Nothing new under the sun?

[dArKeR]

By Jeremy Laurance

Sunshine is one of our most sought- after natural phenomena. People long for it to appear, strip off in its presence and spend large sums of money to pursue it around the world.

Now a professor has been sacked for daring to suggest the sun has some benefits for health. In a challenge to the dogma of the dermatologists, who have painted sunshine as the enemy of health, Michael Holick, professor of medicine, dermatology and physiology at Boston University Medical Centre, has written a book arguing that sunlight can help prevent cancer and heart disease, strengthen the bones and alleviate depression.

In the book, The UV advantage, to be published next month in the US, Holick recommends people spend a few minutes two to three times a week, depending on skin type, exposed to the sun or lying under a sun lamp (without sun cream) to ensure they get enough vitamin D.

http://iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=31&art_id=vn20040425114900290C838468&set_id=1

I believe this. We slowly evolved under the sun. It is the key to our life. Without knowing all the scientific data, I don't think it can be as bad as it's reported.

[amazona]

1. my HMO sent a letter telling us to do this

They said 20 to 30 minutes in the sun 3 times a week without sunscreen significantly reduces your chance of getting breast cancer. Women who do not get enough natural sunlight or consume enough fat are not going to have the right amount of vitamin D. I have wondered if this is the explanation, or an explanation, for the explosion of breast cancer among affluent, educated, normal weight/underweight white women. Apparently there are clusters of breast cancer among "healthy" (don't sun, don't eat) middle-aged white women both in the New York area and even in northern California. Difficult as it is to imagine someone in California paranoically avoiding the sun.