Diary of Unknown Symptoms

Mystery of the Internal Vibration

Entry for August 12, 2007

The Morning After:

Woke up and the only place that was slightly burnt was the top of my shoulders. No visible burn on my chest or my back. Nothing! My wife had the same thing and Natalie with no sunblock whatsoever showed no visible tan anywhere. I was slightly shocked but more proud that it did work again using vitamins as a natural sunblock. My daughter drinks three to four glasses of goat’s milk a day and she probably had plenty of vitamin D for sun protection.

So if none of us got any kind of sunburn, what exactly does sunblock do?

Sunscreen may actually increase the risk of cancer, so proposed California researchers in a paper published in January, 1993, in the Annals of Epidemiology. The researchers contended that UVB- blocking sunscreens had contributed to increasing skin-cancer rates, by disabling the body’s natural alarm mechanism: sunburn. The researchers also posited that because UVB rays are the main source of vitamin D, and because vitamin D may inhibit the progression of melanoma, and because sunscreens block UVB rays- sunscreens might promote vitamin D deficiencies and cause melanomas. (UVB is the shorter wavelength of ultraviolet light that damages the skin. UVA is the longer of the two types of ultraviolet light that reaches the earth. UVA is responsible for tanning.)

In a study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in January,1993, researchers from the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center applied three common types of sunscreen to mice and then exposed most of them to sunlamps twice a week for three weeks. Melanoma cells were then injected into all the mice. The mice exposed to the ultraviolet (UV) rays, even if they were treated with sunscreen, had a higher incidence of melanoma than those not exposed to UV rays. The researchers theorized that sunscreens may allow enough UV to penetrate the skin to suppress the immune response and/or damage DNA, thus allowing tumors to develop.

UVA can cause skin cancer, particularly melanoma, according to the Texas researchers. The sunscreens used in the mouse study blocked little or no UVA.

Advertisements

August 13, 2007 Posted by | Health | , | Leave a comment

Entry for August 11, 2007

Just as we got to the beach, I took 1000 mg of vitamin C, 400 IU of vitamin E and 400 IU of vitamin D and hit the water. From three o’clock until six thirty I spent the day in full sunshine. My wife didn’t use any sunblock either and we made the slightly nervous decision not to use any sunblock on my daughter who is 21 months tomorrow.

We had a great time and spent most of the time in the water with my shirt off. By the time we left, I didn’t feel burnt at all. My daughter looked fine with no visible tan lines.

I think it worked again! We’ll find out tomorrow…

August 13, 2007 Posted by | Health | , , , | Leave a comment

Entry for August 10, 2007

1186973667-sc-1210

Tomorrow I’m going up to Wasaga Beach and the weather forcast is 32 degrees and full sunshine all day. Last year I made the discovery regarding the sunblock vitamins so this year I’ll try the same thing again to see if it works.

Vitamins C, D and E.

August 12, 2007 Posted by | Health | , , , | Leave a comment

Entry for August 03, 2007

1186118513-hr-1181

When I saw this article I was stunned but not surprised. You’ve really got to question what we are doing to our health when you read stories like this. So is it the sunblock or not?

Age-old children’s disease back in force

Diagnoses of rickets, caused by lack of vitamin D, on the rise

Jul 25, 2007 04:30 AM
Suzanne Carere (Special to the Star)

A primitive disease has skulked back onto the scene, hidden in the wake of new health concerns that seem to arise each week.

Rickets, the disease that weakens bones in children, is back.

Although it’s hard to believe, a growing number of studies across North America shows that children of the 21st century are suffering from the same vitamin D deficiency that devastated families more than 100 years ago. The difference is that today we should know better.

Rickets was first described medically in 1650 by Francis Glissen: “We affirm therefore, that this disease doth rarely invade children presently at birth … but after that it beginneth by little and little daily to rage.” The disease became an epidemic in industrialized cities across Europe and North America. Heavy smog blacked out the sun in large cities, making it impossible for growing children to create enough vitamin D through their skin.

The result was weak bones, including leg bones bowed under the weight of children’s upper torsos.

At the time, the disease hit hardest at black people living in England, because darker skin pigmentation requires greater sun exposure to create vitamin D.

Finally, in 1921, Elmer McCollum, an American biochemist, isolated from certain fats the substance that prevents rickets. He named it vitamin D because it was the fourth vitamin discovered.

Soon, it was discovered that irradiating certain foods with ultraviolet light produced vitamin D. Harry Steenbock, a researcher from the University of Wisconsin, patented a highly effective technique for irradiating milk that led to an almost-instant reversal of rickets. By 1930, the disease was nearly eradicated in North America.

That lasted until now.

Rickets is no longer a disease of the past, according to a report published in American Family Physician in 2006. The journal explains that, though there’s a lack of national data at the moment, more and more cases of rickets are being discovered by physicians in the U.S.

Health Canada has noted on its website: “Canadian studies and the ongoing surveillance of childhood illnesses by the Canadian Paediatric Society provide evidence that vitamin D deficiency rickets has not been eradicated.”

According to the pediatric society, 69 cases were confirmed within the first 18 months after the society launched a surveillance study in 2002. The society concluded that “the incidence of vitamin D deficiency rickets is rising worldwide” and “Canada is no exception.”

The reasons for this resurgence appear to be common among all studies. They involve cases of cautious mothers who were doing everything they thought they should to keep their infants safe. Their children were breastfed exclusively and were covered up when exposed to sunlight using a combination of clothing and high-SPF sunscreens.

Unfortunately, breast milk (unlike infant formula) is not a good source of vitamin D and without adequate sun exposure, children are unable to make it themselves.

Although pediatricians know to give supplements in these cases, the pediatric society notes that many children in Canada do not have pediatricians.

This situation represents only half the problem. The other involves the nutritional status of the mothers.

If a pregnant woman is deficient in vitamin D, her child can be more susceptible to rickets after birth. A study published in May in the Journal of Nutrition reported that, in the U.S., “92.4 per cent of African-American babies and 66.1 per cent of white infants were found to have insufficient vitamin D at birth.”

The obesity crisis has brought to light the lack of outdoor activity in both adults and children. Mix this with fears about hormones in milk, skin cancer from sun exposure and mercury in fish such as salmon that contain plenty of vitamin D and a deficit is created.

The solution is straightforward: Drink milk or fortified soy milk, eat fish more often, play outside with your kids at least once a week and ensure you talk to a doctor about including formula or vitamin D supplements when breastfeeding.

The World Health Organization defines health as “the state of complete physical, mental and emotional well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”

Translation: Live more, not less, by learning to keep your overall health in balance.

August 2, 2007 Posted by | Health | , , | Leave a comment

Entry for June 08, 2007

Here’s what Dr. Mercola has to say about vitamin D and sunblock.

Learn Why the Myth of the Sun Causing Skin Cancer Can Hurt Your Health

Most of us have been bombarded about the dangers of the sun by experts and the media. However, because it is one of the most pervasive and inaccurate myths persisting in most of the patients I see, I can only assume you are under the same misunderstanding. Unfortunately, this myth has contributed to massive amounts of disease and illness in our society.

Can sun exposure cause skin cancer? Absolutely. However, appropriate sunlight actually prevents cancer. Exposure to the sun provides many benefits such as promoting the formation of vitamin D. We also have strong evidence that sunlight is protective against MS and breast cancer.

The key is to never burn.

Although the American Academy of Dermatology will have you bathing in sunscreen, it is one of the LAST things you want to put on your body. It is a toxic chemical that can cause problems in your system. Even if it didn’t contribute to disease, the central issue is that it doesn’t even work.

A British dermatologist published an article earlier this year which showed no clear indication that sunscreens worked. Another study in the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology last year found the same thing. A far more logical solution would be to use clothing to protect you against the sun.

You must exercise caution. At the beginning of the season go out gradually, perhaps as little as ten minutes a day. Progressively increase your time in the sun so that in a few weeks, you will be able to have normal sun exposure with little risk of skin cancer.

Remember also never to use sunscreen, another key. You can creatively use your clothing to block the sun’s rays during your build-up time.

The bottom line is, please avoid getting sucked into the hype that sunlight is dangerous. It is only dangerous if you are clueless about fat nutrition, which most medical doctors are. If you choose to ignore your omega 6:3 ratio and stay out of the sun, you could limit your risk of skin cancer, but is that worth the risk of getting MS, breast or prostate cancer?

June 10, 2007 Posted by | Health | , , | Leave a comment

Entry for June 08, 2007

Today I was pleasantly surprised when I came across this article in the Toronto Star. But what it doesn’t say is that when people use sunblock, it actually stops the absorption of vitamin D from the sun. Thank god for Dr. Mercola…

Start taking vitamin D, Cancer Society says
Vitamin D linked to reduced cancer risk

Jun 07, 2007 06:31 PM

Associated Press
Canadian adults should consider taking a specific amount of vitamin D, says the Canadian Cancer Society, basing its new recommendation on an expanding body of evidence linking the vitamin to reduced risk for colorectal, breast and prostate cancers.
The recommendation coincides with a study published in a U.S. journal Friday which found that taking vitamin D supplements and calcium substantially reduced all cancer risk in post-menopausal women.

The four-year study, conducted by researchers at Creighton University in Nebraska, initially enrolled 1,180 women who were over the age of 55 and living in a nine-county rural area of the state.

Of the 1,024 who completed the trial, those randomly assigned to take calcium and vitamin D and who had higher levels of both in their blood were 77 per cent less likely to develop cancer after the first year compared to those taking placebos or calcium alone.

The Canadian Cancer Society released its recommendation today for adults in Canada to consider taking a vitamin D supplement of 1,000 international units daily during fall and winter.

The recommended amount takes into consideration vitamin D intake from other sources, including food, water and a multivitamin, said Heather Logan, director of cancer control policy at the Canadian Cancer Society.

Adults at risk of having lower Vitamin D levels should consider maintaining the recommended intake level year round, the organization said in a release. This includes people who are older, have darker skin, don’t go outside often and wear clothing covering most of their skin.

“A thousand units is really a reasonable recommendation (for) people, according to the evidence and guidelines that exist currently across North America,” Logan said.

But she cautioned that total vitamin D intake — from supplements and diet — should not surpass 2,000 international units.

In addition to the Nebraska research findings, the cancer society said another study released in May suggests women who consume more calcium and vitamin D may be less likely to develop breast cancer before menopause.

“This is a really exciting, emerging area of cancer prevention research and we’ll continue to follow it carefully, and as new information emerges we will update our recommendations accordingly,” said Logan.

The organization said Canada’s geographic location was also a motivating factor for issuing the recommendation. The country’s northern latitude, coupled with weakened sun rays in fall and winter, result in Canadians not producing enough vitamin D from sunlight.

But Joan Lappe, lead investigator on the Creighton University study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, said the implications of her study aren’t to suggest people living closer to the Equator in warmer climates require any less of the vitamin.

“Their vitamin D health is probably more optimal, but the point is that many people further north in the northern hemisphere … north of the 37th latitude just do not get enough months of sunlight exposure to give them optimal vitamin D in the whole year,” she said in a phone interview from Omaha, Neb.

That doesn’t mean Canadians should spend too much time in the sun, basking under harmful ultraviolet rays where they face overexposure, a prime risk factor for skin cancer, Logan said.

“We’re definitely not talking about going out to get a tan, or to go in the middle of the day when the UV index is high,” she said.

“(Supplementation) maximizes the potential benefits in reducing the risk of developing cancer with very few side effects at the doses that are recommended.”

Lappe said based on the study findings, examining the role calcium played requires further investigation.

“In the group that received calcium only there was a decreased incidence of cancer, but it wasn’t as strong as in the group that had both calcium and vitamin D.”

“We know from studies that calcium can bind some byproducts in the colon that actually prevent colon cancer in that way, but I’m not aware of any studies that show what (the) combination does together.”

Logan said while the Nebraska study is “compelling,” there are limitations to applying the results looking at a very specified group of subjects in one American state to the Canadian population at large.

“A large-scale clinical trial would include a much larger participant group that were more representative of the Canadian population, given our diversity, and they would be followed for a longer period of time,” she said.

“If these results can be replicated in a large-scale clinical trial they really would be a remarkable result.”

At this time, the Canadian Cancer Society said it does not have a recommendation for vitamin D supplementation for children.

Recent research highlighting the protective effect of early sun exposure on cancer risk outlines the need to consider boosting vitamin D intake for those at a younger age, said Dr. Reinhold Vieth, director of the bone and mineral lab at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.

“It’s plausible, I think, that vitamin D over a relatively short period like the four years of study here does help to prevent cancer, but you can even take it another step further and start earlier in life to prevent the cancers,” Vieth said.

More vitamin D early in life also influences predisposition to get diabetes and multiple sclerosis, Vieth said.

While there are different schools of thought in regards to calcium and cancer, the influence of vitamin D is more difficult to dispute, Vieth said.

“The thing that is unambiguous, zero debate is that more vitamin D is good,” he said.

“This is one agent that has a lot of different science backing it up.”

June 10, 2007 Posted by | Health | , , | Leave a comment

Entry for July 11, 2006

Three days ago we went up to Wasaga beach. My wife has a friend that owns a cottage right near the waterfront. The weather was a hot 32 degrees, full sunshine and not a cloud in the sky so it was the perfect day to go to the beach. Every year this guy has a party and invites all of his friends from work and we spend the day playing Beach Bocce, volleyball and of course swimming.

We were invited up two years ago and I got a really good sunburn from being in the sun so long. My arms were red, the back of neck was sore and I was so red that everybody at work made comments because it was so bad. And I seem to recall that I was wearing sun block but I can’t say for sure.

This time with my knowledge of chemicals, I refuse to put on any sun block and I’ll just watch my exposure in the sun. We had such a great time that I ended up spending a lot of time in the sun and forgot that I wasn’t wearing any sun block. I must have spent a least three hours in direct sunlight. I’ll pay for this tomorrow….and I’ll look like a lobster again.

The next day, I check out my arms and to my surprise there is no sign of sunburn. No redness whatsoever and I can’t believe it. The back of my neck is fine and my arms and legs show no sign that I was in the sun at all. How is this possible? Doctor Google…

Guarding against Sun Singe

Of course, we all know that a milligram of prevention is worth many pounds of cure when it comes to sunburn. The best way to prevent sunburn is to simply use common sense by avoiding excess exposure and using sunscreen. You can also help your skin by taking some supplements when you know you’re going to be exposed to the sun.

Vitamin C has qualities that can help protect skin from sunlight, and it’s also well-known for its antioxidant properties, says Leon Hecht, N.D., a naturopathic doctor at the North Coast Family Health Center in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

For people who spend a lot of time in the sun, Dr. Hecht suggests up to 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C three or four times a day. “Vitamin C stimulates repair of sun-damaged skin,” he says.

In a controlled study, 10 people took either 2,000 milligrams of vita min C with 1,000 IU of vitamin E a day or an inactive substance (placebo). The sunburn reaction after eight days of treatment revealed that the skin of people in the treatment group showed less damage than that of those in the placebo group.

Dr. Hecht also states that vitamins C and E used in topical sunscreens prove effective as well. “Early studies show that it is prudent to add vitamins C and E to your sunscreen to protect against ultraviolet phototoxic injury to your skin,” he says. Sunscreens with these vitamins already added can be found in drugstores.

Well as it turns out, vitamins C and E have been part of my daily vitamins for months now. I’ve also read that vitamin D can have a positive effect as sunblock and I’ve just added that.

Doctor Google found this:

Sunblock and skin cancer: Not the relationship you thought there was.

1. You need vitamin D. Sunlight on the skin (up to an hour a day) is the most important source of vitamin D. The other source of vitamin D is the food you eat.

2. Vitamin D may have a role in preventing skin cancer and certain other cancers as well (breast and prostate).

3. Using sunblock prevents production of vitamin D by your body. Therefore, using sunblock could actually increase your risk of getting cancer.

The biggest issue with vitamin D is that, at the levels thought to provide protection from cancer, it depletes the level of calcium in the body. This can lead to problems with osteoporosis, but you can take supplements to deal with this.

1. Build up your sun exposure in spring and summer so you can get an hour of sunlight on your body every day, without sunblock. Start slow and AVOID GETTING SUNBURNED. It doesn’t have to be an hour straight – several periods of exposure adding up to an hour is enough. In other places, I have read that (for caucasians, anyway), all that needs to be exposed in summer is the arms and the face, not the whole body. One source says that for caucasians twenty minutes is enough to provide all the vitamin D you need for the day. I wish these guys could come to an agreement, but it looks like 20 to 60 minutes total would be a good idea, more than that is probably asking for trouble with sunburn and increased cancer risk.

2. If you are staying out of the sun, and for everyone in winter, take fish oil as a supplement. African-Americans and others with dark skin living in temperate latitudes should probably take fish oil routinely rather than increase sun exposure, because the melanin in your skin cuts down on the amount of vitamin D produced. (Read this in other places, not in the article – some scientists think that caucasians are humans that lost pigmentation as an adaptation to allow their bodies to produce enough vitamin D in relatively sunless northern latitudes. The jury is still out on that one.) Anyway, Mercola recommends cod liver oil for everybody, both for the vitamin D in it and for the Omega-3 fatty acids. I also read that in the winter, at the latitiude of Boston, a fair-skinned person could stand outside naked all day and not get enough sun to produce any vitamin D. That person would also probably have a severe case of frostbite and an arrest record by the end of the day. Take your cod-liver oil.

3. Reduce your consumption of foods containing Omega-6 fatty acids. If your favorite snack is sunflower seeds, you might want to reconsider that, or reduce your consumption of them/balance your consumption of sunflower seeds by eating more fish containing Omega-3 fatty acids. Remember that corn oil, safflower oil, etc. (he lists them in the article) are almost pure Omega-6 fatty acids and also need to be reduced so that you get as close as possible to a 1:1 ratio of consumption. This is coming out more and more as being important to prevention of certain cancers.

Dr. Mercola points out the irony in our (appropriate) concern about cancer and exessive sun exposure, while at the same time it appears that moderate exposure to sun may actually help to prevent skin cancer and sunblock use could be a problem.

July 12, 2006 Posted by | Health | , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: