Don Smith

FYI To Ask Don's Army:

The pharmaceutical industry is trying to recover from the "body blow" that they suffered from the "HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) Report" that caused millions of women to discontinue taking these products. Since HRT products account for an estimated $60 Billion in sales each year, the "impact" of the HRT Study will be significant!

Therefore, they are stating that the "answer" is "natural" HRT products and this got me to thinking. Exactly what is a "natural" product and how does that differ from a "synthetic" or "artificial" product.

Natural is defined in my medical dictionary as "Neither artificial nor pathogenic" and this gives us a place to start.

When something is "pathogenic" it means that it is "disease or injury producing" and "artificial" is defined as "not natural" and something "made by art" and/or it is "pathogenic" in effect.

Thus, an "artificial" product would be one that (1) is not naturally produced by the body, and/or, (2) is one that causes disease or morbid ( pertaining to disease) symptoms.

The "message" that the pharmaceutical industry will try to get out to the millions of women taking HRT is that while the "artificial" HRT products may be "bad" for them, the "natural" HRT products are "good" for them.

So, you are asking, what does this have to do with us?

1. A "sunscreen" is an "artificial" way to provide photoprotection, thermoprotection and immunoprotection; a "tan" is, on the other hand, the "natural" way that Mother Nature has given us to acquire photoprotection, thermoprotection, and immunoprotection.

Are "artificial" sunscreens also pathogenic? The answer is that there is "concern" that products containing sunscreen (1) may contain powerful free radical generators (that increase cellular damages and changes that can lead to cancer), (2) have strong estrogenic activity (and, therefore, interfere with normal sexual development), and, (3) contain sysnthetic (artificial) chemicals that are "alien" to the human body and that "accumulate" in stored body fat.

2. A "fake spray" tan is an "artificial" way to provide a "cosmetic" tan that IS NOT photoprotective, has "limited" thermoprotective properties and no immuoprotective ability; a "tan" is, on the other hand, the "natural" way that Mother Nature has given us to acquire photoprotection, thermoprotection and immunoprotection.

Are "fake spray" tans pathogenic? There is no evidence that I am aware of to indicate that the DHA used as the "active ingredient" is disease producing but I am concerned that the salons offering this service are not informing their clients that the "cosmetic only" tan provided DOES NOT provide photoprotection and this "omission" can, and does, lead to sunburning and a sunburn, as you know, is an "injury" to the skin that should be avoided.

3. [Added Later] Almost all physicians who understand that it is required for proper calcium metabolism recommend oral (artificial) vitamin D notwithstanding the fact that the sun-induced "natural" vitamin D is free and the cost of patronizing an indoor tanning salon to maintain optimal vitamin D levels is inexpensive. Keep in mind that there is no danger of "toxicity" with "naturally" produced vitamin D.

Is "artificial" vitamin D pathogenic? No, but you can "overdose" on oral vitamin D.

So, a question for you!

If "natural" HRT products are now going recommended by the medical profession for HRT, why are they still recommending the use of "artificial" products containing sunscreen, "fake spray" booths and recommending oral vitamin D?

The medical profession can't have it both ways; either "natural" is good and desired whenever possible or it isn't.

The "bottom line" is that "natural" facultative pigmentation (better known as a "tan") that is produced through sensible, moderate and responsible exposure to UVR outweigh the minimal and manageable risks involved!

Mother Nature knows best: Natural is better than artificial!

Don "Mother Nature's Little Friend" Smith

[ This Message was edited by: Don Smith on 2002-07-22 13:40 ][ This Message was edited by: Don Smith on 2002-07-22 20:52 ]

BooBop

Don, don't slap me to hard, but if it is "Natural", are UV lamps consided Natural?

solarmeter

Not by the "bedscare" community. They are too biased or ignorant to realize that a specific UV ray is a UV ray Period. Physics 101.

A 297 nm ray from the sun has identical effect as a 297 nm ray from a lamp. A photon is a photon is a photon. Only difference is the quantity of them from a given source. That's where exposure time comes into play, managing dose rather than dose rate.

child of ask don