Posts Tagged Skin
by: Mike Barrett
July 21, 2012
Individuals are drawn into compact fluorescent bulbs due to their environmentally-friendly label, but anyone who has really looked into these incandescent alternatives knows of the numerous health and environmental dangers of CFL bulbs. A recent study sheds light on just one such concern associated with the ‘green’ CFL bulbs, showing how they are capable of actually frying your skin with UVA radiation.
CFL Bulbs Can Fry Your Skin
Following a study in Europe examining the effects of CFL bulbs on the skin, researchers from Stony Brook University in New York conducted a similar study to examine the bulbs’ impact on human skin cells. For the study, the researchers purchased CFL bulb from various locations, and then measured the amount of UV radiation emissions. What they found was “significant levels of UVC and UVA” which was a result of cracks that were present in the coating on the bulbs. Every single one of the bulbs studied.
After studying the effects of these emission on human skin cells, they discovered that healthy skin cells experienced the same damage you would find with ultraviolet radiation. Similar tests were also conducted using incandescent light bulbs of the same intensity along with the implementation of UV-absorbing Titanium Dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles, which are found within many personal care products. While the incandescent light bulbs had no negative effect on healthy skin cells, the researchers couldn’t say the same for CFL bulbs.
“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation…Skin cell damage was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles were introduced to the skin cells prior to exposure,” ,” said Professor Rafailovich. “Despite their large energy savings, consumers should be careful when using compact fluorescent light bulbs…Our research shows that it is best to avoid using them at close distances and that they are safest when placed behind an additional glass cover.”
This, of course, isn’t the only issue with compact fluorescent bulbs. In addition to having a potential negative impact on your skin, these bulbs emit toxic chemicals. In fact, only months after it was found that energy saving fluorescent bulbs release carcinogenic chemicals into the air, a new study has found that these harmful chemicals are continually released from the bulbs over a period of weeks to months. In addition to releasing these cancer-causing chemicals, which are far beyond the “safe” level set by the EPA, these bulbs also release levels of mercury which also exceed the “safe” levels for humans.
Friday, July 20, 2012
By: PF Louis
[NaturalNews] “All skin cancer is the result of damage to skin cells,” says Lise Alschuler, ND, author of Five to Thrive: Your Cutting-Edge Cancer Prevention Plan.
Skin cell damage is caused by oxidative stress from free radicals, which manifests as sunburn. It’s the same process that causes metals to rust and apples to brown. Although oxidation cannot be completely avoided, oxidation must be minimized to avoid free radical damage.
Oxidative stress is both the cause and the consequence of disease. Contrary to what allopathic dermatologists recommend, a daily, moderate dose of sun without sunscreen is actually beneficial for the skin.
Bare skin exposed to direct sunshine boosts vitamin D3 production in your body, but it should be moderate. 20 minutes; three or four times a week during peak sunlight hours is sufficient for most vitamin D3 requirements. Then there are supplements that can be added as well.
Antioxidants are the key to reducing oxidative stress. Molecules with missing electrons are called oxidants; whose primary activity is replacing their missing electron by stealing an electron from another molecule. This, in turn, causes a molecular domino effect of oxidative stress that can lead to disease.
The magic of antioxidants is the well researched fact that they can donate an electron to an oxidant without in turn becoming a free radical. Antioxidants stop the cascading free radical effect and reduce free radical damage.
Minimizing free radical damage to skin cells can be boosted by the right diet. Eating lots of fresh, organic plant-based foods is the key. Plants thrive on sunlight while using their own flavonoids to protect them from excess oxidation. You can borrow those flavonoids by eating plants.
Other internal nutrients for your skin
A high quality multivitamin with the full spectrum of vitamin E (mixed tocopherols), mixed cartenoids and zinc would be helpful for maintaining healthy skin as well as, ironically, vitamin D3 supplements.
Good fats are important. Skin cells contain fats. Avoid processed trans-fatty oils and use cold pressed virgin olive or coconut oils for salads and cooking. Omega-3 fatty acids are critical for the full spectrum of health issues. Chia seeds, ground flax seeds, and uncontaminated fish oils are good sources of omega-3.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
[NaturalNews] Growing awareness about the prolific presence of the hormone disruptor bisphenol A (BPA) in plastics, receipt paper, money, and various other consumer products and materials has led to the widespread removal of this highly toxic chemical from many products in recent years. But bisphenol S (BPS), the chemical now being used in place of BPA in many “BPA-free” products, may be just as harmful — if not more harmful — than BPA.
A new study published in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology is the first to analyze the presence of BPS in consumer products, and particularly in both thermal and recycled paper products. According to Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues who conducted the study, BPS is similar to BPA in that it mimics estrogen, and can cause severe endocrine disruption as a result of repeated exposure.
For their study, which was funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Department of Science and Technology of Shandong Province, Kannan and the team tested 16 different types of paper and paper products, including thermal receipt paper, paper currencies, flyers, magazines, newspapers, food contact papers, airplane luggage tags, printing paper, paper towels, and toilet papers.
They found that every single tested sample of thermal receipt paper, which is used by most retailers nowadays to print purchase receipts, tested positive for BPS at concentrations ranging from 0.0000138 milligrams per gram (mg/g) to 22.0 mg/g. This is roughly the same range level that has been observed in thermal receipt paper for BPA in earlier studies.
BPS is up to 19 times more absorbable in the skin than BPA
The research team also found that 87 percent of currency bill samples, which were collected from 21 different countries, contained BPS in varying levels. BPS was also observed in 14 of the other paper products sampled as well, including in 52 percent of recycled paper samples tested, which indicates that this largely unknown chemical is quietly hiding in all sorts of paper products that millions of people are exposed to every single day.
Perhaps the most disturbing finding about BPS; however, is the fact that BPS absorbs into the skin at much higher rates than BPA. According to the study, BPS is capable of absorbing at a rate up to 1900 percent higher than BPA, which makes it potentially much more harmful than BPA at altering hormone levels.
According to a 2005 study out of Japan, BPS is only slightly less potent than BPA at mimicking the female hormone estrogen in the body. However, other studies have shown that BPS is far less biodegradable than BPA, and is actually the most persistent bisphenol compound among eight of the most common bisphenol compounds tested. (http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org)
Sources for this article include:
Thursday, February 23, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews) A new study published in the journalArchives of Toxicologyproves once again that there really is no safe level of exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup (glyphosate) herbicide formula for genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). According to the new findings, Roundup, which is applied by the tens of thousands of tons a year all around the world, is still toxic to human DNA even when diluted to a mere 0.02 percent of the dilution amount at which it is currently applied to GM food crops.
Numerous studies have already identified the fact that Roundup causes DNA damage, not to mention endocrine disruption and cancer. But this new study, which originates out of the Medical University of Vienna, is one of the first to illustrate Roundup’s toxicity at such drastically diluted levels, which is a direct contradiction of the agri-giant’s talking points about the supposed safety of Roundup.
“Comparisons with results of earlier studies with lymphocytes and cells from internal organs indicate that epithelial cells are more susceptible to the cytotoxic effects and DNA-damaging properties of the herbicide and its formulation,” wrote the authors in their abstract.
“Since we found genotoxic (DNA damaging) effects after short exposure to concentrations that correspond to a 450-fold dilution of spraying used in agriculture, our findings indicate that inhalation may cause DNA damage in exposed individuals.”
Interestingly, it is not so much just the glyphosate ingredient in Roundup that is extremely poisonous, as much as it is this chemical’s amplified toxicity in the presence of other additives in the formula. Polyoxyethyleneamine, for instance, a surfactant that facilitates glyphosate’s absorption into cells, has been found to significantly increase Roundup’s synergistic toxicity in humans.
Despite Monsanto’s claims to the contrary, Roundup is clearly an exceptionally toxic chemical that has no legitimate place in agriculture. According to data compiled by GreenMedInfo.com, Roundup is linked to causing Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, imbalanced hormones in children, DNA damage, low testosterone, endocrine disruption, liver cancer, meningitis, infertility, skin cancer, kidney damage, and even uranium poisoning (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/glyphosate).
Environmentally, Roundup is a pervasive threat to air, water, and particularly groundwater and drinking supplies, as studies have shown that it does not effectively biodegrade after being sprayed. Back in the fall, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released data showing that air and water all across America’s “bread belt,” where much of our nation’s food is grown, is highly contaminated with glyphosate (http://www.naturalnews.com/033699_Roundup_pollution.html).