Sun Exposure after Hair Transplant - Page 11 - BaldTruthTalk.com
+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 27 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 21 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 266
  1. #101
    Senior Member gillenator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    1,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 35YrsAfter View Post
    I just emailed Dr. Keene to ask if she is aware of any studies that support a relationship between testosterone and DHT levels. In other words will an increase in testosterone cause DHT production to increase and vice versa?

    -35YrsAfter works at Dr. Cole's office
    As long as it is clinical substantiation. Thousands of studies take place but most of them result in opinions not verification.
    "Gillenator"
    Independent Patient Advocate
    more.hair@verizon.net

    NOTE: I am not a physician and not employed by any doctor/clinic. My opinions are not medical advice nor are they the opinions of the following endorsing physicians: Dr. Bob True & Dr. Bob Dorin

  2. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    848

    Default

    I try not to cut and paste articles to the forum but I think in this case this article is well worth reading. Not so much for the content which I have personally found to be 100% true but for understanding how information is manipulated when there is money to be made. I would consider the Sun just as important as food in healing the body and mind.

    I like the line about tag team effort...........huh......c'mon doesn't that make you laugh kind of reminds me of the ht industry.

    June 4, 2013 by MARCO TORRES

    The Sun Is Heating Up And It's Time To Ignore Every Single Message You Hear About Slathering On Sunscreen

    The idea that sunscreen prevents cancer is a falsity promoted by a profit-seeking tag-team effort between the cancer industry and the sunscreen industry. How convenient an oversight by these demonizers of the sun that people closest to the equator have the lowest incidence of skin cancer, but you'll never hear that message on your local news. Instead, as the summer approaches the media bombards us daily with myths that blocking the sun's rays from reaching our skin will somehow protect us from the one thing it actually prevents--cancer.


    Blocking the sun's rays from reaching our skin dramatically influences our optimal vitamin D levels, leading to higher mortality, critical illness and mental health disorders. Ironically, sunscreen itself causes cancer.


    A Tale of Corruption and Deception

    The sunscreen industry makes money by selling lotion products that actually contain cancer-causing chemicals. It then donates a portion of that money to the cancer industry through non-profit groups like Cancer Societies which, in turn, run heart-breaking public service ads and charity events such as Relay For Life urging people to donate and use sunscreen to "prevent cancer."


    The cancer establishment has retreated from the truth. What began as sincere investigation into the economic root causes of a complex set of 200 different diseases, at the turn of the 20th century, quickly degenerated into a single-minded focus. All cancer societies are now dedicated to funding drug companies to "find the cure" that will never exist, at least not from any mainstream institution.


    Devra Davis, one of North America's sharpest epidemiologists "Astonishing alliances between naive or far too clever academics and folks with major economic interests in selling potentially cancerous materials have kept us from figuring out whether or not many modern products affect our chances of developing cancer." She has documented how some of the world's most prominent cancer researchers secretly worked for chemical firms without disclosing these ties when publishing studies.


    Davis' work will rob you of any lingering, Disney-like fantasies you might have entertained about the nobility of cancer fundraising campaigns actually doing some good the cancer patients. Please DON'T support American or Canadian Cancer Societies or Relays For Life.


    Many grants funding cancer research are supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Melanoma Research Foundation. The NCI is the same federally funded (and privately funded by Big Pharma) organization that promotes mammography via ionizing radiation. In fact they are one of the biggest mammography promoters in the nation. They are directly managed by the biotech sector and typically employ pharmaceutical executives on their boards.


    The Melanoma Research Foundation (MRF) is filled with scientific advisory members with conflicts interests statements littering their academic work. The decision makers at MRF are all current or former pharmaceutical executives or board members.


    Why Sunscreen Will Never Prevent Cancer And May Cause It

    The Sun does not cause cancer. Researchers have concluded that UVA exposure has not contributed to the rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past 30 years. UVA makes up 90 percent of the ultraviolet light spectrum of sunlight.


    "Our data refute the only direct evidence that UVA causes melanoma, which is not to say that UVA is harmless," said the study's lead author David Mitchell, Ph.D., professor in M. D. Anderson's Department of Carcinogenesis located at its Science Park -- Research Division in Smithville, Texas. "UVA is just not as dangerous as we thought because it doesn't cause melanoma."


    Both UVA and UVB can cause tanning and burning, although UVB does so far more rapidly. UVA, however, penetrates your skin more deeply than UVB.


    UVB appears to be protective against melanoma -- or rather, the vitamin D your body produces in response to UVB radiation is protective.
    As written in The Lancet:
    "Paradoxically, outdoor workers have a decreased risk of melanoma compared with indoor workers, suggesting that chronic sunlight exposure can have a protective effect."
    So if UVA and UVB do not cause melanoma, why use sunscreen?
    Skin cancer rates are increasing and the so-called experts are STILL blaming the sun for a problem manufactured right here on earth.


    If the sun was REALLY causing skin cancer, and if sunscreen prevented it, we’d be cancer-free by now. We’re already spending less time outside than ever, and wasting billions of dollars a year on needless, dangerous creams and lotions.
    Meanwhile, just a couple of generations ago, we spent far more time out in the sun and ZILCH on sunscreen -- and skin cancer was practically unheard of.


    After decades of debate, several governments have failed to set mandatory sunscreen safety standards. Companies are free to make their own decisions on everything from advertising claims to product quality. The underlying message is that sunscreen applications are presently carrying risks that far outweigh any benefit to the public.


    Comprehensive scientific reviews indicate that 83% of 785 sunscreen products contain ingredients with significant safety concerns. Only 17% of the products on the market block both UVA and UVB radiation which is the intended purpose by manufacturers of sunscreen, so what's the point? The assessment by the Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep database was based on a review of nearly 400 scientific studies, industry models of sunscreen efficacy, and toxicity and regulatory information housed in nearly 60 government, academic, and industry databases.
    At least 50% of products on the market bear claims that are considered "unacceptable" or misleading under sunscreen safety standards. An analysis of marketing claims on hundreds of sunscreen bottles shows that false and misleading marketing claims are common. They give consumers a false sense of security (based on myths) with claims like "all day protection," "mild as water," and "blocks all harmful rays" which are completely untrue, yet are found on bottles. Consumers might assume that, because researchers have implicated ultraviolet light in skin cancer development, sunscreen automatically thwarts skin cancer. They play on this consumer bandwagon of fear and hope on an issue shouldn't even be an issue...blocking the sun!

    A review of the technical literature shows that some sunscreen ingredients absorb into the blood, and some are linked to toxic effects. Some release skin-damaging free radicals in sunlight, some act like estrogen and could disrupt hormone systems, several are strongly linked to allergic reactions, and still others may build up in the body or the environment.
    Almost two dozen law suits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson Inc., Schering-Plough Corp., Playtex Products Inc., Tanning Research Laboratories Inc. and Chattem Inc involving some of the most popular brands, including Coppertone, Banana Boat, Hawaiian Tropic, Bullfrog and Neutrogena -- charge that manufacturers inflate claims about sunscreens, lulling consumers into believing their products are safe when they have shown to CAUSE cancer.


    Almost half of the 500 most popular sunscreen products may actually increase the speed at which malignant cells develop and spread skin cancer because they contain vitamin A or its derivatives retinol and retinyl palmitate which accelerate tumor growth.


    In a year-long study, tumors and lesions developed up to 21 percent faster in lab animals coated in a vitamin A-laced cream than animals treated with a vitamin-free cream, a report by EWG stated based on their analysis of initial findings released by the FDA and the National Toxicology Program,


    Based on the strength of the findings by FDA's own scientists, many in the public health community say they can't believe nor understand why the agency hasn't already notified the public of the possible danger.


    Scientists have reported that particle size affects the toxicity of zinc oxide, a material widely used in sunscreens. Particles smaller than 100 nanometers are slightly more toxic to colon cells than conventional zinc oxide. Solid zinc oxide was more toxic than equivalent amounts of soluble zinc, and direct particle to cell contact was required to cause cell death. Their study is in ACS' Chemical Research in Toxicology, a monthly journal.


    The Environmental Working Group who previously analyzed 15 studies on nanoparticles on sunscreen said that no investigations have ever assessed absorption through damaged skin. Such data is missing “for nearly all of the 17 sunscreen chemicals approved for use in the U.S.” The scientists note that a concern is children accidentally ingesting nano-sized zinc oxide.


    Another common and toxic ingredient in sunscreens is titanium dioxide. New research published in ACS' journal, Environmental Science & Technology found that Children may be receiving the highest exposure to nanoparticles of titanium dioxide. The geometry of titanium dioxide (TiO2) based nanofilaments appears to play a crucial role in cytotoxicity having a strong dose-dependent effect on cell proliferation and cell death.


    A comprehensive study conducted by researchers at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer found that titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles, found in everything from cosmetics to sunscreen to paint to vitamins, caused systemic genetic damage in mice. The TiO2 nanoparticles induced single- and double-strand DNA breaks and also caused chromosomal damage as well as inflammation, all of which increase the risk for cancer.


    Vitamin D From The Sun is The Key In Preventing Disease

    The scientific evidence, however, shows quite clearly that sunscreen actually promotes cancer by blocking the body's absorption of ultraviolet radiation, which produces vitamin D in the skin. Vitamin D, as recent studies have shown, prevents up to 77 of ALL cancers in women (breast cancer, colon cancer, cervical cancer, lung cancer, brain tumors, multiple myeloma, etc). Meanwhile, the toxic chemical ingredients used in most sunscreen products are actually carcinogenic and have never been safety tested. They get absorbed right through the skin (a porous organ that absorbs most substances it comes into contact with) and enter the bloodstream.


    For the past several years, there has been considerable interest in the role vitamin D plays in improving health and preventing disease. Previous finding show that low levels of vitamin D have been directly associated with various forms of cancer and cardiovascular disease. Stephen B. Kritchevsky, PhD, Professor of Internal Medicine and Transitional Science at the Wake Forest School of Medicine found a significant correlation.


    "We observed vitamin D insufficiency (defined as blood levels <20 ng/ml), in one third of our study participants. This was associated with nearly a 50 percent increase in the mortality rate in older adults," said Kritchevsky. "Our findings suggest that low levels of vitamin D may be a substantial public health concern for our nation's older adults."


    Cedric F. Garland, Dr.P.H., cancer prevention specialist at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and colleagues estimate that 250,000 cases of colorectal cancer and 350,000 cases of breast cancer could be prevented worldwide by increasing intake of vitamin D3, particularly in countries north of the equator. "For the first time, we are saying that 600,000 cases of breast and colorectal cancer could be prevented each year worldwide, including nearly 150,000 in the United States alone," said Garland.


    Although vitamin D can be obtained from limited dietary sources and directly from exposure to the sun during the spring and summer months, the combination of poor dietary intake and sun avoidance has created vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency in large proportions of many populations worldwide.


    It is known that vitamin D has a wide range of physiological effects and that correlations exist between insufficient amounts of vitamin D and an increased incidence of a number of cancers. These correlations are particularly strong for cancers of the digestive tract, including colon cancer, and certain forms of leukemia.


    Spending an average of three hours a day exposed to sunlight can slash the risk of breast cancer by up to 50 percent.


    People with higher blood levels of vitamin D live significantly longerthan people who have low blood levels of the vitamin.


    A new study from University College London in the UK found that people with higher vitamin D levels had a 43% lower risk of depression, compared to people with vitamin D lower levels.
    Results published in Clinical Nutrition also indicated that the higher vitamin D levels were associated with a 67% lower risk of panic, compared to the lower levels.
    "The high burden of mental and behavioral disorders and concurrent high prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency (<75nmol/l) worldwide (29) highlight the potential importance of our findings," wrote the researchers, led by Jane Maddock from the UCL Institute of Child Health.


    People with the highest levels of vitamin D have the lowest risk of skin cancer. Sure, you can get some of that from a pill...but historically, most people have gotten their D straight from the source: the sun, and protecting yourself from it 100 years ago with clothing, cream or anything would likely have been viewed as its own mental health disorder.


    How To Make Your Own Non-Toxic Sunscreen

    While the sun will not cause cancer, it is not in your best interest to burn your skin. So if you are prone to burning easily, try making your own natural sunscreen to extend your exposure.


    New York Times Best selling author, Sophie Uliano of Gorgeously Greenand her new book DO IT GORGEOUSLY, shows you how to make your own non toxic sunscreen in less than 4 minutes.


    Please omit zinc oxide from the recipe to make a truly natural and toxic free version of this sunscreen, especially during preparation. Zinc oxide can affect the lungs and reproductive system if inhaled. Replace the zinc oxide with 1 tablespoon of avocado oil which helps increase the sun protection factor (SPF).
    Recipe: (SPF 6-8)
    2 tablespoon Virgin Coconut Oil
    1 tablespoon Shea Butter
    1 tablespoon Avocado Oil
    1/2 teaspoon Sesame Oil
    1/2 teaspoon Aloe Vera Gel
    Keep in mind that this recipe will not allow you to stay in the sun for hours without burning, even if you have darker skin. If you have pale skin and are prone to burning in very short periods, this recipe will only modestly protect you when UV rays are at their highest strength. Intermittent periods spent in the shade are highly recommended to balance the UV dose you receive.


    For those that tan well, this lotion will give you an excellent color and glow if used daily while spending a minimum of 30 minutes in the sun.


    Although it not waterproof, it is water resistant if applied thoroughly and spread evenly. In direct sunlight, you must reapply a thin layer of the lotion every half hour for optimal results.



    Spread the word: Please promote the use of non-toxic sunscreens.

    Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

  3. #103
    Senior Member gillenator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    1,418

    Default

    Keep bringing it!
    "Gillenator"
    Independent Patient Advocate
    more.hair@verizon.net

    NOTE: I am not a physician and not employed by any doctor/clinic. My opinions are not medical advice nor are they the opinions of the following endorsing physicians: Dr. Bob True & Dr. Bob Dorin

  4. #104
    Doctor Representative 35YrsAfter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Alpharetta, GA
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gillenator View Post
    As long as it is clinical substantiation. Thousands of studies take place but most of them result in opinions not verification.
    Dr. Keene responded:
    While I do not have the the study that proves a linear relationship to serum T and hair follicle T or DHT--the original association of T and DHT to hair loss occurred because of the finding that giving T to men who had been castrated (eunuchs) resulted in hair loss--and among those without the ability to convert T to DHT (those genetically born with an absence of 5 alpha R) there is no AGA. It seems likely, even though the study has not been done yet....that increasing serum levels of T results in increases in follicle levels of DHT, however, there are probably other factors that effect this, including genetic sensitivity to ones' own T or DHT (ie AR-CAG repeats) and the intrinsic ability of the hair follicles to produce DHT from cholesterol--we don't know what drives this. It reminds of the argument that insurance companies used to make--"there is no proof that prophylactic mastectomies reduce cancer in predisposed women--really? How can a breast cancer occur when there is no breast tissue?--eventually the proof was there. Logic suggests there is a relationship, and I think we will prove this point, but the study has not been done--and there are likely other factors that will be involved to determine whether T supplements have the same effect in all AGA patients.... I hope this helps.
    Best Regards,
    Dr. Keene

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    848

    Default

    It reminds of the argument that insurance companies used to make--"there is no proof that prophylactic mastectomies reduce cancer in predisposed women--really? How can a breast cancer occur when there is no breast tissue?--eventually the proof was there. Logic suggests there is a relationship, and I think we will prove this point, but the study has not been done

    I find many people that work in the medical field to be very scary. Maybe brain amputations to avoid any gilomas would be in order as it would save others as well.

  6. #106
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Schrodinger's Box
    Posts
    910

    Default

    While I agree that many sunscreens contain many harmful chemicals and that vitamin D is vital in the prevention of many diseases (there are countless studies currently going on studying vitamin D and diseases and cancer prevention) saying the UV rays are not a cause of cancer is completely false.

    UV rays cause damage to DNA. Not sure of your level of knowledge in biology so forgive me if you feel I am talking down, I am not, just trying to explain. DNA is composed of a phosphodiester backbone and four nucleotides that make up the entire genetic code--thymine, Cytosine, Adenine, and Guanine. When your cells are subjected to UV radiation the bonds of the pyrimidine nucleotide bases (thymine and Cytosine) form covalent bonds with one another when they are paired next to each other. These bonds are commonly referred to as thymine dimers and they create big problems when it comes time for the cell to replicate. These dimers lead to mutations and if these mutations occur in a gene such as an oncogene or a tumor suppressor gene they will lead to cancer. Skin cancer is one of the most common cancers because skin cells are one of the few cells in the body that are constantly replicating and also because every second you are in the sunlight 50-100 of these thymine dimers form. Have you every wondered why your skin turns red and is warm to the touch after a sun-burn? It is not because you have actually been burned, it is your immune system disposing of all of the cells that underwent programmed cell death (apoptosis) due to the formation of thymine dimers. Vitamin D is very important, however you don't need prolonged exposure to sunlight to produce adequate amounts.

    On a side not your comments about x-rays I mostly agree with. Ionizing radiation that you are subjected to from an x-ray is very bad. That's why they typically only recommend getting x-rays once a year unless the risk is justified. The guy earlier talking about the doctor that said the x-ray machine was no worse than going out in the sun is a moron and I would find a new doctor. If you want to talk about things that are going to increase the incidence of cancer just go to the airport. I have refused to go through the body scanners every time and instead opt for a pat down. Those things are so dangerous for frequent flyers, they are already subjected to elevated levels of radiation when they fly and now they are x-rayed before every flight, not good.

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    848

    Default

    The body produces melanin which dissipates 99.9&#37; of UV radiation as heat which prevents the formation of skin cancer. When the body is fed what it needs it has the ability to heal and protect itself under many circumstances. A good example would be the many foods that provide high anti viral activity which protect against cancers that are viral in origin.

    I will take my chances with the Sun over a cell phone or microwave any day.

    One can also work towards constantly trying to increase the length of their own telomeres which I do on a daily basis and you can include increasing the production of vitamin D at the top of that list. I would be willing to test the ability of my body to perform and resist disease against those who fear the sun any time and that is what it really comes down to I believe more in showing me the results and not so much of someone just claiming expertise.

    But I don't know maybe people hundreds of years ago had access to better sunscreens then we have today I wonder what they were.

    A CT scam is equivalent to 500 chest x-rays and the body has no way of protecting itself from this but for most something like this causes little fear through conditioning but heaven forbid someone should go outside in the sun and fresh air..........that's crazy talk.

  8. #108
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    848

    Default

    Below is a cut and paste from Mercola which whom I share views with through my own experience. Not only are my c- reactive protein and homocysteine levels low they are extremely low.

    In one study of more than 2,000 women, those with higher vitamin D levels were found to have fewer aging-related changes in their DNA, as well as lowered inflammatory responsesiii. Women with higher levels of vitamin D are more likely to have longer telomeres, and vice versa. This means that people with higher levels of vitamin D may actually age more slowly than people with lower levels of vitamin D.

    Your leukocyte telomere length (LTL) is a predictor for aging related diseases. As you age, your LTL's become shorter, but, if you suffer from chronic inflammation, your telomeres decrease in length much faster, because your body's inflammatory response accelerates leukocyte turnover. Your vitamin D concentrations also decrease with age, whereas your C-reactive protein (a mediator of inflammation) increases. This inverse double-whammy increases your overall risk of developing autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis.

    The good news is that vitamin D is a potent inhibitor of your body's inflammatory response, and by reducing inflammation, you diminish your turnover of leukocytes, effectively creating a positive chain reaction that can help protect you against a variety of diseases. In essence, it protects your body from the deterioration of aging. Researchers have found that subsets of leukocytes have receptors for the active form of vitamin D (D3), which allows the vitamin to have a direct effect on these cells. This may also explain the specific connection between vitamin D and autoimmune disease.

    The absolute best way to optimize your vitamin D levels would be through safe sun exposure. I am fully aware that many will not be able to implement this recommendation due to lifestyle constraints, but I feel I would be reprehensibly negligent if I did not emphasize how superior photo vitamin D is compared to oral. So for those who are able to, I have provided the following video that helps you find the times exposing your skin to the sun will actually produce vitamin D in your location.

  9. #109
    Doctor Representative 35YrsAfter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Alpharetta, GA
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    topcat:

    Could you send me the link. My whole family is into nutrition and I would like to see the video. There is really a LOT of great alternative information available that I have personally benefited from, so people should keep an open mind:
    chuck@forhair.com

    -35YrsAfter works at Dr. Cole's office
    www.forhair.com

  10. #110
    Senior Member gillenator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    1,418

    Default

    "Gillenator"
    Independent Patient Advocate
    more.hair@verizon.net

    NOTE: I am not a physician and not employed by any doctor/clinic. My opinions are not medical advice nor are they the opinions of the following endorsing physicians: Dr. Bob True & Dr. Bob Dorin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

» IAHRS

hair transplant surgeons

» The Bald Truth

» Recent Threads

Which crossword game has the most plays in 2022
Today 07:54 PM
Last Post By lenkalee266
Today 07:54 PM
Fantastic repair case ongoing by dr Feriduni in Belgium
07-31-2020 11:35 AM
by Davy
Last Post By Davy
Today 10:33 AM
New hair care regime based on gene / anti-ageing science
02-22-2022 10:45 AM
Last Post By pramazon05
Yesterday 09:35 AM
Dr Dogan - TURHAIR- any reviews?
08-13-2022 12:37 PM
Last Post By stefan90
08-13-2022 12:37 PM