|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunlight Information: Skin Cancers and Vitamin DIntroductionFor the past several decades the numbers of skin cancers, and particularly the deadly one, malignant melanoma, have risen dramatically among Caucasian populations throughout the world. In the USA melanoma is the seventh most commonly diagnosed cancer with a rate of 14.2 cases per 100,000 population, (1) while in 1987 Queensland, Australia, had 55.8 cases per 100,000, the world's highest rate. (2) The incidence of the various types of skin cancer in the general British population has been increasing at an annual rate of two to eight percent over the past 2 decades. (3) The contributory factors seem to be a light-skinned, northern European population living in areas of high ambient sunlight, and the incidence of the disease is seasonal, with more cases reported in summer than winter. Yet several clinical and epidemiological aspects of cutaneous melanoma seem anomalous because they contrast with other sunlight-associated skin cancers. For example, persons with the greatest risk of melanoma are not those with the greatest cumulative solar exposure; the anatomic areas that receive the most solar exposure are not preferentially affected; and not all light-skinned people suffer the same - albino Africans who have no pigmentation, are more likely to get sunburn and a number of other skin complaints as a result of exposure to the sun, but they don't get melanomas. (4) In the 1960s I lived with my family in Singapore, just 1.5 degrees from the Equator. I have blond hair, fair skin and blue eyes. It is a combination not believed to be suited to the harsh sun of the tropics. Nevertheless, I regularly went on the beach, to the swimming pool or sailing on the South China Sea with little or nothing on, in the heat of the midday sun. I don't go brown, the best I can manage by way of a tan is a dark golden colour. I remember, in an effort to deepen my tan, I would lie out for hours with the sun to one side of me and its reflection in a mirror of cooking foil on the other to increase my exposure. Like everyone else in the ex-patriot Singapore community, I didn't give skin cancer a thought in those days; the phrase 'malignant melanoma' was unheard of. I didn't use a sunscreen. They too were unavailable. If we used anything at all, which most of the time we did not, it was usually a well-shaken mixture of coconut oil and vinegar. This was a concoction used at the time by naturists. We smelt like a fish and chip shop, but we didn't get burnt in the years we lived there. Today, it seems, all that has changed. Why? What has changed in the last forty years? Skin cancersThere are three major forms of skin cancer:
Who's at risk?
How to detect skin cancerConsult a dermatologist immediately if you have moles or pigmented spots with these characteristics:
Ultraviolet radiationAll types of skin cancer are attributed to exposure to the ultraviolet (UV) part of the spectrum of sunlight. UV is classified as three distinct wavebands: A, B and C. They are all believed to contribute to the development of skin cancer. (5)
How strong is the evidence linking exposure to sunlight with melanoma?During the 1980s and early '90s more than a dozen studies compared histories of sunburn in patients with melanoma and controls. But differences in design and definition of sunburn make it difficult to quantify a single estimate of risk. The most complete data on melanoma and sunburn come from six studies from Australia, Europe and North America. These studies suggest an association but say that the effect is modest. They emphasise the point that episodic exposure seems to be more risky than constant exposure. (14) British doctors R Marks and D Whiteman are unconvinced of the sunlight/melanoma link. They point out that:
Other clinicians agree. Karnauchow says: "The simplistic idea of a sun/melanoma relationship is based more on a belief than science.". . . "As with other neoplasms, the cause of melanoma remains an enigma and most probably the sun has little, if anything, to do with it." (15) And Newcastle dermatology professor, Sam Shuster states that the main reason for the supposed increase in melanomas was a change in diagnostic beliefs: lesions previously regarded as benign became classified first as dubious then as malignant. "Melanomas are being invented, not found," he says, " . . . exposure to screening and pigmented lesion clinics is a greater cause of melanoma than sun exposure." (16) Dr Anne Kricker and colleagues, looking at studies into skin cancer other than malignant melanoma and exposure to sunlight, also say that the evidence linking skin cancers with sun exposure is weak. They note that most studies have not found statistically significant positive associations, while the few that have lacked empirical evidence that sun exposure was the cause. "Many questions remain about the relationship between sun exposure and skin cancer," they say. (17) The ozone holeThe stratospheric ozone layer is a delicate umbrella guarding us from the worst effects of solar radiation. One suggested cause of the recent increase in skin cancers is our use of chemicals which interact with protective layers in our atmosphere that screen us from the sun's ultraviolet rays, of which the best example is a hole in the ozone layer which appeared over the Antarctic a few years ago. The history of skin cancers follows the increase in the use of many chemicals now known to be harmful to the environment. Manufacturing processes which use or generate such synthetic chemicals as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and other perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) all of which tend to destroy the ozone layer as well as having other deleterious effects on our atmosphere, have proliferated over the past half century. Not only do these gases have a strong environmental effect, their chlorine and fluorine bonds make them exceptionally long-lived in the environment. For example, data show that sulphur hexafluoride may persist in the atmosphere for up to 3,200 years. Could our increasing release of these chemicals into the atmosphere be the cause of the dramatic increase in skin cancers? Unfortunately, it seems not. In 1991 Professor Johan Moan of the Norwegian Cancer Institute made an astounding discovery: He found that between 1957 and 1984 the annual incidence of melanoma in Norway had increased by 350 percent for men and by 440 percent for women. But he also determined that there had been no change in the ozone layer over this period. His report concluded that: "Ozone depletion is not the cause of the increase in skin cancers". (18) But if the ozone layer has not yet changed significantly, except at the poles, then what is causing the recent, enormous increase in skin cancer? The sunscreen connectionThe Australian experience might provide the first clue. The medical establishment in Queensland has vigorously promoted the use of sunscreens for many years - and today, Queensland has more cases of melanoma per capita than any other place in the world. This is a trend seen worldwide. Incidence rates of melanoma have risen especially steeply since the mid-1970s. The two principal strategies for reduction of risk of melanoma and other skin cancers during this period were sun avoidance and use of chemical sunscreens. Rising trends in the incidence of and mortality from melanoma have continued since the 1970s and 1980s, when sunscreens with high sun protection factors became widely used. Sunscreens are designed to protect against sunburn which is caused by UVB; they generally provide little protection against UVA rays. There are two types of sunscreen:
Indeed, the Garland brothers strongly believe that the increased use of chemical sunscreens is the primary cause of the skin cancer epidemic. Recent studies by them have shown a higher rate of melanoma among men who regularly use sunscreens and a higher rate of basal cell carcinoma among women using sunscreens. (21) (22) This was confirmed by another study group who found that 'always users' of sunscreens had 3.7 times as many malignant melanomas as those 'never using'. The Garland brothers suggest that this is because people using sunscreens develop a false sense of security; that because they do not get a sunburn they are encouraged to stay longer in the sun, but there may be other reasons why chemical sunscreens can be dangerous:
There is, however, some evidence that regular use of sunscreens helps prevent the formation of actinic keratoses, the precursors of squamous cell carcinoma. (27) The dietary connectionIn the 1970s, when kidney transplantation was pioneered, doctors first encountered the problem of tissue rejection. To combat it, they gave their transplant patients linoleic acid. This suppressed their immune systems very effectively, preventing their transplanted kidneys being rejected. But it also caused a large increase in cancers and this treatment was stopped. Since then, linoleic acid and oils that contain it, have been shown time and again to increase the risk of several types of cancer, including skin cancers. Linoleic acid is the major fatty acid in all polyunsaturated vegetable margarines and cooking oils:
Drs B S and L E Mackie, working on Australia's Sunshine Coast have a great deal of experience in skin cancers. They say: "In view of the work of Black and Erickson in mice and our own work in humans, we believe that human subjects who are at high risk of melanomas and other solar-induced forms of skin cancer should be advised to be moderate in their intake of dietary polyunsaturated fats." (28) Patricia Holborrow also points out that the increase in melanomas could be a result of dietary changes to PUFs."Recently, I followed up four families that started in 1976 to use a diet with preferred oils as safflower and sunflower oil and low in salicylates and additives (that interfere with the metabolic pathway of these fats). There had been three cases of cancer resulting in two deaths in these families." (29) "The issue is further complicated by dietary factors that are cofactors for the metabolic pathways for the fatty acids and which may in addition favour or have a negative effect on the anticancer or cancer enhancing properties of the various prostaglandins (eg the negative effects of vitamin E and the positive effects of vitamin C)." (30) The Australians are as paranoid about heart disease as the Americans. I was in Australia in 1995 and noticed that it is even their custom to remove the cream from milk and replace it with polyunsaturated vegetable oil. One of the recommendations for reducing the risk of skin and other cancers is to reduce intakes of fats and take vitamin supplements. But this approach doesn't seem to work. The findings of a huge study by scientists at the Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; the Division of Human Nutrition and Epidemiology, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, Netherlands; the Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York; and the Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, of 43,217 male participants of the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, did not support the hypothesis that diets low in fat or high in specific vitamins lower risk of basal cell carcinoma. (31) It's usually saturated animal fats that get the blame for all diseases today. They are not the culprits -- 'healthy' vegetable oils are (see Polyunsaturated Fats in The Cholesterol Myth) The benefits of sunlightAlthough the medical establishment still strongly supports the use of sunscreens there is a growing consensus among progressive researchers that the use of sunscreens and heeding the current advice to cover up when out doors may promote not only skin cancers but other cancers as well. There is very little vitamin D in any of the food we eat. Most of the body's vitamin D supply is manufactured by the action of UVB rays on lipids on the skin. (32) Using a sunscreen drastically lowers this production. (33) Researchers at the Occupational Medicine Department, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego studied men in the US Navy during 1974-1984. They discovered that personnel working indoors had 10.6 cases of melanoma per 100,000 while those who worked in occupations that required spending time both indoors and outdoors had the lowest rate at 7.0 per 100,000. They also determined that there were more melanomas on the trunk than on the more commonly sunlight-exposed head and arms. Findings from this study suggest a protective role for brief, regular exposure to sunlight and fit with laboratory studies that showed that vitamin D suppressed the growth of malignant melanoma cells in tissue culture. (27) The same team found that lack of exposure to ultraviolet sunlight may place some populations at higher risk of breast cancer. The association between total average annual sunlight energy striking the ground and age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rates in eighty-seven regions of the United States was evaluated. Annual age-adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer varied from 17-19 per 100,000 in the South and Southwest to 33 per 100,000 in the Northeast. Risk of fatal breast cancer in the major urban areas of the United States increased as intensity of local sunlight decreased. They conclude that "Vitamin D from sunlight exposure may be associated with low risk for fatal breast cancer, and differences in ultraviolet light reaching the United States population may account for the striking regional differences in breast cancer mortality". (34) They also evaluated the association between total average annual sunlight energy striking the ground and age-adjusted breast cancer incidence rates in the USSR and found that the pattern of increased breast cancer incidence in regions of low solar radiation in the USSR was consistent with the geographical pattern seen for breast cancer mortality in the USA and worldwide. (35) A low blood level of vitamin D is known to increase the risk for the development of breast and colon cancer (36) and may also accelerate the growth of melanoma. (27) (28) (37) Because of this, Dr Gordon Ainsleigh in California believes that the use of sunscreens causes more cancer deaths than it prevents. He estimates that the 17% increase in breast cancer observed between 1991 and 1992 may be the result of the pervasive use of sunscreens over the past decade. (30) He also estimates that 30,000 cancer deaths in the United States alone could be prevented each year if people would adopt a regimen of regular, moderate sun exposure. Prostate CancerThat this could be so is confirmed by recent studies which have suggested that exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation may be protective to some internal cancers including that in the prostate. One such is by scientists working at the Department of Urology, North Staffordshire Hospital, Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent, UK. They studied 212 prostatic adenocarcinoma and 135 benign prostatic hypertrophy patients to determine whether previous findings showing a protective effect for UV exposure could be reproduced. Their data confirmed that higher levels of cumulative exposure, adult sunbathing, childhood sunburning and regular holidays in hot climates were each independently and significantly associated with a reduced risk of this cancer.(38) Cancer PreventionSo what should you do to protect yourself as much as possible against these cancers? Summarizing current research the following recommendations appear reasonable:
Dermatologists recommend that you do periodic self-examinations for any changes in the number, size, shape, and colour of pigmented areas of your skin, such as freckles and moles. However, consulting your doctor or a dermatologist may be the surest way to detect skin cancer early. Physicians are trained to recognise skin cancers and are more likely to detect thinner melanomas, the most dangerous type of skin cancer, than patients who do self-examinations, increasing the likelihood that the skin cancer can be detected early enough to be treated effectively. Having said that, however, Christopher Del Mar, Professor of General Practice, University of Queensland, Australia, may disagree. He notes that a worried public are the initiators of surgery. Doctors perform excisions of benign pigmented tissue because of pressure from their patients. He says: "The benefits of early detection programs are uncertain; such programs need to be evaluated to determine whether there are any benefits and, if so, whether they outweigh the costs." (39) ConclusionJohnathan Rees, Professor of dermatology, University Department of Dermatology, Newcastle upon Tyne, appraises the current melanoma "epidemic", saying: "Once you excise a pigmented lesion and know its histology you forfeit the chance of knowing what would have happened if you had left it in situ". "Cohort analyses show, perhaps surprisingly, that mortality from melanoma rose from the 1890s to the 1950s and then started to decline. Changes in leisure activity don't explain the 3-7% pa increase in melanoma incidence from mid-1950s to early 1980s. ". . . individuals with higher continuous sun exposure have lower rates than those exposed intermittently." Some years ago, the vicar of a parish in Devon, who was not in favour of a nearby nudist beach, wrote in his parish magazine: "If God had meant us to walk around without clothes, we'd have been born naked"! Well, of course, He did and we are — perhaps it was for a very good reason. References1.
American Cancer Society.
Cancer facts and figures 1998
. Atlanta, The Society, 1998.
Last updated 17 June 2005 |
"NH&WL may be the best non-technical book on diet ever written"
Joel Kauffman, PhD, Professor Emeritus, University of the Sciences, Philadelphia, PA |