Argument z witaminą D3 jest nadużywany i absolutnie nie przeczy stosowaniu kremów z filtrami, witamina D3 może być dostarczana z pożywieniem. Nie stosowanie filtrów stanowi o wiele większe zagrożenie niż ich stosowanie i takie argumenty wprowadzają tylko zamęt i nieporozumienie gdyż mogą zniechęcać ludzi do stosowania kremów z filtrami lub zachęcać do solarium, które bardzo podwyższa groźbę raka skóry.
UVA także opala, ale mechanizm jest inny.
Vitamin D3 deficiency
UVB is necessary for the conversion of 7-dehydrocholesterol to active vitamin D3. Sunscreen use blocks the skin’s synthesis of Vitamin D3, (Matsuoka LY, Wortsman J, Hollis BW., Use of topical sunscreen for the evaluation of regional synthesis of vitamin D3, J Am Acad Dermatol 1990 May;22(5 Pt 1):772-5
[45] Matsuoka LY, Ide L, Wortsman J, MacLaughlin JA, Holick MF., Sunscreens suppress cutaneous vitamin D3 synthesis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987 Jun;64(6):1165-8
[46] Holick, MF, Photosynthesis of vitamin D in the skin: effect of environmental and life-style variables, Fed Proc 1987 Apr;46(5):1876-82) There is some concern that this may lead to weakened bones and fractures, particularly in the elderly. However, in an Australian study, daily use of a SPF 17 sunscreen by adults over the age of 40 for seven months was not associated with a deficiency in vitamin D (Marks R, Foley PA, Jolley D, Knight KR, Harrison J, Thompson SC., The effect of regular sunscreen use on vitamin D levels in an Australian population. Results of a randomized controlled trial. Arch Dermatol 1995 Apr;131(4):415-21). Further, there is evidence suggesting that vitamin D can be acquired through diet alone(Vieth, R., Vitamin D supplementation, 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations, and safety. Am J Clin Nutr 1999 May;69(5):842-56).
Cosmetic Dermatology June 1999, page 43 by Marc Naylor MD
“ the latest studies proving that ultraviolet exposure is neither required for vitamin D3 sufficiency nor [that vitamin D is] a scientifically proven cancer fighter. Prospective sunscreen trials examining whether sunscreen contributes to vitamin D deficiency found that regular sunscreen users were not vitamin D deficient.”
Photochem Photobiol 1998 Jul;68(1):63-70
An analysis of UVA emissions from sunlamps and the potential importance for melanoma.
Miller SA, Hamilton SL, Wester UG, Cyr WH.
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
[email protected]
Exposure to solar UV radiation is a risk factor for cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM). Epidemiologic studies have also considered the use of sunlamps as a possible contributor to CMM. We measured and analyzed the emission spectra of six different currently marketed sunlamps and a historical sunlamp, the UVB-emitting FS lamp, and compared the results to solar exposure. For a typical tanner (20 sessions @ 2 minimal erythema doses (MED)/session), the annual UVA doses from commonly used fluorescent sunlamps were 0.3-1.2 times that received from the sun. For a frequent tanner (100 sessions @ 4 MED/session), the annual UVA doses from fluorescent sunlamps were 1.2-4.7 times that received from the sun and 12 times for recently available, high-pressure sunlamps. To determine biologically effective doses, action spectra for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in humans and for melanoma in the Xiphophorus fish (XFM) were applied to the sunlamps' emission spectra. The results for the effective doses using the SCC action spectrum tracked the UVB doses, while the results using the XFM action spectrum tracked the UVA doses. When combined with UV exposure received from the sun, typical sunlamp use results in an approximate doubling of annual effective dose, if the XFM action spectrum is applied. Frequent use, however, can increase the annual effective XFM dose by as much as 6 times what would be received from the sun alone for fluorescent sunlamps and as much as 12 times for newer, high-pressure sunlamps.
PMID: 9679452 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Hautarzt 1994 Aug;45(8):517-25
[Long-wave ultraviolet radiation (UVA) and skin cancer]
[Article in German]
Schmitz S, Garbe C, Tebbe B, Orfanos CE.
Universitats-Hautklinik und Poliklinik, Freien Universitat, Berlin.
Ultraviolet light is frequently used for cosmetic tanning of the skin. UV light is known to be carcinogenic, but this is attributed predominantly to short-wavelength UV radiation (UVB). However, new data indicate a carcinogenic role for long wavelength ultraviolet light (UVA) also. In vitro studies have demonstrated DNA-damaging effects of UVA. In animals squamous cell carcinomas and melanomas were induced by UVA alone or in combination with UVB. Reference to a possible carcinogenicity of UVA may also be derived from the therapeutic application of UVA together with psoralens (PUVA). In addition, recent epidemiological studies have associated the use of sunbeds with the development of malignant melanoma. In conclusion, the carcinogenicity of UVA in humans cannot be ruled out, but requires further validation. Long and repeated UVA exposure should be discouraged, because of the far-reaching risks involved.
Publication Types:
• Review
• Review, Tutorial
PMID: 7960749 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Polecam też tekst solaria za i przeciw? prof. Hanny Wolskiej Dermatologia estetyczna 2001/5
Główne fakty:
wg najnowszych badan solaria nie pomagaj na łuszczyce, błędnym jest myślenie, że
opalenizna z solarium zwiększy naszą odporność na skórę, gdyż w rzeczywistości jest odwrotnie, jesli solaria poprawiają samopoczucie, to nie przez wpływ światła, które i tak nie ma kontaktu ze wzrokiem, tylko sam fakt ciepła, relaksu, do poprawy nastroju i depresji spowodownaje brakiem światła wystarczy zakres świtała widzialnego, bez rakotwórczego działania UVA w takich dawkach jakie emitują solaria.