Don Smith

The rapidly growing field of "epigenetics" will, I believe, prove that many forms of cancer are not caused by a single factor; rather, several genetic and non-genetic (i.e., lifestyle and environmental) factors are to blame.

It will also (I predict) show that sunscreen use (i.e., an "artificial" means of replicating the protection afforded by facultative pigmentation) plays a significant role in causing ALL forms of skin cancer (including CMM).


Sunscreens cause cancer.

Research into the health of our ancient ancestors11 also suggests that cancer is indeed a manmade disease. Increasingly, environmental and lifestyle factors are being pinpointed as the culprits, and it is my personal belief that our cancer problem is the result of too many people being regularly exposed to too many of these toxic factors, which include:



It’s highly unlikely that any one of these is solely responsible. Rather it’s probably a combination of several. This means that what needs to be done is a complete overhaul of most industries that provide us with everything from food and clothes to personal care products, furnishings and more. Yes, what I’m suggesting is dramatic, and perhaps that’s why no one really wants to take that bull by the horn, but it’s necessary if we want to truly address the meteoric rise of not just cancer, but many other modern diseases as well. Virtually every single thing you put into your mouth, on your body, and in your home and business, needs to be evaluated for its toxic potential.

http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2013/08/sunscreens-cause-cancer.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2013/08/sunscreens-cause-cancer-2531844.html

JOHN @ URI

Good find, but it will be years before they show results.....

__________________

Don Smith

John:

The first search I made for vitamin D (almost 20 years ago) turned up about 50 citations. Now, I get that many every week. The "rate of growth" is even faster for epigenetics.

It won't take that long because (1) there are laboratory tests that can be used to determine epigenetic changes and (2) epigenetic research is not "controlled" by the dermatologists. Note: Photobiologists could have (and should have) conducted research into the adverse effects of sunscreen use. Why didn't they? Because there was always a dermatologist at the top of their organization chart and their grant funding was controlled by NIH, an organization heavily influenced by dermatologists.

Turbo Girl

This is exactly what I personally believe the ITA should be focusing on in order to expose what is really causing cancer. I believe that if a national campaign of advertising this info, what it does, and who is lying to the public would be what what it takes to turn this industry around.

The average bear isn't going to take the time to do a simple search like Don did. They are just "drinking the koolaid" with no questions asked. If this industry got the info out on a national level, the average bear would be forced to question what they have been being fed and start educating themselves to realize that tanning at moderate levels willl actually help them and heal them.

It's just so frustrating...

__________________
[SIGPIC]