Sunglasses

[Jeff da Weasel]

Originally posted by steadyb Ok, I give up... who's that?

 

 

Baby, I'm a star!

 

By the way, that's me driving north on the 405 through West L.A. while talking on the phone and taking pictures of myself. Sad but true.

 

- Jeff

[Base]

Originally posted by Jeff da Weasel WHOOPS! I meant John Sayers. I'm grouping all folks in the southern hemisphere into one person. My bad. - Jeff

Typical American

[John Sayers]

Originally posted by Billster That's insane. Sunlight & Vitamin D 3rd item And this one is the Aussie Eye Doc Association

 

 

so how come on my national science program the statement that sun screen has been found to cause skin cancer was made uncontested when discussing a new type of sun screen. And why is our government now encourging people to make sure they get their daily sun as it's now been found people lack Vit D!

 

I'm sorry my eyes are too important for me to wrap them up in some synthetic plastic just so I look cool. I treat my skin the same way.

 

cheers

john

[echoshock]

I wish I could help out, but unfortunately I wear my sunglasses at night.
So I can, So I can.

[Billster]

Originally posted by John Sayers so how come on my national science program the statement that sun screen has been found to cause skin cancer was made uncontested when discussing a new type of sun screen. And why is our government now encourging people to make sure they get their daily sun as it's now been found people lack Vit D! I'm sorry my eyes are too important for me to wrap them up in some synthetic plastic just so I look cool. I treat my skin the same way. cheers john

I'd like to see the accredidation of whoever says wearing sunglasses links to cancer. Scientists are a lot like economists -they always say "on the other hand..." You can find a scientist to say almost anything is possible.

Any link between sunscreen and cancer is probably about vitamin D deficiency relating to cancer:

From my first link:

Vitamin D and cancer: Laboratory, animal, and epidemiologic evidence suggests that vitamin D may be protective against some cancers. Epidemiologic studies suggest that a higher dietary intake of calcium and vitamin D, and/or sunlight-induced vitamin D synthesis, correlates with lower incidence of cancer [44-51]. In fact, for over 60 years researchers have observed an inverse association between sun exposure and cancer mortality [33]. The inverse relationship between higher vitamin D levels in blood and lower cancer risk in humans is best documented for colon and colorectal cancers [44-50]. Vitamin D emerged as a protective factor in a study of over 3,000 adults (96% of whom were men) who underwent a colonoscopy between 1994 and 1997 to look for polyps or lesions in the colon. About 10% of the group was found to have at least one advanced neoplastic (cancerous) lesion in the colon. There was a significantly lower risk of advanced cancerous lesions among those with the highest vitamin D intake [52]. Additional well-designed clinical trials need to be conducted to determine whether vitamin D deficiency increases cancer risk, or if an increased intake of vitamin D is protective against some cancers. Until such trials are conducted, it is premature to advise anyone to take vitamin D supplements for cancer prevention.

So, sun exposure vitamin D creation could be beneficial for your immune system and preventing cancer of internal organs, but prevented by too much sunscreen. However, too much sun exposure causes problems with melanomas (skin cancer), so there's a balance to be had.

And back on topic, as to sunglasses, the threat to your vision from too much sunlight far, far outweighs any risk of not having enough sun exposure, particularly when most of your sun exposure is skin, not eyes. Retinas are too important not to protect.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Originally posted by John Sayers I'm sorry my eyes are too important for me to wrap them up in some synthetic plastic just so I look cool.

 

 

I don't give a crap about looking cool. My eyes are very sensitive to light, and always have been. I cannot, for example, drive a car in regular daylight without sunglasses on. In bright Southern California sunshine, forget about it.

 

Good sunglasses... those that block 100% UV and have no lens distortions, are in no way bad for you. Please, John, give us some links that say otherwise.

 

Here's a link from NSW Health in Australia that says, "Wearing a hat and well fitting sunglasses, especially "wraparound" glasses for extra protection, help prevent sun damage, and are particularly important for outdoor workers."

 

- Jeff

[echoshock]

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Originally posted by echoshock

Is that the girl band we gonna produce together? ...well, actually they rather look like some bankers daughters from long island

By the way, i'm mixing the other song right now

.

[echoshock]

Originally posted by Angelo Clematide Is that the girl band we gonna produce together? ...well, actually they rather look like some bankers daughters from long island By the way, i'm mixing the other song right now .

Yea thats what most of the snobby girls on Long Island look like. You can't see from the photo but I'm sure they're all chewing gum at the same time. But hey if they can dance then we should start a girl 'band'.
Can't wait to hear the mix.

[MorePaul]

The G7 Girls?

Where's Leggy Starlitz when you need him

[John Sayers]

Australia had been told we have a problem with skin melanomas and a huge campaign was foisted on us to use sunscreen.

The story was explained to me by a doctor friend.

the government told doctors they would pay them $75 to remove any melanomas found and the figures came out.

The most likely candidate for melanoma was the gnarled old farmer who had spent his life in the sun followed by the surfers who had spent the endless summer and least was the city folk who covered themselves and stayed inside.

Soon the gov realised this was costing a pile and making doctors lottsa money - so they changed it - we''ll pay $75 if you prove it's malignant through pathology tests. Now the doctors had to prove the mole they had removed for $75 was for real.

Suddenly the figures changed. The gnarled old farmer was the least likely, the surfer stayed in the middle and the city folk who spent two weeks lying on the beach in paradise and went pink or worse and returned back to the city became the most likely.

If anyone should have skin cancer due to UV it's me. As a child I spent my summers by the sea and peeled off 2 - 3 layers of skin each summer but in my late teens I developed severe acne and my father, who was a doctor, sent me to his skin specialist mate who burnt my face and back with UV lamps, new techo at the time, - I looked liked I'd returned from snow skiing perpetually. Then he tried liquid nitrogen to burn them off!!

Fortunately my father decided to put me on Tetracycline antibiotic and I was fixed and managed to stay away from his mate from then on with an open prescription for tetracycline. There have been no side effects from the tetracycline so far or the UV. I'm not scarred either due to the tetracycline.

the trouble with medicine and science is that they are moving targets.


cheers
john

[thankyou]

Could be the polarization. Try holding the lens in front of you in a situation where things are blurry, then turn the lens 90 degrees to see if it clears up. If so, get lenses that aren't polarized. Polarized lenses do strange things sometimes, and I think some people are more sensitive to it than others.

BTW, John, now I know why the Croc hunter squints.

[thankyou]

Originally posted by John Sayers the trouble with medicine and science is that they are moving targets. cheers john

My friend says that's why they call it "practicing" medicine. BTW, my dad was a doc who did R&R in Australia with Leon Uris. They both had been on Guadalcanal.

[Billster]

Originally posted by John Sayers If anyone should have skin cancer due to UV it's me. cheers john

 

 

The "good news" about skin cancer is that it is easily detectable. It's right there on the surface to see if you look for it.

 

gross medical pictures here

[Kendrix]

Originally posted by TinderArts I'd go with Maui Jims over Ray Ban. For eyesight issues it's better to see an opthamologist. Poorly diagnosed eye issues can makes things worse quickly.

 

 

I agree on the Maui Jims. I found them more soothing & glare-busting than the ray bans i tried at the time.

 

The best part is that ive owned these $200 glasses for six years now. I haven't lost them! This is a minor miracle.

Great glasses

[bp]

Ken, you might remember Christine from last year's jam. She managed a Sunglass Hut for a number of years and told me of ownership changes of Revo and others. Maui is one that is still being made to the best quality. Many others have gone way downhill.

[Jeff da Weasel]

I... ahem... also managed a Sunglass Hut.

Hey, I was in college. It was a job. In a mall.

- Jeff

[Futuristic]

I too recommend Non-Polarized lenses for most uses. Actually, I wouldn't use them for anything but a day on the water.

As to other causes of distortion, check out the PDF files that can be found at the following page:

Private Pilot Magazine SunGlasses Shootout

Oakley hosts the page, but the tests were impartially done by Private Pilot magazine about 4 years ago. They test a number of optical measurements, including fine line resolution.

The Oakleys top every test, though there are also many top brands that do very well: RayBan, Maui Jim, etc.

I wouldn't be without my Oakleys, but if I didn't have them with me I would still use some Convenience Store cheapies. My eyes are too important.

Futuristic

[elsongs]

I wear my sunglasses at night.

So I can, so I can...

[elsongs]

Originally posted by John Sayers I've read that sunglasses are bad for you - they filter out the UV info your body needs, via the pineal gland, to adjust the body to the external sunlight, i.e skin protection etc. They are also connected with cancer All the natural eyesight people advise against sunglasses. I've never worn them cheers john

I've read that coffee was bad for you.

No, wait I've read that coffee was good for you.

Seeriously, I've always been anti-sunglasses (more of the aesthetic, since I prefer to see people's eyes) but a couple of years ago I noticed my right eye's sight was somewhat not as sharp as my left eye. When I would look into a light source with that eye, it would be cloudy. I went to an optometrist and they told me I had cataracts (I'm only 34, was 32 at the time). the optometrist told me to UV-protect my eyes and wear sunglasses in direct sunlight to keep it from getting worse. I've done that and the cataracts has stayed the same pretty much since then.