Facebook Pixel

Comment Reply

EmpowHER Guest
Anonymous

the tan is a sign of skin damage argument is pretty silly and the AAD can say it all they want and it makes very little sense. We evolved being exposed to UV light and without it we couldn't survive. Human evolution shows clearly that skin tone and melanin production help us to avoid sun burn.

The issue is skin type. If you are fair skinned with red hair, you need to be careful and should wear ORGANIC sunscreen when spending more than 15-20 minutes outdoors. Folks with darker skin types should receive 20-30 minutes a day of unprotected exposure before they cover up.

People need to be logical. if you take a second and look at all the chemicals we apply to our skin everyday you should hear some bells going off.. Things like oxybenzone, parabins in products like perfume, body wash, sunless moisturizers, anti-antiperspirants.. all products that we use without question. It seems odd that we are encouraged to blame UV light for skin cancer and not the companies that produce these products. These companies are the ones funding anti UV light research. Fear = Consumption. its just to bad most people fall for it.. including the MD community. Do you really think mother nature got it wrong? does it make sense to you that every other living thing on the planet needs UV light to survive and apparently we dont?? We threw the monkey wrench into the plan when we started to settle in places that are frozen for half the year.
bottom line we need 15-30 minutes per day of UV exposure every single day of the year!

research MD's like

DR. Holick
DR. Sorenson
DR. Zoltan Rona
DR. Reinhold veith
DR. Bill Grant

these are just a few MD's encouraging people in North America to embrace sensible UV exposure for Optimal health.

May 28, 2010 - 9:01am

Reply

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy