Many Melanoma Survivors Skip Sunscreen

[elizabethbraddock]

Yes, that is correct: age is not the only reason for the increased cancer incidence, but it is a major factor in most types of cancer.

You are also correct in stating that our generation is exposed to higher amounts of UV radiation in the past, which would explain the increased incidence of skin cancer and at earlier onsets. NASA has found that UV radiation levels from the sun has been increasingly able to penetrate the atmosphere over the last 3 decades.

As far as the VHF being linked to cancer, I am aware of the study you speak of. However, it was shown that there was no statistical significance, and therefore is not an absolute risk factor. VHF, and radio frequencies in general, are low energy and is not ionizing. They're not able to penetrate the cell and damage DNA. You can read about the statistical significance of the VHF study in this scholarly, peer-reviewed article here:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/153/2/202.long

But I agree with you, more people reaching higher age may be a reason for a higher cancer incidence, but it's not the only reason. Two thing I think may play a role in skin cancer developement: - we're exposed to more chemicals, processed food and unhealthy stuff than the generations past. That might cause an overall damage to our DNA and our cells, so people might get more likely to get various kinds of cancer (including skin cancer) - the ozon layer of our planet that filters some of the sun's UV radiation has taken some damage from chemical air polution. I wonder if that's one reason for people getting more skin cancer now than in the decades past. I also read that people are more likely to get skin cancer the closer they live to radio stations. So apparently VHF radio waves can cause cancer, too. >_<

 

[Claudya]

Yes, that is correct: age is not the only reason for the increased cancer incidence, but it is a major factor in most types of cancer.

You are also correct in stating that our generation is exposed to higher amounts of UV radiation in the past, which would explain the increased incidence of skin cancer and at earlier onsets. NASA has found that UV radiation levels from the sun has been increasingly able to penetrate the atmosphere over the last 3 decades.

That's very interesting. Do they have an explanation? Does the sun emit more UV light than it did in the past? The sun will continually increase her emissions due to her getting older, so an increase of UV radiation would make sense. Or did our atmosphere become "weaker" (because of the ozon layer damage or the global warming or something else)?

As far as the VHF being linked to cancer, I am aware of the study you speak of. However, it was shown that there was no statistical significance, and therefore is not an absolute risk factor. VHF, and radio frequencies in general, are low energy and is not ionizing. They're not able to penetrate the cell and damage DNA. You can read about the statistical significance of the VHF study in this scholarly, peer-reviewed article here:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/153/2/202.long

Thanks for the article, that's gonna make for an awesome bedtime reading. Statistics lessons always did a good job putting my to sleep.
Seriously though, I'll read it.
VHF waves are electromagnetic radiation just like UV or x-rays are, just with a much longer wave length and a lot less energy. But they belong to the same category of radiation. And there's a certain angst about radio waves or things like cell phone radiation supposedly causing cancer or Alzheimer's, so I wasn't very surprised to read about the VHF cancer correlation. (Honestly, most radio stations could cause cancer to my ears because of the horrible music they're playing and the even more horrible jabbering of the hosts. :gah)

 

[elizabethbraddock]

That's very interesting. Do they have an explanation? Does the sun emit more UV light than it did in the past? The sun will continually increase her emissions due to her getting older, so an increase of UV radiation would make sense. Or did our atmosphere become "weaker" (because of the ozon layer damage or the global warming or something else)?

Correct again. The main cause for the increased UV penetrating the atmosphere is a decreased level of stratospheric ozone. Increases are between 9-20%, depending on geographic location.

Thanks for the article, that's gonna make for an awesome bedtime reading. Statistics lessons always did a good job putting my to sleep.
Seriously though, I'll read it.
VHF waves are electromagnetic radiation just like UV or x-rays are, just with a much longer wave length and a lot less energy. But they belong to the same category of radiation. And there's a certain angst about radio waves or things like cell phone radiation supposedly causing cancer or Alzheimer's, so I wasn't very surprised to read about the VHF cancer correlation. (Honestly, most radio stations could cause cancer to my ears because of the horrible music they're playing and the even more horrible jabbering of the hosts. :gah)

The longer wavelength and low energy of radio waves is what makes them unable to pass through clothing and penetrate the cell. The content carried over the air is another matter, like you said.

 

[farouk]

That's very interesting. Do they have an explanation? Does the sun emit more UV light than it did in the past? The sun will continually increase her emissions due to her getting older, so an increase of UV radiation would make sense. Or did our atmosphere become "weaker" (because of the ozon layer damage or the global warming or something else)?

Correct again. The main cause for the increased UV penetrating the atmosphere is a decreased level of stratospheric ozone. Increases are between 9-20%, depending on geographic location.

Thanks for the article, that's gonna make for an awesome bedtime reading. Statistics lessons always did a good job putting my to sleep.
Seriously though, I'll read it.
VHF waves are electromagnetic radiation just like UV or x-rays are, just with a much longer wave length and a lot less energy. But they belong to the same category of radiation. And there's a certain angst about radio waves or things like cell phone radiation supposedly causing cancer or Alzheimer's, so I wasn't very surprised to read about the VHF cancer correlation. (Honestly, most radio stations could cause cancer to my ears because of the horrible music they're playing and the even more horrible jabbering of the hosts. :gah)

The longer wavelength and low energy of radio waves is what makes them unable to pass through clothing and penetrate the cell. The content carried over the air is another matter, like you said.

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Hi. I think maybe also that two strands of argument are lumped together. People who argue against bikinis on conservative taste grounds; and those who warn against melanomas developing from excessive skin exposure, have in some cases become unusual allies?

(I'm not sure how far one can legitimately lump together these strands of arguments, anyway.)

 

[elizabethbraddock]

That'd be an interesting way to look at things.

That's very interesting. Do they have an explanation? Does the sun emit more UV light than it did in the past? The sun will continually increase her emissions due to her getting older, so an increase of UV radiation would make sense. Or did our atmosphere become "weaker" (because of the ozon layer damage or the global warming or something else)?

Correct again. The main cause for the increased UV penetrating the atmosphere is a decreased level of stratospheric ozone. Increases are between 9-20%, depending on geographic location.

Thanks for the article, that's gonna make for an awesome bedtime reading. Statistics lessons always did a good job putting my to sleep.
Seriously though, I'll read it.
VHF waves are electromagnetic radiation just like UV or x-rays are, just with a much longer wave length and a lot less energy. But they belong to the same category of radiation. And there's a certain angst about radio waves or things like cell phone radiation supposedly causing cancer or Alzheimer's, so I wasn't very surprised to read about the VHF cancer correlation. (Honestly, most radio stations could cause cancer to my ears because of the horrible music they're playing and the even more horrible jabbering of the hosts. :gah)

The longer wavelength and low energy of radio waves is what makes them unable to pass through clothing and penetrate the cell. The content carried over the air is another matter, like you said.

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Hi. I think maybe also that two strands of argument are lumped together. People who argue against bikinis on conservative taste grounds; and those who warn against melanomas developing from excessive skin exposure, have in some cases become unusual allies?

(I'm not sure how far one can legitimately lump together these strands of arguments, anyway.)

 

[farouk]

That'd be an interesting way to look at things.

Correct again. The main cause for the increased UV penetrating the atmosphere is a decreased level of stratospheric ozone. Increases are between 9-20%, depending on geographic location.



The longer wavelength and low energy of radio waves is what makes them unable to pass through clothing and penetrate the cell. The content carried over the air is another matter, like you said.

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Hi. I think maybe also that two strands of argument are lumped together. People who argue against bikinis on conservative taste grounds; and those who warn against melanomas developing from excessive skin exposure, have in some cases become unusual allies?

(I'm not sure how far one can legitimately lump together these strands of arguments, anyway.)

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Do you think the comparison is valid? or maybe apples and oranges instead?

 

[elizabethbraddock]

I think it might be a bit of a stretch.

That'd be an interesting way to look at things.

Correct again. The main cause for the increased UV penetrating the atmosphere is a decreased level of stratospheric ozone. Increases are between 9-20%, depending on geographic location.



The longer wavelength and low energy of radio waves is what makes them unable to pass through clothing and penetrate the cell. The content carried over the air is another matter, like you said.

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Hi. I think maybe also that two strands of argument are lumped together. People who argue against bikinis on conservative taste grounds; and those who warn against melanomas developing from excessive skin exposure, have in some cases become unusual allies?

(I'm not sure how far one can legitimately lump together these strands of arguments, anyway.)

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

Do you think the comparison is valid? or maybe apples and oranges instead?

 

[farouk]

I think it might be a bit of a stretch.

[MENTION=90009]elizabethbraddock[/MENTION] :

You're probably right. It's apples and oranges, really.

But it's kind of easy to see how some people might want to lump them together; given the wider publicity given to skin cancers today, and given that some Fundamentalist folk for completely different reasons might want to denigrate some swimsuits.

If you see what I mean?

Anyway, sometimes it's good just to try to apply a bit of clear thinking. (Some people might deny that it is, of course.)

Blessings.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Extra UV light from the sun would maybe cause some problems. I'm taking the stance that there is no extra from decades past, but even if 20% more, would that be enough to make a difference between say the measly 10 minutes they recommend, compared to several hours the past generations endured?

But this embarks on another subject: global warming. My jury is out on that, but IF there is global warming, it's not man-made as prideful man secretly thinks he's powerful enough to change this earth. No --- the problem is the sun, and it's been acting up lately. As a matter of fact, there's global warming on all the planets in the solar system as documented by NASA, and as new-ager David Wilcock joked, "There's no SUV's on Jupiter."

But the crux or what I am saying is that the UV is not that much greater. OK.... I’ll concede a little. Maybe an hour and a half of sun today is equal to two hours decades ago, and that's probably an exaggeration, but even if that were the case, let's all be honest and not blame the sun. Something else is clearly going on. Yahweh would not place a cancer-causing orb in the sky. The sun is the giver of all life, and of all the idolatries mentioned in the bible, I can at least understand why ancient man revered the sun. I'll be somewhat forgiving of that. It's the physical counterpart of Yahweh's character, and of his Son Yeshua (who is the forerunner of the same God we will all become equal to)

 

[elizabethbraddock]

A 6-9% increase in parts of the world is a significant increase, and the areas of the world where the UV has increased also see the increased incidences in skin cancer. It is the single largest contributor and predictor to skin cancer prevalence.

You have to remember, the creation was perfect in the beginning, but the whole world is cursed with death after the Fall.

I also do not believe that climate change is not caused by human activity, but that is beside the point. The fact is, is has been shown that there has been a decline in stratospheric ozone which has led to an increase in UV radiation.

 

[tim-from-pa]

A 6-9% increase in parts of the world is a significant increase, and the areas of the world where the UV has increased also see the increased incidences in skin cancer. It is the single largest contributor and predictor to skin cancer prevalence.

You have to remember, the creation was perfect in the beginning, but the whole world is cursed with death after the Fall.

I also do not believe that climate change is not caused by human activity, but that is beside the point. The fact is, is has been shown that there has been a decline in stratospheric ozone which has led to an increase in UV radiation.

Could you please direct me to a chart or other information about UV increase over the years, and by that, are we talking just recently or say, 100 or more years ago?

From my own experience, I know that smog and similar air polution has been markedly improved in the last 45 years. When I was a kid, I could not stand to go into the city the smell would overtake me. Now, I can go to any major city and the air quality seems the same as out here in the country where I live, except I get behind a bus or something.

As for the sun, I seem to tolerate the same number of hours in the sunlight as when I was a kid, so you would not know about UV increase based on the way I burn. Several hours only yields mildly red, and slight stinging in the shower the next day or two, then it's all over, like the other day when I was painting my deck without my shirt on from 10:45AM until about 4:30PM. And after a time, or two or 3, I no longer burn even slightly, but tan. This is how it was with me 45 or more years ago, so I don't notice that much of an increase.

However, I also take far more antioxidants than I did as a kid (I even am healthier, too). That can counteract say, a few % increase in UV IMO, and is the very point I brought up earlier. Is it better to merely avoid the sun, or should we be asking why we're all sickly Draculas that shrivel up as soon as the sun hits us these days? (or at least that's what we are being told) Because I don't remember these cancer problems as a kid. In other words, if we are four points sicker, I'd blame one point on the sun giving out more UV and the other 3 for being sickly. I think the latter is the weightier matter.

People worry about my being in the sun, but it never bothered me, and I always felt better getting my energy straight from it. But many people appear to have problems and take the stance, "I get burned in the sun so you must too!" I find that a bit offensive. In fact, I'm in my mid-50's and I'm still trying to find any age spots or freckles yet and some generation x ladies and gentlemen in their 40's have skin looking older than mine.

 

[farouk]

A 6-9% increase in parts of the world is a significant increase, and the areas of the world where the UV has increased also see the increased incidences in skin cancer. It is the single largest contributor and predictor to skin cancer prevalence.

You have to remember, the creation was perfect in the beginning, but the whole world is cursed with death after the Fall.

I also do not believe that climate change is not caused by human activity, but that is beside the point. The fact is, is has been shown that there has been a decline in stratospheric ozone which has led to an increase in UV radiation.

Hi Elizabeth!

Maybe your good interest in the subject of melanoma has been heightened by your medical training?

Are you due to qualify soon, maybe?

Blessings.