger during the summer months,
a new study conducted by GW School of Medicine and Health Sciences (SMHS) researchers found that the effect of the sun on the skin, not only by burning, but simply by tanning, causes melanoma formation. Their paper, entitled “Melanoma induction by ultraviolet A but not ultraviolet B radiation requires melanin pigment,” was published in June 2012.
“This is the first time that UV-induced melanin formation (tanning), traditionally thought to protect against skin cancer, is shown to be directly involved in melanoma formation in mammals,” said De Fabo, who is professor emeritus at SMHS.
Their research used a mouse model to investigate melanoma formed in response to artificial ultraviolet wavelengths at what they claim were biologically relevant doses. They showed that melanoma induction by artificial ultraviolet A requires the presence of melanin pigment and is associated with oxidative DNA damage within melanocytes. In contrast, ultraviolet B radiation initiates melanoma in a pigment-independent manner associated with direct ultraviolet B DNA damage. In other words, the researchers claims that that both UVA and UVB have a significant role for melanin within the melanocyte in melanoma genesis.
In other words, advising the population that a sunburn was hazardous to health was not enough to encourage the masses to reduce sun exposure. They needed to develop a study to suggest that both sunburning and tanning have toxic cancer causing effects. The more people that believe this, the more people will stay out of the sun or lather on the sunscreen. The more people that prevent the sun rays from reaching their skin, the higher the probability of vitamin D deficiency. The higher the probability of vitamin D deficiency, the more incidence of disease and consquently the more clients for conventional medicine. Do you see how this works?
Just in case you were wondering who funded this ridiculous study, the grant was supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Melanoma Research Foundation. The NCI is the same federally funded (and privately funded by Big Pharma) organization that promotes mammography via ionizing radiation. In fact they are one of the biggest mammography promoters in the nation. They are directly managed by the biotech sector and typically employ pharmaceutical executives on their boards.
The Melanoma Research Foundation (MRF) is filled with scientific advisory members with conflicts interests statements littering their academic work. The decision makers at MRF are all current or former pharmaceutical executives or board members.
Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.