Sunday, July 12, 2009
Heatwave Returns
This article gave rise to an exceedingly loud snort from myself, when I read it this morning in The Times:
"Sunshine is not the main cause of the most dangerous form of skin cancer, according to researchers, who say some warnings about the perils of sunbathing are scaring people unnecessarily."
Nanny, exaggerating risk?
Surely not?
FYI, the sun has returned to Brighton and I intend to make the most of it today.
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dear God!
ReplyDeleteWon't somebody think of the children?
Isn't it high time that all of this skin-cancer nonsense was stopped in its tracks by levying a huge fine on the sun?
The only rule that people need to remember in relation to life is this;
ReplyDeleteEverything in moderation.
Simple isn't it?....Now can I have my own quango complete with an excessive salary and an expense account, not to mention a gold plated pension?
I could call the quango The Commission of The Bleedin' Obvious!!
Tonk, it wouldn't be approved as a quango until you had had three years and thirty meetings in 5 star hotels charged to expenses in order to completely define "moderation".
ReplyDeleteI'm very tempted to get a load of t-shirts with this printed:
http://images.jeffbyrnes.net/uploads/2008/04/common_sense_super_power.jpg
There's always been some mystery about the relationship between sun and skin cancers.
ReplyDeleteThey do a lot of research in Australia on this topic (given that they have a lot of sunshine and a lot of people of Anglo-Celtic origin). But from what I read a couple of years ago, the numbers didn't seem to stack up. At one point it was considered that sun tan lotions might even have been contributing to some skin cancers.
But at least it's a field where researchers are still prepared to go wherever the evidence takes them, which is refreshing to see.
I live in the south of England and my problem today hasn't been sunburn, it's been a case of rushing home early morning as quickly as possible to get out of the pouring rain. I was completely soaked.
I stand in a solarium for 6 mins every 10 days or so. This is mainly medicinal although not having totally white skin is a bonus. My son passed on some scaremongering to me, so I had a little google. Now CRUK seemed to suggest that I was a disaster waiting to happen (sounds familiar) - according to them ANY exposure to UVA would give you skin cancer, (what was that, 'no safe level?'). I obviously pondered the fact that we didn't have sun cream when I was a kid etc etc.
ReplyDeleteAccording this article, the main risk factor is not the sun, but having a large number of moles on one's body. Yet, in this country, the sun only has to poke its face out of a cloud, and we are all being instructed to cover ourselves all over with suncream
ReplyDelete(factor 5,000+) with dire warnings about the consequences. As Tonk observed, 'everything in moderation' and that does not mean 'avoid the sun like the plague'. Of course, the exhortation to use suncream wouldn't have anything to do with making money for the companies that manufacture suncream by any chance, or am I being cynical?
The best way to deal with deal with moles is to give them a sharp "whack" with a rolled up newspaper or magazine: that sends them running back to the garden!
ReplyDelete(Sorry, I couldn't resist that).