Also try: melanoma, skin cancer, sun damage, sun exposure, sun protection, sunblock, sunscreen, uva rays, uvb rays
Jul 11, 2008
Most alarming news of the day:
Study shows rate of dangerous melanoma up 50% in young women since 1980
Not good news at all. The disturbing news is from a Washington Post online report (7/11/08):
An analysis of government cancer statistics from 1973 to 2004 found that the rate of new melanoma cases in younger women had jumped 50 percent since 1980 but did not increase for younger men in that period.
What's concerning is that if melanoma, which has traditionally (and incorrectly) been viewed in the popular mind as only an "older person's disease" is cropping up so early--what does that indicate for the years ahead? Does it signify that melanoma will be on the rise as the population ages? If so, it's not a good prognosis. It's too eary to tell right now, but it's news to take heed of and it reinforces the need to wear sunscreen--even for just incidental exposure like window shopping.
I'm anal about these things--so I do what I can to remember sunscreen all-year long. But even with that, I recently had a scrape taken off my nose to have a biopsy done. This report reminded me to call for the results, which I just did. Thankfully, it was benign--so I'm left with some good news and a little dent in my nose. All worth it.
With all the self-tanners available today, it's insane to sun sans protection. It's insane to sun period. And if you're not wearing sunscreen, get some NOW. A good one to try that's gotten mucho recommendations is Anthelios SX by LaRoche-Posay. It's an SPF 15 (I'm a fan of higher SPF's, particularly for longer exposure times) but Anthelios SX contains both Parsol 1789 for longer UVA rays and Mexoryl SX for shorter UVA rays--plus Octocrylene for UVB (and some short-ray) protection. Octocrylene is a chemical sunscreen ingredient that absorbs the damaging rays rather than deflecting it (as a physical blocker would).
posted by skintoxicated
Write a review about Anthelios SX with Mexoroxyl MX
Return to Beauty Cred
7/12/08
GReat article and the reason rates are climbing is not because people do not use sunscreen......the rates are climbing because they are using sunscreen. Sunscreen and the chemicals in it are the culprit...not the sun.
This report must list the number of people that used sunscreen in the past... at the actual site of the cancer...you give me that specific report...... and you will know the truth on these matters.
7/13/08
According to the Washington Post article, Mark Purdue, a research fellow at the National Cancer Institute, who led the analysis on skin cancer rates published in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology,
"One possible explanation is increases among young women of recreational sun exposure or tanning bed use," Purdue said. "Both of these things have been identified as risk factors. It's possible increases in these two behaviors may be responsible."
So the study did not analyze root cause--just the rate of detection. While the use of tanning salons definitely grew in the time period of the study (1973 - 2004), I'm not entirely sold on the statement that a possible factor could be the increase in recreational sun exposure. However, given the amount of data to date on the correlation between sun exposure and development of skin cancers, I'm still a proponent of sun protection--and that includes sunscreens, hats, protective clothing, staying in shaded areas, avoiding direct sun during peak hours,...etc. And if the chemicals are a concern, review the Environmental Working Group's list for their picks on "safest" sunscreens; the link is here: http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens2008/summary.php
7/17/08
Greetings,
I state now that I am not a physician. I worked in a facio-maxillary lab in Melbourne, Australia. My training was to primarily assist in the creation of facial prostheses for patients who had lost portions of the face (especially ear tips. The most prevalent cause was skin cancer.
I have been using sunscreen in excessive portions since working in that laboratory. And because of the incredibly strong sun in Australia, I get checked regularly for skin cancer.
I believe that my precautions have saved me so far (as I am a perfect candidate), and I don't appreciate anyone who accuses sunscreen as being "the cause of skin cancer". I feel that this is unnecessary scare-mongering.
I also believe that the incredibly stunning tan that can easily be developed with the aid of a sun bed is a concern. I have tanned in one of these wonderful contraptions, and found that the process and result were relaxing and exceptional. However, do we know of the true, concentrated level of any sort of UV radiation the recipient is receiving?
If you want to look tanned, it is up to the individual to weigh up the risks of skin cancer via unadulterated UV exposure (sun bed), and the crap that we cover ourselves with to get a fake tan.
I can honestly say that I don’t know the long-term effects of fake tan vs. sun beds. What I do know is that my skin looks at least 10 years younger than my peers – because I use sunscreen.
7/22/08
Thanks you so much for the review on skin cancer.
This statistics is a good reminder to wear sunscreen everyday.