Here Comes the Sun: Skin Cancer and the Sun, By Mrs. Vera West

No medical advice is offered here; for information purposes only!

The Vigilant Fox Substack published an article by A Midwestern Doctor, republished from The Forgotten Side of Medicine, titled "The Shocking Truth About Skin Cancer: What You're Not Being Told About the Sun."

https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/the-shocking-truth-about-skin-cancer

This provocative piece begins by questioning the pervasive public health narrative that casts sunlight as a universal danger, asking, "Is everything we've been told about the sun one big fat lie?" It argues that the relentless focus on avoiding sun exposure to prevent skin cancer overlooks the essential benefits sunlight provides, positing that staying out of the sun entirely may carry risks as severe as, or even greater than, excessive exposure.

The argument hinges on a striking mortality paradox drawn from a 20-year Swedish study of nearly 30,000 women, published in the Journal of Internal Medicine in 2016. The study found that women who avoided sun exposure had a 60 percent higher all-cause mortality rate compared to those who regularly soaked it in. Even more startling, non-smokers who shunned the sun faced a death risk equivalent to smokers who embraced it. Posts on social media seized on this, noting that sun avoidance could be as deadly as smoking—a comparison that challenges the orthodoxy of sun-as-enemy. This suggests that the health costs of dodging sunlight extend far beyond the skin, potentially implicating systemic effects that rival or exceed the dangers of overexposure.

To unpack this, the article distinguishes between skin cancer types, a nuance often lost in public messaging. Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) are common and tied to chronic sun exposure, yet they're rarely fatal. Melanoma, though less frequent, is the deadly outlier—but its link to sunlight isn't straightforward. Studies, like one from JAMA Dermatology in 2018, show melanoma often strikes less-exposed areas like soles or backs, hinting at causes beyond cumulative UV, such as genetics or sporadic burns (NEJM, 2020). By lumping all skin cancers into a single death sentence, health campaigns oversimplify the risk. Excessive sun can indeed trigger BCC and SCC—Cancer Research UK (2023) attributes 90 percent of non-melanoma cases to UV—and severe burns spike melanoma odds, but avoiding sun entirely doesn't erase melanoma risk while sacrificing other gains.

One of those gains is vitamin D, which sunlight generates in the skin and which the article casts as a hidden hero. Vitamin D bolsters immunity, strengthens bones, and, per a 2021 Nutrients review, correlates with lower cancer mortality. Yet staying out of the sun drives deficiency—The Lancet in 2023 estimated 35 percent of U.S. adults fall short, a condition linked to higher rates of cancer, heart disease, and infections, diseases far deadlier than skin cancer's annual 13,000 U.S. deaths (ACS, 2024) versus 600,000 from all cancers. A 2022 Nature review reinforces this, showing vitamin D's protective role. By shunning sunlight, we risk a slow, systemic toll that could outweigh the acute threat of a melanoma diagnosis.

The article also critiques sunscreen, a cornerstone of sun avoidance, as a paradoxical player. It blocks UVB rays—crucial for vitamin D—while letting through UVA, which penetrates deeper and may even contribute to melanoma, according to some studies (Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2011). Research like a 2019 Annals of Epidemiology analysis finds sunscreen users don't consistently see lower melanoma rates, and some data suggest a slight uptick in risk. Slathering on SPF or staying indoors might trade one harm (skin cancer) for others (deficiency-related diseases), tipping the scales unfavourably. This challenges the blanket advice to shield ourselves at all costs, suggesting overprotection disrupts the body's natural balance with sunlight.

Historically, sunlight was revered—early 20th-century heliotherapy treated tuberculosis and rickets—yet today's sun phobia, the article argues, is a modern distortion, possibly fuelled by dermatology and pharmaceutical profits from fear-driven products. This cultural shift amplifies the case: we've swung from embracing the sun's healing power to demonising it, ignoring evidence that moderation—15-30 minutes daily, adjusted for skin type—offers net benefits for most. The Swedish study's sun avoiders didn't just die more; they hint at a broader vitality sunlight imparts, lost to those cloistered indoors.

Excessive exposure undeniably raises skin cancer risk, especially for fair-skinned people who, per a 2024 British Journal of Dermatology study, face triple the melanoma odds of darker skin types. The Swedish study's observational nature can't prove causation—sun avoiders might differ in diet or activity—but its scale and corroborating vitamin D research lend weight. Supplements could offset deficiency, a fix the article sidesteps, yet sunlight's benefits may extend beyond vitamin D to immune or mood effects science hasn't fully mapped. If staying out of the sun matches overexposure's toll, it's through this cumulative erosion—weaker defences, frailer bodies—versus the more visible, but less frequent, threat of a cancerous lesion.

In the long run, the numbers tilt toward balance. Skin cancer kills thousands yearly, but deficiency-related diseases claim far more, suggesting avoidance could be a slow poison as lethal as frying on a beach. The article's call for sensible exposure—neither shunning nor worshipping the sun—emerges as rational, backed by data and a historical nod to sunlight's worth. Staying out of the sun entirely, it contends, could indeed be as bad as too much, if not worse, by sacrificing vitality for a narrow safety that doesn't fully deliver. This isn't a rejection of caution but a plea to rethink a narrative that's left us paler, sicker, and perhaps no safer.