Visit us on TWITTER & FACEBOOK!

We will no longer be updating the blog, but please visit our twitter account for new updates on Vitamin D & Sunbeds!

Ultimate Exposure on Twitter.
Bronze Tan Studios on Twitter.


And become a Fan on Facebook!

Ultimate Exposure on Facebook
Bronze Tan Studios on Facebook

Vitamin D In A New Light

There are thirteen vitamins humans need for growth and development and to maintain good health. The human body cannot make these essential bio-molecules. They must be supplied in the diet or by bacteria in the intestine, except for vitamin D. Skin makes vitamin D when exposed to ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation from the sun. A light-skinned person will synthesize 20,000 IU (international units) of vitamin D in 20 minutes sunbathing on a Caribbean beach.

Vitamin D is also unique in another way. It is the only vitamin that is a hormone, a type of steroid hormone known as a secosteroid, with three carbon rings.

Steroid hormones such as cortisone, estrogen, and testosterone have four carbon rings. Ultraviolet B radiation in sunlight breaks open one of the rings in a steroid alcohol present in the skin, 7-dehydrocholesterol, to form vitamin D (cholecalciferol). The liver changes this molecule into its circulating form, 25-hydroxyvitamin D (calcidiol, 25[OH]D), the "vitamin D" blood tests measure. Cells throughout the body absorb 25-hydroxyvitamin D and change it into 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol), the active form of vitamin D that attaches directly to receptors on the DNA of genes in the cell’s nucleus.

The vitamin D hormone system controls the expression of more than 200 genes and the proteins they produce. In addition to its well-known role in calcium metabolism, vitamin D activates genes that control cell growth and programmed cell death (apoptosis), express mediators that regulate the immune system, and release neurotransmitters (e.g., serotonin) that influence one’s mental state.

Severe deficiencies of some vitamins cause vitamin-specific diseases, such as beriberi (from a lack of vitamin B1, thiamine), pellagra (B3, niacin), pernicious anemia (B12), and scurvy, (vitamin C). A deficiency in iodine produces a goiter, mental retardation, and, when severe, cretinism.

Rickets, a softening and bending of bones in children, first described in 1651, is another nutritionally-specific disease. It reached epidemic proportions following the industrial revolution, which began in the 1750s. In the 19^th century, before the importance of exposing children to sunlight was recognized, the majority of children that lived in cities with sunless, narrow alleyways and pollution developed rickets. An autopsy study done in Boston in the late 1800s showed that more than 80 percent of children had rickets.

Early in the 20^th century an investigator found that cod liver oil could prevent rickets in puppies. The nutritional factor in the oil that promotes skeletal calcium deposition was named "vitamin D," alphabetically after already-named vitamins A, B, and C. Rickets was thought to be another vitamin-deficiency disease, and the curative agent, a steroid hormone, was mislabeled a "vitamin."

Now, a century later, a wealth of evidence suggests that rickets, its most florid manifestation, is the tip of a vitamin D insufficiency/deficiency iceberg. A lack of Vitamin D can also trigger infections (influenza and tuberculosis), autoimmune diseases (multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and inflammatory bowel disease), cardiovascular disease, and cancer. Practitioners of conventional medicine (i.e., most MDs) are just beginning to appreciate the true impact of vitamin D deficiency. In 1990, medical journals published less than 20 reviews and editorials on vitamin D. Last year they published more than 300 reviews and editorials on this vitamin/hormone. This year, on July 19, 2007, even the New England Journal of Medicine, the bellwether of pharmaceutically-oriented conventional medicine in the U.S., published a review on vitamin D that addresses its role in autoimmune diseases, infections, cardiovascular disease, and cancer (N Engl J Med 2007;357:266–281).

Up until 1980, doctors thought that vitamin D was only involved in calcium, phosphorus, and bone metabolism. Then two investigators proposed that vitamin D and sunlight could reduce the risk of colon cancer. A growing body of evidence indicates that they were right and that vitamin D can prevent a whole host of cancers – colon, breast, lung, pancreatic, ovarian, and prostate cancer among them. Colon cancer rates are 4 to 6 times higher in North America and Europe, where solar radiation is less intense, particularly during the winter months, compared to the incidence of colon cancer near the equator. People with low blood levels of vitamin D and those who live at higher latitudes are at increased risk for acquiring various kinds of cancer. Many epidemiological, cohort, and case control studies prove, at least on a more likely than not basis, that vitamin D supplements and adequate exposure to sunlight play an important role in cancer prevention (Am J Public Health 2006;96:252–261).

There is now strong scientific evidence that vitamin D does indeed reduce the risk of cancer. Evidence from a well-conducted, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial proves beyond a reasonable doubt that this is the case, at least with regard to breast cancer. A Creighton University study has shown that women over the age of 55 who took a 1,100 IU/day vitamin D supplement, with calcium, and were followed for 4 years had a highly statistically significant (P <0.005)>Am J Clin Nutr 2007;85:1568–1591).

Some of the genes vitamin D activates make proteins that halt cancer by inducing apoptosis (programmed cell death), which destroys aberrant cells before they become cancerous, like adenoma cells in the colon and rectum. Others promote cell differentiation and reining in of out-of-control growth of cancer cells (like prostate cancer cells). Vitamin D-expressed genes inhibit angiogenesis, the formation of new blood vessels that malignant tumors need to grow, as studies on lung and breast cancers show. Other genes inhibit metastases, preventing cancer that arises in one organ from spreading its cells to other parts of the body, as studied in breast, and prostate cancers.

Vitamin D also expresses genes that curb cardiovascular disease. One gene controls the renin-angiotensin system, which when overactive causes hypertension (high blood pressure). Others stifle the immune system-mediated inflammatory response that propagates atherosclerosis and congestive heart failure (Curr Opin Lipidol 2007;18:41–46).

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a neurologically devastating disease that afflicts people with low vitamin D levels. Its victims include the cellist Jacqueline Du Pré, whose first symptom was loss of sensation in her fingers, and some 500,000 Americans who currently suffer from this malady. MS is an autoimmune disease, where the body’s immune system attacks and destroys its own cells. With multiple sclerosis, T cells in the adaptive immune system, Th1 cells (CD4 T helper type 1 cells), attack the myelin sheath (insulation) of the axons (nerve fibers) that neurons (brain cells) use to transmit electrical signals. The Vitamin D hormone system regulates and tones down the potentially self-destructive actions of Th1 cells. These cells make their own 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D if there is a sufficient amount of vitamin D (25-hydroxyvitamin D) circulating in the blood. Researchers have shown that the risk of MS decreases as the level of vitamin D in the blood increases (JAMA 2006;296:2832–2838). People living at higher latitudes have an increased risk of MS and other autoimmune diseases. Studies show that people who live below latitude 35° (e.g., Atlanta) until the age of 10 reduce the risk of MS by 50% (Toxicology 2002;181–182:71–78 and Eur J Clin Nutr 2004;58:1095–1109).

In a study published earlier this year, researchers evaluated 79 pairs of identical twins where only one twin in each pair had MS, despite having the same genetic susceptibility. They found that the MS-free twin had spent more time outdoors in the sun – during hot days, sun tanning, and at the beach. The authors conclude that sunshine is protective against MS (Neurology 2007;69:381–388).

New research suggests that influenza is also a disease triggered by vitamin D deficiency. Influenza virus exists in the population year-round, but influenza epidemics are seasonal and occur only in the winter (in northern latitudes), when vitamin D blood levels are at their nadir. Vitamin D-expressed genes instruct macrophages, the front-line defenders in the innate immune system, to make antimicrobial peptides, which are like antibiotics (Science 2006;311:1770–1773). These peptides attack and destroy influenza virus particles, and in human carriers keep it at bay. (Neutrophils and natural killer cells in the innate immune system and epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract also synthesize these virucidal peptides.) Other vitamin D-expressed genes rein in macrophages fighting an infection to keep them from overreacting and releasing too many inflammatory agents (cytokines) that can damage infected tissue. In the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, which killed 50 million people, of which 500,000 were Americans, young healthy adults (as happened to my 22-year-old grandmother) would wake up in the morning feeling well, start drowning in their own inflammation as the day wore on, and be dead by midnight. Autopsies showed complete destruction of the epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract due, as researchers now know, to a macrophage-induced overly severe inflammatory reaction to the virus. These flu victims were attacked and killed by their own immune system, something researchers have found vitamin D can prevent (Epidemiol Infect 2006;134:1129–1140).

Randomized clinical trials need to be done to test the vitamin D theory of influenza. With what we know now, however, perhaps an annual shot of 600,000 IU of vitamin D (Med J Aust 2005;183:10–12) would be more effective in preventing influenza than a jab of flu vaccine.

Our species evolved in equatorial Africa where the sun, shining directly overhead, supplies its inhabitants with year-round ultraviolet B photons for making vitamin D. Our African ancestors absorbed much higher doses of vitamin D living exposed in that environment compared to the amount most humans obtain today. A single mutation that occurred around 50,000 years ago is responsible for the appearance of white skin in humans. It turns out that a difference in one rung, or base pair, in the 3 billion-rung DNA ladder that constitutes the human genome determines the color of one’s skin (Science 2005;310:1782–1786). White skin, with less melanin, synthesizes vitamin D in sunlight six times faster than dark skin. People possessing this mutation were able to migrate to higher latitudes, populate Europe, Asia, and North America, and be able to make enough vitamin D to survive.

The majority of the world’s population now lives above latitude 35° N and is unable to synthesize vitamin D from sunlight for a period of time in winter owing to the angle of the sun. At a large solar zenith angle, ozone in the upper atmosphere will completely block UVB radiation. In Seattle (47° N) and London (52° N), from October to April UVB photons are blocked by the atmosphere so one’s skin cannot make vitamin D. (The half-life of circulating vitamin D is approximately one month.) Making matters worse, even when UVB radiation is available in sunlight, health authorities, led by the American Academy of Dermatology, warn people to shield themselves from the sun to avoid getting skin cancer.

Except for oily fish like (wild-only) salmon, mackerel, and sardines and cod liver oil – and also sun-dried mushrooms – very little vitamin D is naturally present in our food. Milk, orange juice, butter, and breakfast cereal are fortified with vitamin D, but with only 100 IU per serving. One would have to drink 200 8-oz. glasses of milk to obtain as much vitamin D as skin makes fully exposed to the noonday sun.

The U.S. Food and Nutrition Board in the Institute of Medicine puts the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for vitamin D at 200 IU for children and adults less than 50 years old, 400 IU for adults age 50–70, and 800 IU for adults over the age of 70. Most multivitamin preparations contain 400 IU of vitamin D. These guidelines are directed towards maintaining bone health and are sufficient to prevent rickets – but not cancer, cardiovascular disease, multiple sclerosis, or influenza. Without evidence to support it, the board arbitrarily set the safe upper limit for vitamin D consumption at 2,000 IU/day.

Vitamin D (25-hydroxyvitamin D) blood levels, the barometer for vitamin D status, are measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml) or nanomoles per liter (nmol/l), where ng/ml = 0.4 nmol/l. Children and adults need a vitamin D blood level >8 ng/ml to prevent rickets and osteomalacia (demineralization and softening of bones) respectively. It takes a concentration >20 ng/ml to keep parathyroid hormone levels in a normal range. A level >34 ng/ml is required to ensure peak intestinal calcium absorption. Finally, neuromuscular performance steadily improves in elderly people as vitamin D levels rise up to 50 ng/ml. Accordingly, a vitamin D blood level <8>severely deficient; 8–19, deficient; and 20–29, insufficient, i.e., too low for good health. A level >30 ng/ml is sufficient, but experts now consider 50–99 ng/ml to be the optimal level of vitamin D. Levels 100–150 ng/ml are excessive and >150 ng/ml, potentially toxic.

A majority of Americans have insufficient or deficient vitamin D blood levels. In veterans undergoing heart surgery at the Seattle VA hospital, I found that 78% had a low vitamin D level: 12% were insufficient; 56%, deficient; and 10% were severely deficient.

In order to enjoy optimal health, we should maintain a vitamin D blood level of ≥50–99 ng/ml. Without sun exposure, to reach a level of 50 ng/ml requires taking a 5,000 IU/day vitamin D supplement. There are two kinds of vitamin D supplements: vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), the kind our skin makes, and vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol), a synthetic variant made by irradiating plants. Vitamin D2 is only 10–30% as effective in raising 25-hydroxyvitamin D blood levels compared to vitamin D3, leading the authors of a recent study conclude, "Vitamin D2 should not be regarded as a nutrient suitable for supplementation or fortification" (Am J Clin Nutr 2006;84:694–697).

Concerns about vitamin D toxicity are overblown, along with those about sun exposure. As one researcher in the field puts it, "Worrying about vitamin D toxicity is like worrying about drowning when you’re dying of thirst." The LD50 of vitamin D in dogs (the dose that will kill half the animals) is 3,520,000 IU/kilogram. One can take a 10,000 IU vitamin D supplement every day, month after month safely, with no evidence of adverse effect. (Am J Clin Nutr 1999;69:842–856). A person must consume 50,000 IU a day for several months before hypercalcemia (an elevated calcium level in the blood, which is the initial manifestation of vitamin D toxicity) might occur. Vitamin D in a physiologic dose (5,000 IU/day) prevents the build up of calcium in blood vessels. (Circulation 1997;96:1755–1760). If one takes 10,000 IU of vitamin D a day and spends a lot of time in the sun, it would be prudent to check vitamin D blood level to ensure that it does not exceed 100 ng/ml.

Sensible sun exposure should be encouraged, not maligned. If one avoids sunburn, the sun’s health-giving benefits far outweigh its detrimental effects. A large body of evidence indicates that sunlight does not cause the most lethal form of skin cancer, malignant melanoma. A U.S. Navy study found that melanoma occurred more frequently in sailors who worked indoors all the time. Those who worked outdoors had the lowest incidence of melanoma. Also, most melanomas appear on parts of the body that are seldom exposed to sunlight (Arch Environ Health 1990;45:261–267). Sun exposure is associated with increased survival from melanoma (J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:195–199). Another study showed that people who had longer lifetime exposure to the sun without burning were less likely to get melanomas than those with less exposure (J Invest Dermatol 2003;120:1087–1093.)

The rise in skin cancers over the last 25 years parallels the rise in use of sunscreen lotions, which block vitamin D-producing UVB radiation but not cancer-causing ultraviolet A radiation (UVA). (Newer sunscreen lotions also block out UVA.) Each year there are 8,000 deaths from melanoma and 1,500 deaths from nonmelanoma (squamous and basal cell) skin cancer. Surgical excision of nonmelanoma skin cancers cures them, except in rare cases where the growth has been allowed to linger for a long time and metastasize. Dr. John Cannell, Executive Director of the Vitamin D Council, makes this point: 1,500 deaths occur each year from non-melanoma skin cancer, but 1,500 deaths occur each day from other cancers that vitamin D in optimal doses might well prevent. (The Vitamin D Council website is an excellent source of information on vitamin D.)

The U.S. government and its citizens currently spend $2,000 billion dollars ($2 trillion) on "health care," i.e., sickness care, each year. The cost of taking a 5,000 IU supplement of vitamin D every day for a year is $22.00. The cost for 300 million Americans taking this supplement would be $6.6 billion dollars. The number and variety of diseases that vitamin D at this dose could prevent, starting with a 50 percent reduction in cancer, is mind-boggling. If everyone took 5,000 IU/day of vitamin D, the U.S. "health care" industry would shrink. It would no longer account for 16 percent of the gross domestic product.

Health food stores typically do not sell vitamin D3 in 5,000 IU tablets, but they are readily available online. BIO-TECH Pharmacal produces both 5,000 and 50,000 IU tablets of Vitamin D3, which online sites sell. Some people prefer to take one 50,000 IU table a week (equivalent to 7,100 IU a day) and a three-day course of 150,000 IU vitamin D at the first sign of a cold.

Two sites that sell both "D₃-5" (5,000 IU) and "D₃-50" (50,000 IU) are here and here.

Donald Miller (send him mail) is a cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington in Seattle. He is a member of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness and writes articles on a variety of subjects for LewRockwell.com. His web site is www.donaldmiller.com

(Source)

New Vitamin D Research!

Tanning Beds For Vitamin D

08/07/2009

New research from Michael Holick indicates that tanning beds may be even more effective at producing vitamin D than was previously believed, according to reports from Smart Tan.

Holick’s group studied 15 people aged 20-53, tracking their vitamin D blood levels as they tanned in tanning equipment three times a week. Fifty percent had higher vitamin D blood levels after one week of tanning and 150 percent had higher vitamin D blood levels after five weeks of tanning.

Source: http://www.lookingfit.com/hotnews/tanning-beds-for-vitamin-d.html

Natural Vitamin D doses and cancer Reduction

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

As an advocate of Smart Tanning in moderation and sunburn prevention, it was great to read that a $20 million US government study has been sponsored to examine natural Vitamin D doses and cancer reduction.
Currently 75% os US adults and children are Vitamin D deficient. Higher levels of Vitamin D have been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease, help prevent certain cancers, help with weight loss, help increase bone density, reduce depression.........to name just a handful of benefits of this amazing 'Sunshine Vitamin'
Why is it called the Sunshine Vitamin ? When sunlight (UVB) contacts the skin it produces Vitamin D3, through a series of reactions this is converted to Vitamin D. Sun exposure is the most efficicent way of producing Vitamin D in the body.
So it makes you think ! Why is the USA experiencing a Vitamin D deficiency epidemic. Could it be because the $35 billion cosmetic industry is 'sun scaring' people inside and undercover and out of the sun ? Promoting sun 'avoidance' as opposed the 'moderate' sun exposure.
Just 15 minutes, 3 times a week in the sun, can stimulate the skin to produce healthy Vitamin D levels.
We need sunlight for every day functions, we weren't made to live in caves or uderground WE NEED sunlight. The key word to remember here is moderation. As a tanning salon owner we promote Smart Tanning, and that is 'Never Burn'.
Happy Tanning :-)

Source: http://alohasuntan.blogspot.com/

The Health Benefits of Tanning

The therapeutic exposure to sunlight has origin in ancient Chinese and Egyptian medicine. Recently, however, there has been much controversy as to whether or not tanning is a good idea, whether or not it is healthy. The popularity of tanning beds

has greatly risen with adults, yet skyrocketed with image-obsessed teens. Although many warn it against, people are starting to urge others to tan, stressing the numerous benefits, for both health and self-esteem. Tanning in and of itself is not unhealthy; contrary to what many think, tanning is very healthy for you in a number of ways.

“Tans are natural shields against the sun's ultraviolet radiation, which can damage skin tissue in the form of a sunburn (as well as cause cancer in the long-run). Exposure to ultraviolet rays causes certain skin cells to produce the pigment melanin, which darkens through oxidation. Enough beach bumming and those cells will migrate closer to the skin's surface and produce more melanin, further darkening the skin into a suntan. It's no wonder our bodies have developed the ability to produce melanin. The pigment absorbs ultraviolet radiation and defends against further penetration of skin tissue.” (8) Tans are great because they are our body’s natural protection against sunburns, and without them we would be much more susceptible to burns and skin cancer. This is why, during the summer, people get burned the first time they go into the sun – because their bodies are not yet prepared to fight sunburns. Tanning is necessary to prevent against burning and hurting the skin, and tanning beds are great and easy ways to tan in a controlled atmosphere.

Beginning with physical appearance, tanning adds a young and healthy glow. In addition, a tan makes one look more muscular and defined, and will help hide visible veins, body hair, and impurities in or on the skin. With the intense pressure to look one’s best, many resort to tanning to give themselves a young and healthy look, but do not completely understand its full effect. Tanning has proven to help many skin conditions, from acne to eczema, and even psoriasis, “a fairly common and extremely persistent skin disease … the typical lesion of psoriasis is a red, sharply circumscribed patch with silvery scales.” (11) In fact, eighty percent of psoriasis sufferers who tan show improvement as a direct result of their exposure to the ultraviolet light. “The skin disease had plagued Candy Knox since childhood. Each winter, the red, scaly patches indicative of psoriasis would reappear on her arms and Knox would once again contend with discomfort and feelings of insecurity. But a few years ago her dermatologist recommended a surprising treatment that has helped Knox cope when cold weather hits: indoor tanning. ‘My doctor said my best bet was to move to Florida or go tanning when I needed it,’ said Knox, who now makes periodic trips to the tanning booth. ‘It really seems to help whenever I have a breakout.’” (5)

Sunlight has proven to affect over one hundred of the body’s function. Exposure to light has proven to lower the resting heart rate and blood pressure. It also lowers cholesterol because the body uses the liver’s cholesterol as raw material to produce vitamin D. Sunlight reduces stress and can help the immune system, as well as increase the skin’s resistance to infections. With exercise, sunlight has many beneficial results, as it heightens physical performance. Sunlight can increase cardiac output, as well as increase energy, endurance, and muscular strength. Lastly, it is proven that “sunlight stimulates the thyroid gland, which boosts your metabolism.” (9)

Seasonal Affective Disorder is also known as winter depression, an affective mood disorder that stems from lack of sunlight. Most SAD sufferers experience regular mental health throughout most of the year, but experience depression symptoms during the winter months. Dyane Riel, for example, was born and raised in a small Canadian village where it snows in October and stays dark for almost half the year. Riel said many of the locals experience Seasonal Affective Disorder. “A lot of people I knew were depressed all the time” Says Dyane. “They opened tanning shops in town and everyone uses them. Many people go south for vacations as well. These things are great therapy for them.” (5) Also, exposure to bright light has been found to alleviate some symptoms of Pre Menstrual Syndrome, or PMS, such as mild depression, mood swings, physical discomfort, irritability, and social withdrawal.
Looking at other health benefits, tanning has been shown to release endorphins, a chemical that produces a happy, pleasant feeling. It also produces vitamin D, a vitamin many people are deficient in, which is necessary for calcium absorption in the body. Tanning beds are great because one can go at any time they are available and get that sunlight they have been lacking. One of the benefits of going tanning is that the exposure to UVB light is the body's natural way to produce vitamins. A great percentage of today’s population is vitamin D deficient. People get between ninety and ninety-five perfect of their vitamin D through sun exposure, and people are going outdoors less and less as the years go by. For example, the vast majority of people works indoors, drives cars instead of walking or biking, and exercises inside a gym as opposed to running or working out outside. One of the greatest benefits of tanning is the increased production of vitamin D, which is an excellent vitamin for a number of reasons.

Research has recently shown that individuals with healthy vitamin D levels are much less likely to develop certain forms of cancer, such as breast cancer, ovarian cancer, colon cancer, and prostate cancer. These life-threatening cancers are much more common in those who do not receive regular sunlight, as vitamin D plays a role in slowing the growth of the cancer cells in these kinds of tumors.
When vitamin D is missing, your body releases another hormone, parathyroid, to pull calcium out of the skeleton. One result of this is osteoporosis, a bone-brittling disease which leads to approximately one million hip or bone fractures a year. “[Boston University medical school professor Michael] Holick believes the high rates of osteoporosis among the elderly can be partly traced to the fact that many spend little time outside and they're diligent sunscreen wearers. Indeed, studies suggest that 30 to 40 percent of American and British elders with hip fractures were low on [vitamin] D. The problem could be remedied with the same ultraviolet lights that iguana owners use for their pets. ‘We don't do this for nursing home residents,’ Holick says, ‘but we’ll spend 40 bucks for lights for an iguana.’” (10)

Osteoporosis and cancer, however, are not the only health risks from vitamin D deficiency that we should worry about. “Current research indicates vitamin D deficiency plays a role in causing seventeen varieties of cancer as well as heart disease, stroke, hypertension, autoimmune diseases, diabetes, depression, chronic pain, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, muscle wasting, birth defects, and periodontal disease." (7) In Finland, where the sun shows for only a few hours a day during wintertime, natives have the world’s highest incidence of Type 1 diabetes. In a study tracking ten thousand children, researchers discovered that those who had regular doses of vitamin D as infants were approximately 80 percent less likely to develop Type 1 diabetes than those who did not get enough of it. Hypertension, or high blood pressure, is more common the farther one is from the equator.

Aforementioned Professor Holick “recruited 18 volunteers with mild hypertension and put them under UVB lights for at least six minutes three times a week. After six weeks, the amount of D in their systems had more than doubled and their blood pressure had dropped significantly - to normal for some.”

Tanning is undoubtedly good for ones health and appearance, as mentioned before, but many people question why tanning beds are so popular when the sun is free. However, there are a great number of reasons why tanning beds are superior. First of all, there are parts of the Earth that do not always receive as much sunlight as needed during the day for people to remain healthy. Professor Holick joked, “you could stand outside naked from the time the sun rises till it sets and you won’t make any [vitamin] D.” (10) The vast majority of people that do not already tan don’t realize that tanning salons have different strengths of beds, and customers can choose how long they are exposed to the UV rays. Tanners can use either the lotions sold at the store to enhance their tans or a light sunblock to lessen it, however exposure to UV rays from either tanning or the sun is greatly recommended by many doctors to treat skin conditions and prevent a vast number of health risks.

In conclusion, tanning is best in small doses, almost deemed necessary for a multitude of reasons. From the prevention of cancers, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, hypertension, autoimmune diseases, depression, chronic pain, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness or wasting, birth defects, and periodontal disease to just wanting to look and feel better, tanning is a great way to stay healthy and look good.

Source: http://www.freeonlineresearchpapers.com/health-benefits-tanning

Benefits of Moderate UV Sunshine Exposure

Acedemic Fraud

Posted by Tan Man on July 30, 2009

IARC Report Declaring UV “Carcinogenic to Humans” ignored conflicting information JACKSON, Mich. (July 29) –

QUICK ANSWERS:

1. This list means nothing more than SUNBURN is harmful. There’s no research suggesting that non-burning exposure is harmful.

2. Many of the parties promoting this list have ties to the $35 billion sunscreen industry, which wants you to over-use their product.

3. Saying that ultraviolet light causes skin cancer and therefore should be avoided is just like saying water causes drowning and therefore should be avoided.

You need water in order to live and survive – just as you need ultraviolet light in order to live and survive.

4. By including UV light on a list of carcinogens without making the statement clear that overexposure, and not mere exposure, is the danger, the makers of this list have made a glaring and fraudulent omission.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer ignored conflicting information in its classification of ultraviolet light as ‘carcinogenic to humans’ – a one-dimensional conclusion that benefits the $35 billion sunscreen industry, which has strong financial ties to most of the dermatology community today, and forgets the fact that humans need UV light to live.

“If a pharmaceutical company sold you sunshine, we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now,” International Smart Tan Network Vice President Joseph Levy said. “Instead, we are dealing with a report that now has the press comparing Mother Nature’s most important creation – sunlight – to arsenic and mustard gas. It’s ludicrous.” “Saying that UV exposure is harmful and should be avoided is as wrong as saying that water causes drowning, and therefore we should avoid water.”

No data has ever been presented suggesting that UV exposure in a non-burning fashion is a significant risk factor for any skin damage, nor has a mechanism been established whereby UV causes melanoma, which is more common in indoor workers than in outdoor workers and which occurs most commonly on parts of the body that don’t get regular UV exposure. IARC cited its own report alleging “risk of skin melanoma is increased by 75 per cent when people started using tanning beds before age 30.” Ignored in this statement is confounding information pointing out that: * IARC’s analysis was flawed. When the palest individuals who cannot tan (called Skin Type I – people who are not allowed to tan in North American tanning facilities) were removed from the IARC data set, there was no increase in risk for the group being studied. *

In fact, 18 of 22 studies on this topic show no statistically signficant relationship between indoor tanning and melanoma – including the largest and most recent study. “Ignoring conflicting information in the publication of a report and elevating your conclusion without bringing confounding information to light constitutes academic fraud,” Levy said. “This report presents no new data, ignores confounding information and attempts to reach a new conclusion with no new information. While it remains prudent for individuals to avoid sunburn, it should be noted that there is NO RESEARCH suggesting that non-burning UV exposure is a significant risk factor for humans. None.” Levy continued, “Further, it is clearer now more than ever that humans NEED regular UV exposure as the only true natural way to make vitamin D. It is called ‘The Sunshine Vitamin’ for a reason: You produce more vitamin D by getting a tan in a non-burning fashion than you would from drinking 100 glasses of whole milk.

We are very concerned that the politics of profit-motivated anti-UV groups are misrepresenting the balanced message about sunlight that a true, independent evaluation of the science supports. The U.S. government in 2000 placed ultraviolet light on the federal government’s list of known human carcinogens. But the criteria to be labeled a carcinogen does not take into account the dosage of a substance required to increase risk – which means that the listing only indicts sunburn, not non-burning exposure.

According to that report, “The Report does not present quantitative assessments of carcinogenic risk. Listing of substances in the Report, therefore, does not establish that such substances present carcinogenic risks to individuals in their daily lives.”

Source: http://justdfacts.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/acedemic-fraud/

Tanning Truth

Indoor Tanning: Smart Tan

Posted: Friday, January 18th, 2008

An estimated 30 million North Americans turn to tanning salons as a controlled alternative to outdoor tanning. As we become increasingly aware of the benefits associated with regular exposure to sunlight and of the importance of managing the risks that can be associated with sunburn and overexposure, more people are turning to indoor tanning facilities to help attain their tans in a controlled environment scientifically designed to minimize the risk of sunburn.

The Tanning Industry’s Base Belief

The professional indoor tanning industry’s scientifically supported position is summed up in this declaration: Moderate tanning, for individuals who can develop a tan, is the smartest way to maximize the potential benefits of sun exposure while minimizing the potential risks associated with either too much or too little sunlight.

This position is founded on the following tenets:

1. Ultraviolet light exposure from the sun or from an indoor tanning unit is essential for human health, and getting it in a non-burning fashion is the smartest way.
2. The professional indoor tanning industry promotes and teaches what we refer to as The Golden Rule of Smart Tanning: Don’t ever sunburn.
3. For the past decade, the indoor tanning industry has been more effective at teaching sunburn prevention than those who promote complete sun avoidance. Since the mid-1990s, tanning industry research has supported what millions of indoor tanners have known all along: that non-tanners sunburn outdoors more often than people who tan indoors. The professional indoor tanning salon industry is part of the solution in the ongoing battle against sunburn and in teaching people how to identify a proper and practical life-long skin care regimen.
4. A tan is the body’s natural protection against sunburn. Your skin is designed to tan as a natural body function.
5. Every year, millions of indoor tanners successfully develop “base tans” before embarking on sunny vacations – tans that, combined with the proper use of sunscreen outdoors, help them prevent sunburn.
6. There are known physiological and psychological benefits associated with sunlight exposure and there are many other potential benefits that appear linked to sun exposure, but need further research. The potential upside of these benefits is considerable and deserves further consideration. Because sunlight is free and vitamin D is a relatively cheap pharmaceutical product, research into the many benefits of vitamin D has not been funded to its natural conclusion.
7. The body produces Vitamin D naturally when the skin is exposed to sunlight. Vitamin D deficiency has become a recognized epidemic in North America and overzealous sun protection practices likely have contributed to this.
8. The risks associated with UV overexposure are manageable for anyone who has the ability to develop a tan.

Why Is Indoor Tanning “Smart Tanning?”

Indoor tanning, if you can develop a tan, is an intelligent way to minimize the risk of sunburn while maximizing the enjoyment and benefit of having a tan. We call this SMART TANNING because tanners are taught by trained tanning facility personnel how their skin type reacts to sunlight and how to avoid sunburn outdoors, as well as in a salon.

Tanning in a professional facility today minimizes risk because the government regulates indoor tanning in the United States and Canada. In the United States, exposure times for every tanning session are established by a schedule present on every piece of equipment that takes into account the tanner’s skin type and the intensity of the equipment to deliver a dosage of sunlight designed to minimize the risk of sunburn. The schedule, as regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, also takes into account how long an individual has been tanning, increasing exposure times gradually to minimize the possibility of burning.

That kind of control is impossible outdoors, where variables including seasonality, time of day, weather conditions, reflective surfaces and altitude all make outdoor tanning a random act and sunburn prevention more difficult.

How Do Indoor Tanning Salons Teach Sunburn Prevention?

The indoor tanning industry is at the forefront in educating people how to successfully avoid sunburn over the course of one’s life.

• Studies of indoor tanners have shown consistently that indoor tanning customers once they begin tanning in a professional salon, are less likely to sunburn than they were before they started tanning.
• Studies have also shown that indoor tanners are less likely to sunburn outdoors as compared to non-tanners.

Consider, in recent years sunburn incidence in the general population has been steadily increasing while sunscreen usage has been declining. And according to the American Academy of Dermatology, the sub-group most likely to sunburn is older men. In contrast, sunscreen usage outdoors among indoor tanners is increasing.

We believe that teaching people strictly to avoid the sun may be making them more likely to sunburn when they do go outside for summer activities – and everyone does go outdoors at some point. Consider:

1. Tanning is your body’s natural defense mechanism against sunburn, and indoor tanners have activated this defense against burning – a tan essentially multiplies the ability of sunscreen worn outdoors to do its job. That’s one reason non-tanners are more vulnerable when they inevitably do go outdoors.
2. Indoor tanners are educated at professional tanning facilities how to avoid sunburn outdoors, how to use sunscreens appropriately and how to properly moisturize their skin.

When you also consider that the majority of people who sunburn are male, according to the AAD, and that 65-70 percent of indoor tanning customers are female, clearly, it is non-tanners who are doing most of the burning outdoors. In the war against sunburn, tanning salons are part of the solution. Those who abstain from sun exposure completely are more likely to sunburn when they inevitably do go outdoors, even if they attempt to wear sunscreen.

Why We Promote Indoor Tanning As “Smart Tanning”

The professional indoor tanning industry promotes responsible indoor tanning and sunburn prevention as “smart.” We choose not to use the word “safe.” Here is why:

The word “safe” implies that one can recklessly abuse something without any fear of causing harm. And reckless abandon certainly is not the behavior the professional indoor tanning industry is teaching. In fact, we are playing a key role in successfully preventing that kind of reckless abuse. By teaching a “smart” approach to sunburn prevention that recognizes that people do perceive different benefits from being in the sun, we are able to teach sunburn prevention in a practical way that respects both the potential benefits and the risks of sun exposure.

For example, previous generations believed that sunburn was an inconvenient but necessary precursor to developing a tan. Today we know better, and we are teaching a new generation of tanners how to avoid sunburn at all costs. Again, our position: Moderate tanning is the best way to maximize the potential benefits of sun exposure while minimizing the potential risks of either too much or too little exposure.

These graphs illustrate our point. The left graph shows the conventional thinking about sunlight: that totally eliminating sun exposure eliminates risks. That oversimplification is why the $30 billion sun-care industry tells us to wear sunscreen 365 days a year, no matter where we live. But the right graph is a more accurate, albeit more complicated, description of the risk function.

The one thing we do know for certain about sunlight is that zero exposure does NOT equal zero risk; in fact, the risks of zero exposure would be deadly. So the risk function must be curved. The vertex of that curve — where risk is minimized — is different for every person and cannot be randomly defined. What’s more, this graph does not even take into account the balance between benefits and risks. That has to be part of the equation if any campaign is going to be effective.

Human life is totally reliant on sun exposure, and the life-giving effects of ultraviolet light. The question for each of us — a question that nobody knows the exact answer to — is how much sun exposure is appropriate, and how much is too much. Basing the answer to that question on the belief that any exposure increases one’s risk of skin damage — a belief that is not categorically supported in the medical literature —fails to recognize the positive influence ultraviolet light and sunlight have on our lives.

New research on breast cancer, prostate cancer, ovarian cancer, colon cancer, heart disease, multiple sclerosis and other deadly diseases — research that shows that regular sun exposure may play a key part in preventing the onset or retarding the growth of these deadly diseases — supports the position that moderate sun exposure, for those of us who can develop a tan, is the best way to maximize the potential benefits of sun exposure while minimizing the potential risks of either too much or too little exposure.

Why Don’t We Hear More About Smart Tanning Then?

That is changing. In 2006 the American Cancer Society and the Canadian Cancer Society joined health officials in Australia in finally recognizing that individuals need some ultraviolet light exposure in order to be healthy, and that sun avoidance may be contributing to vitamin D deficiency.

Why did this acknowledgement take so long? As we mentioned, the truth about sun exposure is abstract and complicated — the right level of exposure for one person may not be right for another person. Heredity, skin type, and many other factors make it a different equation for everyone. But one truth is universal: We all need sun exposure and UV light in order to survive.

It is a lot easier just to tell people to avoid sunshine than teach them how to enjoy it responsibly and appropriately, so many of our public health advisories have attempted to oversimplify the message and few took into account any potential for positive effects of sunlight. Instead of teaching you how to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks, many reports simply oversimplify the scenario and mislead you into believing that any exposure is bad for you.

You should also be aware of the fact that many industries benefit from scaring you about any sun exposure – twisting a proper message of sunburn prevention into an unwarranted message of total sun avoidance. This profit-based science has created what we believe is a total misuse of sunscreens.

What Do We Mean When We Say “Misuse of Sunscreens?”

Sunscreen should only be used to prevent sunburn. It is being marketed to block all UV exposure, which is unwarranted.

Make no mistake: Sunscreen is a good product with an intelligent usage: the prevention of sunburn. But it is not necessary to wear this product daily most of the year in most climates to prevent sunburn. Yet many in the $30 billion sun care industry encourage everyone to wear products with sunscreen (many of which are women’s cosmetics) 365 days a year — no matter where they live. This is misuse of the product and may in fact cause more harm than good in the long run. Please consider:

1. Sunscreen, when worn, almost completely prevents your skin from producing any vitamin D. Sun exposure to the skin is the body’s natural way to produce Vitamin D – it is the way you are naturally intended to get it. An estimated 90 percent of the vitamin D in our systems comes from sun exposure. In fact, according to accepted anthropologic evolutionary theory, that’s why fair-skinned cultures developed fair skin: To better produce vitamin D from sunlight.
2. Vitamin D is very rare in foods and the form of vitamin D you get from foods and dietary supplements is not processed in the body the same way as Vitamin D produced naturally from sun exposure to the skin.
3. Wearing sunscreen in northern climates most of the year totally blocks your body’s ability to produce vitamin D.
4. Many studies have shown and it is now universally accepted that up to 90 percent of the North American population is vitamin D deficient. What’s more, recent research has shown that humans need five to 10 times more vitamin D than we previously thought – levels that are not attainable through diet and supplements alone.
5. Women’s cosmetics today almost always contain sunscreen. It is very difficult for women to find products that do not block UV exposure.

Again, while sunscreen is an excellent product that has an intelligent usage in the fight against sunburn, overuse of the product may have serious consequences as well. Because most women wear foundation products daily, their make-up may be preventing them from producing vitamin D much of the year. And because women are more likely than men to develop osteoporosis, making up 18 million of the 25 million Americans afflicted with the disease, they would stand to benefit even more from an increase in vitamin D production.

What Is The Appropriate Usage of Sunscreen?

Simply stated, sunscreen should be used as a tool to prevent sunburn whenever sunburn is a possibility. It should not be used on a daily basis in climates and seasons when sunburn is not possible.

While the tanning industry does support the use of sunscreens as a tool to prevent sunburn outdoors, we do not believe it is proper to teach people to wear this product during times of the year when one would not be able to sunburn outdoors. That is misbranding the product

That is why the professional indoor tanning industry teaches proper sunscreen usage more effectively than those who simply tell the public to wear the product 365 days a year: The tanning industry’s approach is more credible and practical.

Why Should We Be Concerned About Vitamin D Deficiency?

New research has shown that vitamin D deficiency is epidemic in American adults today, suggesting that up to 90 percent of North Americans are vitamin D deficient. It is likely that over-usage of sunscreen in climates and seasons when sunburn is not a possibility has contributed to this epidemic. This is especially significant because:

• A 2006 systematic review of 63 studies on vitamin D status in relation to cancer risk has shown that vitamin D sufficiency can reduce one’s risk of colon, breast and ovarian cancers by up to 50 percent. The landmark paper, published in the February 2006 issue of The American Journal of Public Health, is the most comprehensive paper on vitamin D written to date.
• Additionally, vitamin D deficiency is a leading cause of osteoporosis, a disease affecting 25 million Americans which leads to 1 million hip and bone fractures every year. In elderly individuals, such fractures are often deadly. Encouraging everyone to wear sunscreen all year long in any climate undoubtedly is contributing to this problem, as vitamin D is necessary for the body to properly process calcium.
• While environmental correlations have established for years that people in sunny climates have lower risks of many forms of cancer, in recent years the mechanism by which Vitamin D slows or retards the growth of tumor cells has been researched and identified. It was once thought that only the kidneys could produce active vitamin D, but we now know that many cells in the body perform this function, including cells in the breast, prostate, colon, brain and skin.
• Research has shown that the active form of vitamin D, when present in cells throughout the body, inhibits the growth and spread of abnormal cells, including cancer cells.

What Does Indoor Tanning Have To Do With Vitamin D?

Exposure to UVB from sunshine is the body’s natural way to produce vitamin D, accounting for 90 percent of vitamin D production. Dietary “supplements” are just that: Supplemental ways to produce vitamin D.

Research has shown that people who utilize indoor tanning equipment that emits UVB – which most tanning equipment does – also produce vitamin D. And studies have also shown that indoor tanning clients have higher vitamin D blood levels than non-tanners.

While the North American indoor tanning industry promotes itself as a cosmetic service, one undeniable side-effect of that cosmetic service is vitamin D production. Even though it is not necessary to develop a tan to produce vitamin D, this should be considered: Because research suggests that the risks associated with sun exposure are related to intermittent sunburns, it is credible to believe that the benefits of regular, moderate non-burning exposure outweigh the easily manageable risks associated with overexposure.

Tanning is a Natural Body Process – It is Not Damage

Tanning is your body’s natural protection against sunburn — it is what your body is designed to do. Many have referred to this process as “damage” to your skin, but calling a tan “damage” is a dangerous oversimplification. Here is why:

• Calling a tan damage to your skin is like calling exercise damage to your muscles. Consider, when one exercises you are actually tearing tiny muscle fibers in your body. On the surface, examined at the micro-level, that could be called “damage.” But that damage on the micro-level is your body’s natural way on the macro-level of building stronger muscle tissue. So to call exercise “damaging” to muscles would be terribly deceiving. The same can be said of sun exposure: Your body is designed to repair any damage to the skin caused by ultraviolet light exposure. Developing a tan is its natural way to protect against the dangers of sunburn and further exposure.
• Saying that any ultraviolet light exposure causes skin damage is a dangerous oversimplification. It would be like saying that since water causes drowning, humans should avoid all water. Yes, water causes drowning, but our bodies also need water; we would die without it. Similarly, we need sun exposure; we would die without it.

It is the professional indoor tanning industry’s position that sunburn prevention is a more effective message than sun avoidance, which ultimately encourages abuse. It is a responsible, honest approach to the issue.

But What About Skin Cancer?

There arguably is more misinformation about skin cancer than any other form of cancer, and most of it involves distorting the nature of skin cancer’s complex relationship with sun exposure. Consider:

• Melanoma skin cancer is most common in people who work indoors – not in those who work outdoors.
• Melanoma skin cancer occurs most often on parts of the body that are not regularly exposed to the sun.
• 18 of 22 studies examining melanoma and indoor tanning have shown no statistically significant association, including the most recent and largest study, which showed no connection at all. The four older studies that alleged a connection did not adequately control for important confounding variables such as the subjects’ outdoor exposure to sunlight, childhood sunburns, type of tanning equipment utilized (many of which were unsupervised home units) and duration and quantity of exposures.
• Melanoma mortality rates in the United States are not rising among young women, but are increasing dramatically among older men, according to National Cancer Institute data. (In Canada, melanoma rates for women under 50 have actually declined in the past 20 years). Yet the majority of the marketing message about this disease is directed at young women, who are the highest consumers of dermatological services.
• The photobiology research community has determined that most skin cancers are most likely related to a strong pattern of burning and intermittent sun exposure in those people who are genetically predisposed to skin cancer and not simply to cumulative exposure. That suggests that a pattern of repeated sunburning is what we need to prevent. And that kind of prevention is exactly what the indoor tanning industry is doing effectively.
• Skin cancer generally has a 20- to 30-year latency period. The rates of skin cancer we are seeing today in older individuals mostly are a function of the ignorant misbehavior of the 1970s and early 1980s. Recall: Society used to view sunburns as an inconvenient right of spring, or as a “precursor” to developing a summer tan. Severe burns were commonplace. Today we know how reckless that approach was, and the incidence rates of skin cancer today in those over 50 years of age reflect that ignorance.

The indoor tanning industry believes that our role in teaching sunburn prevention will help to reverse the increases that largely are a result of misbehavior that took place years ago before the professional tanning industry existed and before we were organized to teach sunburn prevention.

How Do You Define Moderate Tanning?

The term “moderate tanning” means something different for every different individual, and that is an important point. The bottom line is what we call “The Golden Rule of Smart Tanning” – Don’t EVER sunburn. A fair-skinned, red-headed, green-eyed person may not have the ability to develop a tan without sunburning. This person should not attempt to tan then. On the other hand, most of us have the ability to develop a tan, and the majority of us tan very easily. Moderation, in our view, means avoiding sunburn at all costs. Going about that agenda will mean something different to every different person.

What About Teenage Tanning?

In the past few years the dermatology industry’s lobbyists have argued that teenagers should be totally prohibited from tanning in salons despite having no solid evidence that tanning in a non-burning fashion results in any significant risk. In fact, such prohibitions would likely do more harm than good. Consider:

1. Studies have shown that teens who tan in salons are less likely to sunburn outdoors compared to non-tanners.
2. 83 percent of teenagers who tan indoors prior to taking sunny vacations report that their indoor tan, combined with the proper use of sunscreen, helped them to prevent sunburn.
3. Further, 72 percent of teenagers who currently tan indoors say they would simply tan more aggressively outdoors or purchase home tanning units – both of which are more likely to produce sunburns – if they were unable to utilize indoor tanning salons. If teenagers are unable to tan in salons, sunburn incidence actually will increase, and it is likely that total UV exposure in this age group will increase. This would be hurting people, not helping them.
4. There is no data to suggest that tanning is more dangerous for any specific age group. Photobiology suggests that burning (not tanning) at an early age could increase risk later in life. As we just discussed, it appears that indoor tanners sunburn less than non-tanners, including teen-agers who tan outdoors.
5. Indoor tanning facilities today are at the forefront in teaching teenagers outdoor sunburn prevention, including the proper use of sunscreens to prevent sunburn outdoors. If teenagers are denied access to indoor tanning, sunburn incidence will increase.

The tanning industry supports existing laws requiring parental consent for minors who wish to tan in salons, and would support constructive efforts to bolster enforcement of this standard.

Are All Dermatologists Against Indoor Tanning?

While most of the dermatology profession has an inexplicably myopic view about tanning, some enlightened dermatologists have broken ranks with their peers in recent years, urging their profession to re-think its one-sided dogma about sun exposure. Two of the most recent:

• Research dermatologist Dr. Sam Shuster, professor emeritus to the Department of Dermatology at Newcastle University in northern England, challenged his peers to quantify the alleged increase in skin cancer incidence, which is not based on actual numbers but only estimates. In the book, “Panic Nation: Unpicking the Myths We’re Told About Food and Health” Shuster calls his peers to acknowledge that a tan is the body’s natural protection against sunburn – a reality that has been all but stampeded under the establishment’s rhetoric. “Unfortunately our attitude to sun and ultra-violet (UV) light is subject to much perverse and dubious technical ‘advice’, which society has passively accepted without questioning its provenance,” Shuster writes.
• Boston University Professor Dr. Michael Holick – the scientist who was involved in the discovery of the active form of vitamin D in the early 1970s – wrote the book “The UV Advantage” in 2004, urging people to embrace moderate exposure to ultraviolet light as the body’s natural way to produce Vitamin D. Holick is one of the world’s leading authorities on vitamin D production. “Since some exposure to sunlight is beneficial to your health, it is reasonable that if you wish to be exposed to sunlight, that you can do so with relative safety if you make sure that you do not receive a sunburn,” Holick says.
• Many rank-and-file dermatologists have more moderate views about sensible sun exposure, but have been intimidated by their peers not to discuss these views publicly. Indeed, upon publishing “The UV Advantage” in 2004, Holick was forced to resign his post at Boston University as a professor of dermatology, with the chair of that department calling his work “schlock science.” In spite of such rhetoric, in the two years since publishing his book, most of Holick’s positions have become mainstream thinking.

Source: http://www.tanningtruth.com/index.php/category/headline/