stranded on a deserted island
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skin Care and Makeup Forum

free skin care · Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:47 pm

If you were stranded on a island and could only have 3 beauty products....what would you chose, your very top essentials Confused

PS. I know everyone is going to start with a good sunscreen as we are all very practical and things tend to get hot on these deserted tropical islands Laughing

free skin care · Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:09 pm

Yes, sunscreen is number 1. Then C serum, and lip balm!

Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:45 pm

No Sunscreen. That's a little impractical for living outside constantly on a hot tropical island. Within a few days your deep tan will protect you from the sun so you never burn anymore.

I would want to have lip balm, coconut oil or some other good oil, and aloe vera gel. Unless I could find aloe growing there. I was going to say a razor. And I would miss my makeup, but who's going to see you on a deserted island anyways. If you're all alone.

free skin care · Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:44 pm

sexy28, your tan won't protect you from skin cancer, or all the wrinkles and sun spot you get as you age...

sunscreen is a necessity...then I'd pick my lip balm and a moisturizer.

free skin care · Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:34 pm

Sunscreen of course Very Happy

Hat (my head hates the rays beating down on it). Tooth brush....I am a tooth fanatic Laughing

Fri Jun 24, 2005 11:25 pm

Most sunscreens don't even protect from UVA rays which can cause the skin cancer. "The ultraviolet energy (UV) provided by sunlight is composed of different wavelengths: UVA, UVB, and UVC (UVC is not of concern to us as it gets absorbed in the atmosphere). Most of the UV rays are of the UVA type. However, sunscreens, which categorically block UVB rays, do not uniformly block all UVA rays. Unfortunately, the Sun Protection Factor (SPF), whether it be 8,15, or 45 measures only UVB protection. This is one of the real dangers in using sunscreens, according to the Eades, as they can offer a false sense of protection for those who feel they can bask for hours in the sun without worry. The UVA contributes to skin cancers as well and has been fingered as the culprit in contributing to the wrinkled, leathery look called photoaging."

Not to mention that the sun protects against and prevents other more deadly cancers like breast, prostate cancer, cervical cancer and even some skin cancers etc. Most common skin cancers are not deadly, while breast cancer and other cancers are. Dark skin acts like a natural sunscreen. As does diet (anti-oxidants, beta-carotene, PH - Alkaline/Acid). Also sunscreens have shown to produce high levels of cell death, Pro-oxidants and carcinogens in themselves that cause cancer. "doctors also question the oil bases used in sunscreens and theorize that unstable oils under the influence of the UV rays could form damaging and potentially cancer-causing compounds called lipid peroxides. These, they contend, could find their way into the skin cells."

Also, if you are stranded on some island you are outside constantly and exposed to the sun. No air conditioned hotel room to hide in. How would it be practical to really give full protection with a sunscreen? People hardly use enough to really even give much protection in the first place. You need a lot of it all over (and no one to apply it on those hard to reach spots for you). Not only would you need a lot of it, but you would need to reapply it every few hours. You would be going through like a bottle every couple of days.

And then when would you get any positive benefits from the sun like Vitamin D? Sunscreen blocks the synthesis of Vitamin D cause it's synthesized from UVB rays.

"Vitamin D regulates the growth of cancer cells. It impairs the proliferation of cancer tumors in the body, and at the same time it is extremely important for absorption of calcium in the small intestine."

It is a myth that the sun is so evil. The way people talk about it you would think that they would rather live on Neptune then on a planet that is so close to the sun. Life here is not possible without the sun. Should we all live underground? We wouldn't need to cover every inch of skin constantly with sunscreen then. We could be vampires. The sun is not the enemy if you don't overdo it and seek shade whenever it starts to feel too hot. They've even done research studies on people with skin cancer and found that the more sun they got after they got the cancer, the higher their survival rate. The sun helped them.

"Doctors Michael and Mary Dan Eades are methodical and deliberate in their explanation of sunbathing. And the golden rule (so to speak!) that they emphatically deliver is "Never, never let your skin burn." They encourage a tan that's arrived at by small but continual and increasing doses of sun exposure. "Gradually and safely building up a protective layer of natural sunscreening skin pigment designed by nature to fend off the penetration of the UVA rays may indeed be the best way to protect against the development of skin cancers. . . ."

Moreover, while they believe the antioxidants present in our skin and body tissues protect us from damage caused by the sun, they know that exposure to UV rays also depletes antioxidant levels. They claim that it is vital for us to replenish our levels of vitamin E, selenium, alpha-lipoic acid, and coenzyme Q10 along with essential fatty acids (the "good" fats) through dietary supplementation.

The Eades also draw correlations between sunbathing and its possible protective properties against breast, colon, and prostate cancers. These cancers, they say, "are lowest in the sun-drenched countries near the equator and increase as you move toward the polar regions of the globe." In other words, get some sun, get less cancer. Moreover, they cite animal research showing that sunlight, by stimulating the thyroid gland, can facilitate weight loss."

"Octyl methoxycinnamate (OMC), which is present in 90 per cent of sunscreen brands, was found to kill mouse cells even at low doses in a study by Norwegian scientists.

The chemical is used as a filter for the more harmful UVB light. In Dr Christensen's study, mouse tissue grown in culture was treated with a solution of OMC at five parts per million - a much lower concentration than in sunscreens. Half the cells treated with OMC died, compared with fewer than 10 per cent in a control experiment.

When researchers shone a lamp for two hours to simulate midday sunshine, more cells died. Dr Christensen suggested that the reaction between OMC and sunlight created an effect that was twice as toxic as the chemical alone."

"Recent studies have also shown a higher rate of melanoma among men who regularly use sunscreens and a higher rate of basal cell carcinoma among women using sunscreens (Garland, Cedric F. et al. Effect of sunscreens on UV radiation-induced enhancement of melanoma growth in mice. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 86, No. 10, May 18, 1994, pp. 798-801"

"Drs. Cedric and Frank Garland of the University of California have pointed out that while sunscreens do protect against sunburn, there is no scientific proof that they protect against melanoma or basal cell carcinoma in humans (Garland, C.F., et al. "Could sunscreens increase melanoma risk?" American Journal of Public Health, 1992; 82(4): 614-615.) The Garlands believe that the increased use of chemical sunscreens is the primary cause of the skin cancer epidemic."

"In February 1998, epidemiologist Marianne Berwick of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York presented a careful analysis of data on sunscreen use and skin cancer at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Sunscreens may not protect against skin cancer, including melanoma, she concluded. "We don't really know whether sunscreens prevent skin cancer," said Berwick. She looked first at four studies of squamous cell cancer, a cancer that appears on the head, neck, and arms but is usually not lethal. Two of the studies concluded that sunscreen protected against a skin condition thought to precede squamous cell cancer while two other studies reported that sunscreen did not shield people from this type of skin cancer. She then analyzed two studies of basal cell carcinoma, another nonlethal skin cancer that is the most common form of skin cancer and appears most frequently on the head, neck, and arms. Those two studies found that people who used sunscreen were more likely to develop basal cell cancer than people who did not. She then analyzed 10 studies of melanoma, the skin cancer is the most deadly. Melanoma often starts in or near moles on the skin. In five of the melanoma studies, people who used sunscreen were more likely than nonusers to develop melanoma."

"Dr. Berwick previously conducted a 1996 study that found no link between sunscreen use at any age and the development of melanoma. The same study also found no relationship between a history of sunburn and the development of melanoma."

""The evidence indicates that chronic sun exposure may be protective for the development of melanoma because the skin has adapted to the sun, having become thicker as it has tanned. On the other hand, intermittent sun exposure appears to increase risk, making it much less protective," added Dr. Berwick."

"Skin cancer increase not due to ozone depletion
But what about ozone depletion and skin cancer? Could this be the cause of the increased skin cancer rates? Professor Johan Moan of the Norwegian Cancer Institute found that the yearly incidence of melanoma in Norway had increased by 350% for men and by 440% for women during the period 1957 to 1984. He also determined that there had been no change in the ozone layer over this period of time. He concludes his report in the British Journal of Cancer by stating "Ozone depletion is not the cause of the increase in skin cancers" (Moan, J. & Dahlback, A. The relationship between skin cancers, solar radiation and ozone depletion. British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 65, No. 6, June 1992, pp. 916-21)."

Here are some good links:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/21/health/main697033.shtml

A well talked about site on here - http://www.skinbiology.com/toxicsunscreens.html

http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/1998/05/wellbeing.html

http://www.mercola.com/2000/oct/15/sunscreen.htm

http://www.newstarget.com/007632.html

http://www.newstarget.com/001264.html

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041009/bob8.asp

http://www.mercola.com/2003/dec/24/vitamin_d_deficiency.htm

http://www.google.com/custom?cof=AH%3Acenter%3BAWFID%3A5cdb2968a482194d%3B&domains=www.mercola.com&sitesearch=www.mercola.com&q=sun&sa2=Search

http://www.newstarget.com/003069.html

http://www.uvadvantage.com/myths.php

http://www.mercola.com/fcgi/pf/forms/healing_sun.htm

http://www.terressentials.com/truthaboutsunscreens.html

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:OcP_W7ToiXsJ:www.hallgold.com/toxic-chemical-ingredients-directory.htm%20propylene%20glycol%20skin%20care

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:13 am

Wow, sexy28! That was one heck of a post!

If I were stranded, I would have to say sunscreen, eye cream, and Winnie, I'm with you - toothpaste! Laughing

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 3:13 am

Sexy, your post is interesting but there are some issues witrh the research you quoted. The prime one being about cancer rates near the equator. There is no ozone hole over the equator, which is the main cause of skin cancer (some of the ozzy and kiwi members can give more info on this, given the high rates of skincancer from the outdoors life combined with ozone depletion). If ozone depletion was not responsible for the 350-440% increase in norwegian skin cancer rates, what was? Perhaps the increased foreign travel to sunny places for holidays? Further, the correlation between sun exposure and cancer protection near the tropics could in fact be a correlation between diet, pregnancy rates and early mortality. Equitorial countries tend to have more agrarian as opposed to industrial life styles resulting in lower consumption of processed and high fat food. Women tend to have children younger than in industrialised societies and due to poverty and deprivation, people die younger. Cancer is predominatley a disease of old age, which is one (but not the only) reason there is more of it now than a hundred years ago.

Personally, I'd go for a solid physical sunblock, like zinc oxide (I too have concerns about chemical blocks), cpious supplies of shea butter to help clean the zinc off at night and a solar powered electric tooth brush Very Happy

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 4:27 am

Sunscreen & vit C, I would have to make my own toothbrush from natural products as I would need my mascara, feel naked without it. On second thought I guess I could get lashes tinted before I went and then I could take my tooothbrush. Yep! that's what I will do. I need a hat & sunnies as well.
How long am I going to be on this Island? Will I be able to replace my stuff when it runs out. Can I take a solar powered laptop?
I don't think I will bother going because I need to take too much with me. Oh well. You lot have fun Bad Grin

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 4:36 am

A good pair of sunglasses so I wasn't suinting all the time! I'd say Vit C and sunscreen too.

I have to add the sunscreen issue here. I am a little of a fanatic, don't want to stand near a window without it. However, my dad who is in GREAT Health and is 78 (never now to look at him)has been outside his whole life and RARELY if ever wears sunscreen.

He gets a little red but ends up with this beautiful olive tan. He has very few age spots and no moles, sun freckles, etc
He is Italian, but not dark skinned at all. His father came over "on the boat",& had blond hair and green eyes. (thanks, grandpop, that's where I get my PALE skin from!!)

So, I don't know....maybe sexy28 is on to something.

Even still, I'm not giving up my sunscreen!!

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 4:37 am

that would be SQUINTING not suinting. Damn, is my coffee ready yet? Confused

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:38 am

Definately my JI pressed powder (yes sad but I feel naked without it now!! Laughing

plus it has a little sun protection too), my Dr H Rejuvenating mask which could double as moisturiser and lip cream, and some mascara! My stumpy little lashes can't live without it! Laughing

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:45 am

Sexy I have to agree with you on the sunscreen, I think one of the reasons Cancer has been on the increase over the years is the awful standard of our food, all the intensive farming and chemicals - we have the bare minimum of nuitrients inside us at it is to keep us going day to day never mind to fight anything off!!!!

Back to the question Rolling Eyes

I'd take homemade cleanser, ACV toner and day oil (with built in Vit C Wink

)

free skin care · Sat Jun 25, 2005 6:48 pm

Wow, who knew what a can of worms I would open up Laughing

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 2:03 am

Lip balm and Johnny Depp.

Mon Jun 27, 2005 2:58 am

Johnny Depp Laughing

I just wanted to show that there is another side to the sun is always bad thought. As well as about sunscreen. Not all scientists believe that it's bad. I guess I got a little carried away. I started reading so much about it the past week or so when searching for info on a good sunscreen and it has started to make me think twice about it. I had saved a lot of links while searching for info. I would still wear it if I think I'm going to burn, but beyond that I don't know anymore. I'm starting to think it's better just to limit my exposure and wear hats or uv-protected clothing. I've been nude sunbathing for like 10-20 min. a couple times a week while trying to ease my irrational fear of the sun. I feel so much better and have so much more energy and look so much better. I really need the vitamin D. The sun is a necessity for me. And sunblock blocks Vitamin D like 99%. So without getting the sun on my bare lotion free skin I'm screwed for Vitamin D. Which would screw me for calcium etc. In fact I think I have a long term Vitamin D deficiency. I just learned that supposedly you don't get it through windows, cause they usually block the UVB rays, just not the UVA rays so much. But UVB is what we need for it. Most sunblocks heavily block the UVB rays.

As far as the cancer and the equator, I suppose you are referring to one of the quotes. As you can notice in the quote though they are not talking about skin cancer rates (I don't know what those are). They are talking about other cancers, so what does that have to do with the ozone? It could correlate to other factors as well. I don't know how they are measuring things and what factors they are looking at. But it's not skin cancer they are talking about. Also the other paragraph they said that the ozone has not really changed in these same years that the skin cancer rate has risen. That I guess that the ozone was just as bad when the skin cancer rates were lower.

Here is the paragraph again:

"The Eades also draw correlations between sunbathing and its possible protective properties against breast, colon, and prostate cancers. These cancers, they say, "are lowest in the sun-drenched countries near the equator and increase as you move toward the polar regions of the globe." In other words, get some sun, get less cancer. Moreover, they cite animal research showing that sunlight, by stimulating the thyroid gland, can facilitate weight loss." "

See, breast, colon and prostate is all they mention. Not skin cancer that would have anything to do with the ozone.

Anyways, has anyone read the UV advantage book?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743486471/ref=lpr_g_1/104-5261380-0997554?v=glance&s=books

It's kind of hard to know what to make of all the studies and research and numbers with untold amount of variables. But I know one thing, that is I need vitamin D and I can't get it with sunblock on. I also know that diet has been shown to have a roll in protecting against the harmful effects of the sun. Which makes total sense. These deep pigments and compounds in these plants help protect them from the sun, so they should help us second hand. I believe that is why most healthy living things like trees and plants are so well protected from the sun, while once dead like wood floors are totally damaged by the sun.

Here's some examples:

http://www.cyanotech.com/news/articles/05-20-01A.html

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FDN/is_2_8/ai_103194453

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:50 am

http://www.vegansociety.com/html/food/nutrition/vitaminD.php

Vegans and vitamin D

hmm

m Johnny Depp Cool

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 4:21 am

I didn't mention skin cancer in my post about the supposed benefits of cancer protection derived from living near the equator, I merely suggested the supposed benefits could be explained by diet (for colon cancer, processed foods are believed to have caused the huge increase in in digestive cancers), pregnancy when younger and breast feeding (breast cancer, pregnancy and breastfeeding are known protectors) and decreased life expectancy (prostate cancer, which is mainly found in older men).

Skin cancer rates near the tropics would be low to minimal because there is full ozone protection there. If you don't think that there has been any depletion of the ozone since the 1950's or that UV-B rays have been linked to skin cancer rates check this out

http://www.ciesin.org/TG/HH/ozover.html

http://www.ciesin.org/TG/HH/ozskin1.html

http://www.theozonehole.com/consequences.htm

Your body can also manufacture all the Vit D it needs from just 15 mins of daylight exposure as well, though I appreciate that as a vegan you may need to increase this slightly.

I'm not saying that we should be scared of the sun, but to ignore the consequenses of not adequately protecting oneself, just for the sake of a tan or because one interperets one or two pieces of research saying it's ok, is positively harmful.

Liz Cool

PS Depp is mine because I'm older than the rest of you and age has its perogatives Laughing

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:31 am

guapagirl wrote:

PS Depp is mine because I'm older than the rest of you and age has its perogatives Laughing

Damn your eyes miss guapa!

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:15 am

s'cuse me I am the oldest. he is mine. Cool

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:56 am

I look older than you and he's more my type

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:00 am

Girls,
I do miss the tan on my legs,boobs(I used to go topless Laughing

), mu tummy....I can see all my veins, all my imperfection on my skin, but are more than 10 years since I didn't expose my body to the sun.
My face....nooooooo way, I have melasma, I can not go out without sunblock.
Sometimes, I think that I would like to be black, so I have a SPF 500 natural, not this fair skin.
I do believe that sunshine is good for you in moderation, but if I would be on a island I would take C serums, lipstick and lipliner and I would be Tanned like I was in my 20s.

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:51 am

I take him because I can beat up the rest of you. Laughing

Tell you what makes me laugh, when you go away and you see a couple on the beach...and only on the last couple of days the lady plucks up courage to take off her top. I can't imagine having tan lines, pale or brown but not checkered. Laughing

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:52 am

Good call on Johnny ladies Laughing

Just wish I had thought of him first Exclamation

free skin care · Mon Jun 27, 2005 10:24 am

guapagirl wrote:

I look older than you and he's more my type

You do not look older than me. Have you had an eye test lately?
I'll share JD but I want Luka (probably mispelt) from ER all to myself. Bad Grin

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.