I first want to say that I think you should relax. There was so much tension in that response it surprised me, as it was very unwarranted. Perhaps what I said went contrary to your current beliefs or something. Just so you know, stress is the number ONE accelerator of the aging process. I wasn't attacking you in any way shape or form, so I'm not sure what prompted the "easy meeeee, steady" remark along with a very defensive rebuttle, almost like you were crying, "Blasphemy".
Secondly, I was comparing blacks in Africa with blacks in America, not all Africans. The white Africans were Eurpoeans who migrated down there and who previously were not exposed to that direct "overhead" sunshine all the time. It takes many many generations to adjust to a new environment.
My facts were with regard to most of the southern states to northern states and the peoples who were "indigenous" to those states for their whole lives. All cancers increase exponentially from the southern border to the canadian border. And you suggest the sun is not popular in Texas? Did you take a poll to come to that conclusion?
I point you to an article the "Boston Globe" published just this year on August 29th, 2005, written by Globe correspondent Brian Klodko. It's entitled, "The good sun?"
"The claim that some sun could help the body ward off cancer, or better cope with it, isn't so new -- 25 years ago, researchers noted that cancer rates were higher in northern parts of the United States, where people get less sun exposure.
One study of 900 men in California found that men with darker tans had half the risk of advanced prostate cancer. Another study, looking at 6,000 people in Denmark and Sweden, found that people with a reported history of sunburns and sunbathing were less likely to get the disease.
Perhaps the most provocative finding came from Marianne Berwick, an epidemiologist at the University of New Mexico. In a study of 650 melanoma patients in Connecticut, she found that people who reported more sun exposure over their lifetimes had a better chance of surviving the disease. In other words, the same sunlight that could be a risk factor for melanoma could also increase the chances of beating it."
I mean my gosh, what a statement. The Boston Globe has many lawyers working for them. They're only reporting reputable research. Texas admittedly have higher rates of the specific skin cancer melanoma, but it is believed by researchers to be due to the retirees from the north and also they say diet differences contribute as well. I mean when one state has more cancer than the "majority" of the other southern states there has to be a specific reason for the discrepency. One is diet difference (less minerals), and the other is retirement (skin cancer is also more prevalent in Florida and Arizona, where all the white albinos from the north chose to retire down, and are never in the sun have the diseases).
Quoted from "The Calcium Connection" by Dr. Cedric Garland and Dr. Frank Garland, 1989, Foreside, Simon and Shuster Inc.
"Low cancer areas were far more frequent in the sun belt. What was the significance of sunlight with regard to cancer rates? Sunlight reacts with cholesterol inside and on the surface of the skin to create Vitamin D. Vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium and utilize the calcium that is available."
In the "Health Stream Literature Summary" Issue 29, March 2003, I quote:
"Cancer incidence rates and environmental factors: an ecological study.
Steiner G G. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol (2002) 21(3) p205-12.
Comparison of cancer rates for different areas of the world shows a general pattern of lower cancer rates in lower latitudes (ie closer to the equator). Possible explanations for this observation include increased production of vitamin D due to sunlight at low latitudes or some undefined effect of temperature.
The study found a positive correlation between cancer incidence rates and latitude, and an inverse correlation between cancer incidence rate and temperature." End Quote.
Now you said with regard to President Bush's cancer, "His doctor reported that it came from years of being in the hot Texas sun for extended periods of time. I'm sure this was a "lifestyle" for him."
They'll have you believe anything they want you to believe just by telling you. The doctor was acting on an assumption, he did not research a thing, he's too busy to! He deals with patients every day. All he knows are what his colleagues tell him and what the pharmaceutical companies tell him. You said, "I'm sure this was a "lifestyle for him", another opinion based on conjecture. You're guessing. Not to mention this was one isolated incident.
Another quote from you, "I'm sure alot of those people had "lifestyles" out in the sun. Just to add, white south Africans were more proned to attaining skin cancer than black south africans. Hmmm, I wonder why?"
Another conjecture. White Africans ARE more prone to skin cancer than the whites, because they migrated down there from Europe and it takes many generations (according to anthropologists) for a species to adapt to a change in environment such as more sun. Whereas the African Americans always resided there and thus have adapted darker skin to protect themselves. Also when you say, "Hmm, I wonder why" that actually makes me wonder too. Because you cite no concrete evidence to support your opinions. Were you IN Africa like I was? Did you research scientific libraries as I have? Or are you just sitting here defending all your current beliefs because they've been brainwashed into you by dermatologists or MD's? If you have done research please tell me and cite the "specific" studies and not just say "some researchers".
You said, "In short meeeeee, research the facts. You will be surprised." This was just rude and insulting to me. I have honestly tried very hard never to insult you in a similar way. It appears that I have researched the facts more than you, because you were unable to cite "one" specific fact or study. You just cited, "I'm sure this is why this is occuring", or "Hmm, wonder why this is the case" yet you never really let us know.
"Oh yeah, if the sun doesn't cause wrinkles then Louisiana was never flooded. Come on!!!!!!!!"
An amazing body of research disagrees with you here. I point you to look at ALL the cultures who are in the sun many hours a day. Black Africans, various mountain populations, like the Hunzas in Pakistan, Okinawans in Japan (this particular people is at sea level), Bamas of China, Azerbajians of Russia. Look at their skin. Well first you'll have to do some research, and look for pictures of them even into old age and see how great their skin is. Please don't tell me none of this matters, until you see the pictures of those peoples into their old, old ages and see it for yourself. They're all in the sun out in the fields farming many hours a day, they go to bed and sunset and get up and sunrise.
You said, "Stop taking the vitamin D supplements and just rely on the sun and tell me about the bags under the eyes and the porous skin then. I'll bet you will have a different testiomny."
Actually, most of my Vitamin D "does" come from the sun.
"Vitamin D in a tablet and Vitamin D from the sun are two different things."
Yes, I agree. Vitamin D from the sun is much better for you because it's naturally occuring, and the sun also produces Inositol triphosphate in your skin as well.
You said, "The sun has been in your face all your life so acccording to your theory, you should have great skin without taking the supplements."
Now you hit upon the key issue. This was my whole point with my initial posting. The problem is, we DON'T stay in the sun. Most of us have indoor jobs, or do indoor activities much of the day every day. Also, just because there are people who have cancer in very nice and sunny spots, does NOT mean it came from the sun.
The first questin you must ask, is where did they use to live before they came here, and how long did they live there? Have they always lived in this sunny region since they were little? Also, just because they live in a sunny region does NOT mean they necessarily spend all their time outdoors. It's just as easy to stay inside all day down south as it is up north. It's about lifestyle choices. Also, with so many misinformed doctors telling us to stay out of the sun, even MORE people avoid sun exposure, this time on purpose, and the cancers are rising at an escalating rate under the current body of medical "wisdom."
Also, the black's in Africa are generally quite poor which means the shelters aren't great (if they have any at all) which forces them to be outside all the time. In South Africa though for instance, they are quite rich and most white's down there have great shelters and adopt the terrible white living style of being inside all the time as well. There are so many factors operating here. Everyone directly blames the sun, because that's what all the doctors have told them for a long time so that's all the believe. They think of the medical establishment in almost "God-like" terms, failing to realize that most medical research TRAILS scientific research by decades. Most medical authorities defend the tried and true status quo, rather than embracing new theories, with an utmost stubborness in fact.
You said, "If we all ate correctly we wouldn't have to take supplements anyway. God put everything on this earth for us to consume so our bodies would be in tip top shape. Every vitamin known to man is sufficient in these foods for us to live long and healthy." This is a very popular misconception by many nutritionists, doctors and laypeople. God of course gave us plenty of nutrients naturally occuring, and it's important to stay close to nature and eat foods right off the tree, but what about since the flood happened, when the lush black soils turned primarily to red clay? The nutritional value of foods depends ONLY on the soil from which it was produced. Have you examined all the soils in depth to make the claim for certain that all our foods have high amounts of vitamins and minerals? Those populations I mentioned before who have great skin into their old age have two common denominators that one, they are in the sun working on their farms growing things (since that's the only way they can get food in the mountains) all day from sunrise to sunset, and secondly all the populations have constant replenishment of their soils by glacial water which melts up in the mountains. Of course up in the mountains the ONLY source of water for irrigation, watering crops and drinking is melted glacial water which has TONS of minerals in it. There were soil analyses done on the Hunza Population who live in the Himalayan mountains ni Pakistan and they found first of all, that the lush perfectly BLACK soil which is very loose went down for over 1 foot! Nowhere else in the world is this the case except other mountain populations. We all have red clay, and many of us who use fertilizers and miracle grow only get black soil within an inch or two at most, and much of it is "synthetic" fertilizers. But this population has irrigation of water with LOTS of potassium, magnesium, iron, calcium, zinc, selenium, cesium, all poored on to their soils every day in summer (as ice melts when heated of course). Whereas in the winter they eat dried fruits. But you cannot believe the lushness and beauty of all their fruits and vegetables. The apples hang very low toward the ground because they're so plentiful they weight the tree down. The color and taste are exquisite, and they can be confident they are getting all the minerals and vitamins they need from their foods. We on the other hand don't have glacial water on our soils. It is primarily of clay, and ANY certified soil analysis, will show low amounts of trace minerals, and other minerals compared to other population's soils. So health is very much determined by the soil the plants are grown in. So we MUST either take supplements or move in with those people, or lastly have the government find some way of watering every field in the contry with mineral-rich water.
You said, "So since you have changed your diet considerably, those vitamin D pills have got to be a waste of your money." Please don't be so condescending and assuming. I have a right to do what I wish with my money, and I don't like it when people, particularly if they're misinformed, criticise my efforts when I have done much research on how I should live and what I should eat. I am a certified bio-chemist, and used to work for a pharmeceutical company until I realized that I'm only helping people put poisons in their body, and so I quit. Now I'm focussed on nutrition, and the chemistry of biological systems to prevent and cure disease.
In the end, I implore you to do what you feel like doing for yourself. That's why it's so wonderful to be an addult, becaues you can weigh the pros and cons of arguments and make the "best" (according to you) possible decision for yourself. So go ahead and stay out of the sun forever. But let me say this, your pituitary gland needs UV radiation or you're DEAD.
But are all the doctors right? Or God. You make the call.
What does all of this have to do with Body Odor people wonder? Well the sun and other earth nutrients are critical for proper digestion and absorption of nutrients which you need to build up your body, release the toxins adhered to the cell's surface, and get your digestion running along smoothly. And the debate was on the safety of following the protocol of being in the sun for some hours each day.