Veritas, this is NOT worth reading. I’m not sure what your purpose was in posting it; I’ll assume that it is one of two reasons:
(1) You stand to profit in some way from posting the URL for this site, and used the sensationalism of the title, and the implied NCI imprimatur to draw people in. If this is the case, I’ll assume that you’re not interested in discussing the validity of the information.
Or
(2) You accidentally came upon this website, and, believing that the site owner was of sterling repute, and the information was of sound scientific origin and significant importance, wanted to share. Kudos if this is the situation.
However,
At the risk of sounding harsh, the “information” is pure, unadulterated crap. The website is just another one of thousands that target vulnerable patients and their families, while posing as knowledgeable and highly ethical purveyors of scientific/medical information. In reality, most are cheap marketing sites for some product or the other. In this particular version, potential customers are advised to contact Connie Hargrave, MA, ECT, a “researcher” of dubious distinction for “recommendations” of products (and can anyone tell me the meaning of ECT as used by Ms. Hargrave?).
She claims to have posted medical research findings, but I checked the site over pretty good, and didn’t find a single journal article or conference abstract, or weblink, citation, or reference to supporting literature. The quote you included alluded to “findings published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute”, which would appear to be a good place for a link to said findings. Instead, there was a link to even more of Ms. Hargrave’s “research findings”. She engages in name-dropping of minor scientific figures, along with incomplete or distorted interpretations of their alleged research findings.
Yes, I took the time to research the information presented on the site. Let’s just say that much of what is presented is very seriously flawed, or outright false.
There’s nothing worth reading here; what’s more is that Ms. Hargrave and her like-minded counterparts on the internet have the potential to do great harm to patients and their families. There is no scientific evidence on record of sunlight or Vitamin D megadoses curing cancer, and there’s been no causal link established between the development of any of the cancers she mentions and lack of sunlight and/or Vitamin D.
If you are in need of accurate, up-to-date medical information, particularly on “cures”, I suggest starting with the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health, particularly the National Cancer Institute, who have excellent resources for both the average patient/consumer and for medical/scientific professionals. And, no, they are not “hiding” or withholding miracle cures and treatments from the American public.[/quote]
Eavesdropper –
I agree that everything should be viewed with a skeptical eye, and I agree that the website mentioned in the original post is a little heavy on hype. However, the journal citation that you are looking for is here:
Berwick M, Armstrong BK, Ben-Porat L, Fine J, Kricker A, Eberle C, et al. Sun Exposure and Mortality From Melanoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:195–99.
And furthermore, there is an interesting (although I know very little about this) summary in Science Daily entitled “Two Studies Find Evidence That Sunlight May Have Beneficial Influence On Cancer”
The Harvard Medical School Family Health Guide, in “Benefits of Moderate Sun Exposure” admits the possibility of a relationship between low Vitamin D levels and cancer, and suggests that people may have gone a little too far in avoiding sunshine: http://www.health.harvard.edu/fhg/updates/update0604d.shtml
And you’re right – there is no evidence that megadoses of Vitamin D cures cancer, but dismissing the possibility of a relationship out of hand (and you were pretty harsh) seems a little closed minded. I used to TA for a class at Michigan called “The Biology of Cancer;” the number of things that have gone from being accepted to disproved (and vice versa) over the years should make everyone a little careful about dismissing ideas that make some sense.
Finally, if you click on people’s screen names you can see how long they’ve been on this board (Veritas has been here over 3 years) and how many posts (in the case of Veritas – lots) which would have shown that he/she probably wasn’t posting for the purpose of selling.
