eileen

Public release date: 22-Sep-2008

Contact: David Sampson
david.sampson@cancer.org
American Cancer Society

Variant of vitamin D receptor gene linked to melanoma risk


A new analysis indicates an association between a gene involved in vitamin D metabolism and skin cancer. Published in the November 1, 2008 issue of CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, the study suggests that individuals with certain variants in a vitamin D-related gene, called BsmI, may be at an increased risk of developing melanoma.
Research has shown that vitamin D in the body has significant protective effects against the development of cancer because it regulates cell growth, cell differentiation and cell death. This is supported by evidence that sun exposure, which helps in the production of vitamin D, can have anticancer effects.
Vitamin D exerts its effects by binding to a receptor located within cells. Because there are genetic differences in this vitamin D receptor among individuals, investigators suspect that different people have different levels of vitamin D activity within their bodies. Therefore, some individuals may naturally be able to achieve more vitamin D-related protection against cancer than others. However, study results on this topic have been conflicting, and no review of the available data has been performed to date.
To address this issue, Dr. Simone Mocellin and Dr. Donato Nitti of the University of Padova in Italy examined the existing research investigating the association between common variants in the vitamin D receptor and the risk of melanoma. The analysis revealed a significant association between melanoma risk and the BsmI gene.
The researchers note that additional research is needed to validate this link, and called for well-designed, population-based, large, multi-institutional studies to test whether any vitamin D receptor variant is independently associated with melanoma risk.
"These findings prompt further investigation on this subject and indirectly support the hypothesis that sun exposure might have an anti-melanoma effect through activation of the vitamin D system," the authors wrote.
SOURCE LINK: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-vov091708.php

__________________
"under exposure to UV rays is as dangerous as overexposure....this is D life" eileen

Don Smith

That was the point we made in Part 1 of our series on CMM.

I sent a copy of this article to several derm's who sent e-mails "poo pooing" our theory.

And don't forget that UVR does not cause CMM. The only relationship between UVR and CMM is "coincidental" - i.e., the fact that UVR exposure results in a signal being sent by the keratinocytes to the melanocytes to produce more melanin and when the melanocytes can't keep up with the demand, the "mother" melanocyte cell divides and--for reasons not understood--the signal to stop dividing is "scrambled" and the "mother" melanocyte cell keeps on dividing over and over and over again.

However, as we said in the article, the "scrambling" of the signal won't take place if the vitamin D level is optimal, i.e., >120 nmol/L.

It is always "rewarding" to see papers agreeing with your theory-LOL.

eileen

...and even more rewarding to see your responses.
thank you :)

__________________
"under exposure to UV rays is as dangerous as overexposure....this is D life" eileen

Don Smith

Here is the "nut" of the problem we must overcome.

The derm's are entitled to their own opinions regarding UVR and CMM but they are not entitled to their own facts. The fact of the matter is that many of the anti-UVR scientists spouting this nonsense are coming very close to academic fraud and the journalists reporting it are guilty of incompetence.

For instance, if you carefully read the Fisher and Berwick papers, they do not say that tanning is not safe. However, the incompetent journalists said that because of the false, deceptive and misleading press release from the journal Pigment Cell and Melanoma Research.