I have never heard of the website, and the clickbait title is kind of annoying, not to mention the suncreen fear mongering. But the studies are fascinating.
I think if you ask just about anyone they would agree that sunburns increase your chance of skin cancer. The info is everywhere, the warnings are everywhere.
Why is this the first time I have read this contradictory info? Has anybody else read this?
There are many here much better at scrutinizing this type of thing, so I present it to you:
The site itself is garbage and mostly draws information from newspaper articles (not particularly reliable) and places like the Natural News (extremely unreliable). However the study referred to (the actual study is open access here) is interesting. It does not really suggest anything as extreme as the site you linked to, and it has several significant limitations acknowledged by the authors. I'm also not convinced fully by the statistical analysis - they evaluate so many different variables that some false positives are almost inevitable and while I'm not a stats expert I don't see any indication they've fully accounted for that.
The results did suggest that for a couple of specific cancers there was a decreased incidence rate in women who had gone on "sunbathing vacations" in their 20's or used a solarium. There was no link between UV exposure and overall cancer risk. They didn't look at people with extreme exposures. From a quick look I also don't see anything about them looking at whether or not the women used sunscreen. Also even if the reduced cancer rate is true that does not necessarily mean there's a direct cause-effect relationship (maybe women going on these vacations are generally more fit, for example, or have higher income). Overall the authors concluded that some level of exposure to the sun may have beneficial effects, likely due to vitamin D production, but they did not support high levels of exposure and also stated clearly that their study had a lot of limitations.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ashartus For This Useful Post:
And Saying that there was an increased rate of Melanoma with increased sunscreen use is strange. People in the sun a lot will use sunscreen more + have a greater sun exposure and likely an increased melanoma risk.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
His link actually concluded that it is a decent guide but some of the science may be off. It did show (just like the guide did) that a higher SPF is not always better and makes minimal difference past 15.
Edit : here is their conclusion
Quote:
Sunscreens remain an important option to help avoid unwanted UV exposure. Overall, the EWG report makes it easy for consumers to differentiate between sunscreens, and make selections based on UV spectrum protection and ingredient preferences. While I’m personally not convinced about the hazards of the current FDA-approved products, I agree with the group’s overall recommendation that physical barriers, containing titanium and/or zinc, have superior risk/benefit profiles. When you look past the headlines, the Environmental Working Group’s analysis isn’t bad. It’s cautious but pragmatic. The bad probably isn’t as bad as they say, but they take a good perspective related to risk/benefit overall.
His link actually concluded that it is a decent guide but some of the science may be off. It did show (just like the guide did) that a higher SPF is not always better and makes minimal difference past 15.
Edit : here is their conclusion
The SPF conclusion is the same, but the "science may be off" is a little disconcerting. Ultimately, I suppose if we can agree to "put on the sunscreen properly", then there isn't a problem.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.