|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Australian Paradox and the Deadly Myth of SunscreensNine Class-Action Lawsuits Filed Against Sunscreen Manufacturers for Fraudulent Sun Protection ClaimsBy
Researchers at the Queensland Institute for Medical Research in Brisbane, Australia, followed 1,383 adults for five years. They reported in 1999 that, while sunscreen use reduces the risk of developing squamous-cell carcinoma, the use of sunscreen did not reduce the risk of developing melanoma or basal cell carcinoma. The manufacturers of sunscreens and so-called sunblocks promote sunbathing and sun exposure by claiming to protect users from harmful ultraviolet rays. While the products do protect against ultraviolet B (UVB) and C (UVC) rays -- the shorter-length ultraviolet rays that cause sunburn and increase the risk of skin cancer -- they do little to stop ultraviolet A (UVA) rays. These are the deadly longer-length rays that penetrate deeper into the skin and are responsible for sun-induced skin aging well as certain types of skin cancers including the most deadly type - melanoma. The use of sunscreens has seriously increased the incidence of melanoma, and more skin-cancer research is backing up what was first documented in Australia. Sadly, I have seen this frightening increase first hand in my dermatology practice, where there has been a dramatic increase in melanoma among teens and even preteens. Two teens in particular actually developed lentigo maligna melanoma, a type of cancer usually seen only in individuals in their 40s and older who have had long-term exposure to the sun. The bottom line is that sunscreens have disabled the body's early-warning system -- sunburns -- and have created a false and deadly sense of security in the minds of people who are now ''cooking'' themselves longer, completely oblivious to the terrible, long-term, deep-tissue damage being done to their bodies. Therein lies the essence of what is the Australian paradox. On March 30th 2006 nine lawsuits involving some of the most popular brands, including Coppertone, Banana Boat, Hawaiian Tropic, Bullfrog and Neutrogena, and the manufacturers including Johnson & Johnson Inc., Schering-Plough Corp., Playtex Products Inc., Tanning Research Laboratories Inc. and Chattem, Inc. were filed in California charging that the sunscreen manufacturers dangerously inflate claims about the protective qualities of sunscreens, lulling consumers into believing they are safe from the dangers of prolonged sun exposure. The lawsuits have been granted class-action status and have the entire $5 billion dollar sunscreen industry in a state of panic. One lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles, calls sunscreens the snake oil of the 21st century." Most researchers also are also concerned that, while there is very little difference between an SPF (sun protection factor) rating of 15 and one with a SPF of 60, the higher ratings that are being aggressively marketed by the sunscreen manufacturers may be causing people to spend more time in the sun and thereby increasing the cancer risks and the damage to skin. We use sunscreens simply to absorb or diffuse energy from the sun that may result in damage to our skin's DNA or that may initiate chemicals in the skin that cause aging and eventually skin cancer. Here is the picture of concern -- an unfolding paradox that affects us all: You put a sunscreen on and feel invulnerable -- that you are now protected from the sun's damage; but the UVA rays you are absorbing result in accelerated aging and an increased chance of developing melanoma. By far the greatest threat being perpetrated by the Australian paradox is the long-term, possibly fatal, damage being done to our children. Conscientious, health-minded parents are slathering their children with high SPF sunscreens and then unknowingly allowing them to go out and literally ''bake'' in the sun. My team and I have recently filed for a patent for a revolutionary sunblocking product, that I am confident will, for the very first time, block 100% of the suns damaging rays without the life-threatening consequences of existing sunscreens, and will allow us to once again enjoy the great outdoors without destroying our health. Until we have successfully completed all of our testing and can bring our product to market, the Australian paradox will continue to be a major threat to everyones health. Here's some advice, based on sound science and my own research, that can help minimize the risks. Limit sun exposure and cover up as much as possible when you are outside. Always wear a hat and, before your sunscreen, apply a topical anti-oxidant cream such as vitamin E or vitamin C to absorb or diffuse energy not blocked by the imperfect sunscreens. New research suggests that anti-oxidant creams containing ellagitannins (found in raspberries) such as my derme’llage Skin Care Regimen are even more helpful when used in conjunction with a sunscreen. The compounds in these berries not only have the ability to absorb excess energy, but also may directly protect DNA by other means. Choose your sunscreen carefully. Make sure it has a SPF factor of at least 15 to block the UVB rays and contains the chemicals that block UVA light, i.e. stabilized avobenzone or Mexoryl. Robert D. Bibb, MD, is a pioneer in the field of environmental dermatology and internationally recognized cancer prevention researcher based in Myrtle Beach, S.C. and is President of Botanical Solutions, Inc. MSNBC Sunscreen Lawsuit Story... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12081374/ Sunscreen Lawsuit Complaint... http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/sunscreen/amended_complaint.pdf Other Links... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13360246/ http://www.newstarget.com/001264.html http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/964647970.html
|
|
 |
According to the Encarta World English Dictionary, a paradox is a statement, proposition or situation that seems to be absurd or contradictory, but in fact is or may be true. Here's a good one: Thanks to the Australian government's ''Slip, Slop, Slap'' public-service campaign, Australians have a very high per capita usage of sunscreen, but they also have one of the highest per capita incidences of melanoma, the most deadly form of skin cancer. In fact, the incidence of melanoma in Australian men doubled between 1983 and 1997.
