Wear Sunscreen in the Office? Maybe

Reader Comments
Back to article

With my luck it will be found, proof positive, that sunscreen is dangerous. When I was little a suntan was a sign of good health. A few years ago I had a squamous growth removed from my face. The doctors said it was strange as I was so "young" for skin cancer... Shortly after I was diagnosed with Lupus. That partly explains the growth. It also explains why the sun makes me ill, and why I burn more easily. I am fortunate to have a mild case which althought it affects my lifestyle and hobbies, has not yet sent me to the hospital. My doctors and all the medicine I take are enough to be concerned with! I wear SPF broadband block every day -- the lighting in my office, the sun on the way home, etc are enough to affect me. I wonder if they can replace the ozone layer?

Shirley of PA 1:38PM July 02, 2008

As the med student implied, the real question is: "how much?" How much micronized titanium oxide (?) in sunscreen will cause DNA damage and potentially cause cancer? How much sun will do the same? How much vitamin D deprivation will lead to cancer? Obviously, with our different genetic makeups and lifestyles, these "how much" questions will have a different answer for everyone. Not wanting to die of cancer, and not having the money to have a team of researchers analyzing our individual bodies, we go with mean (average) results and hope for the best. If someone has a better solution, I'd be glad to hear it!, But I've not encountered one so far.

Dan S. of VA 9:20AM July 01, 2008

Has anyone tried to correlate the rise in skin cancer cases with the use of sunscreen? There is nasty stuff in 95% of them. I think the industry is trying to sell sun screen which is why the focus is so intense..

jack Jacobsen 3:03AM June 30, 2008

There's enough evidence that the chemical components used in these sunscreens are most likely more immediately dangerous than the sun that it almost seems criminal to suggest people slather themselves full with these creams. Especially children, who are even more at risk to the dangers of these sunscreens (hormone mimickers, propylene glycols, parabens etc.).
Sun exposure may be dangerous, but only over a very long term, and then, it's still not clear who exactly is at risk. It makes far more sense to insist that people keep themselves covered up as much as possible, limit direct and prolonged exposure to the sun.

itchy of IL 2:20AM June 30, 2008

Hi - in response to the second commenter's questions, I am a medical student and spent the last two weeks covering a unit on skin diseases, so I might be able to offer a few guesses to at least two of your questions. First, melanocytes involved in melanoma can actually migrate to different sites in the body - thus sun exposure at once site could induce changes manifested elsewhere. Selective pressures have undoubtedly played a role in the maintenance of many tumor suppressor genes we have to fight against cancer, and thus the body is relatively good at preventing cancer until older age, when fertily is not much of an issue and hence selective pressures are not as strong. While the body may have protective mechanisms in place in youth, eventually damage done from the sun forms a cumulative process. Ultraviolet radiation directly damages your DNA, knocking out one gene here, another there - until eventually a cancer cell manages to make it thru. By this point, the person may be 65 years old, and as she or he would not be having children at this age anyway (and likely have already cared for their grandchildren) there is not much selective pressure. I cannot speak to any of your questions about the doctors you named or the reporter, but I am convinced by the science that sun exposure is quite deadly and that taking protective measures is worthwhile. Why is skin cancer a modern epidemic? 5,000 years ago we didn't have teenage girls lining up to fry their skin under UV tanning bed lights or intentionally exposing their whole bodies to the sun. Look at how people dress in the desert - do they cover themselves up completely with wraps or do they walk around in speedos? Additionally, UV radiation levels are thought to be increasing due to atmospheric changes.

A student of OH 1:05AM June 30, 2008

Skin is a stupid overrated organ anyway. Skin is the cause of racism. I was thinking of having mine removed.

Rufus T. Fisch of VT 1:01AM June 30, 2008

Nice article. What are your thoughts about this similar report?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q87Draan-Y

Mandar of NJ 10:32PM June 29, 2008

(1) Why wasn't the human body's (supposed) susceptibility to to death by sun exposure, bred out of us during our evolution? How did the human race manage to survive the skin cancer epidemic that must have been going on before the sunscreen companies started selling their products? Why is skin cancer a very modern epidemic?
(2) Why is it that most melanomas occur at sites that don't get exposed to the sun?
In whites, the most common melanoma sites are the leg in women, and the trunk in men. Blacks and Asians get melanoma almost exclusively on skin that is not exposed to sunlight: the palms, soles, nails and mucous membranes. So if sun exposure leads directly to melanoma, why don't most victims get it on or above the neck?
(3) How much income, if any (in all its forms, like: honoraria, free trips to conferences, consulting fees, research funding, etc., have your two experts (Lim and Austin) received from organizations involved with marketing sunscreen? Just how independent and dispassionate are these two gentlemen?
(4) Why hasn't Ms Kotz been asking these questions (and publishing the answers), instead of leaving that task to your readers?
Please, stop insulting our intelligence.

Medical_skeptic of AZ 9:31PM June 29, 2008