Yo tomo cerca de 1000 mg al dia de vitamina C(aparte de otras vitaminas y minerales en cantidades industriales) desde hace muchisimo tiempo.Siempre me he hecho analisis de sangre, orina y todo es normal.

Por poner alguno de los efectos:

-Nunca enfermo.

-Voy todo el dia como una moto desde que me levanto hasta que me acuesto.
Con 32 años me siento como si tuviera 18.

-Mi tiempo de recuperacion de las palizas diarias que me doy haciendo deporte se reduce bastante.

Como soy O- dono sangre todo lo que puedo, debido a que se de la escasez de este grupo sanguineo y siempre pienso en el subidon que le puede dar al tio o tia que reciba una transfusion de mi sangre.

__________________

NUEVAS REFERENCIAS:

Pigment grade powders of metal oxides such as titanium dioxide or zinc oxide have been used in combination with organic filters to enhance protection in the longer UVA range. Unlike organic filters, they work by reflecting and diffusing UVR. However, these powders also diffuse visible light because of their large particle size and give the skin a white appearance. To overcome this drawback, nanosized powders (<100 nm) of titanium dioxide and zinc oxide have been used. However, minimizing the particle size changes the protective properties of titanium dioxide: the smaller particles shift the protection range from the longer UVA toward the UVB [LAS NANOPARTÍCULAS DE ÓXIDO DE ZINC SON MENOS EFICACES AMÉN DE POTENCIALMENTE PELIGROSAS, ¡Y ESO QUE SE USAN PURAMENTE POR ES´TETICA! ]

The development of efficient sunscreens Moyal D - Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol

---------------------------------------------------------

In 2006, a minimum requirement for UVA efficacy of sunscreens was chosen in Europe. [12] A UVAPF of at least 1/3 [HAN ESCOGIDO COMO "ESTÁNDAR" UNA PROTECCIÓN UVA 1/3 DE LA UVB] of the SPF of the product is now required, which is equivalent to a ratio SPF/UVAPF ≤3. This criterion has also been recently adopted by Australia and the Mercosur countries (viz. Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay). This value has been chosen based on the calculations presented in [Table 2], linking real UV exposure to related visible [¿Y LOS EFECTOS INVISIBLES QUÉ?] biological phenomena.

p53 protein expression following UV exposure is a sensitive biological endpoint for the evaluation of sunscreen efficacy against damage that may lead to skin cancer [ASÍ "SABEN" QUE EL "FOTOPROTECTOR PREVIENE EL CÁNCER": ¡¡¡¡¡¡MEDIANTE UN MARCADOR ARBITRARIO!!!!!!

Need for a well-balanced sunscreen to protect human skin from both Ultraviolet A and Ultraviolet B damage Moyal D - Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol

---------------------------------------------------------

Influence of certain ingredients on the SPF determined in vivo.

When determined in vitro, the SPF of certain commercial sunscreen products can be lower than the SPF indicated on the label. The study of the composition of this type of product enabled us to note that the majority contained substances reputed to have anti-inflammatory properties. This effect is shown by inhibiting the erythema, without protecting the skin, which constitutes a serious public health problem. The anti-inflammatory effects of αbisabolol-, allantoin- and 18-β-glycyrrhetinic acid-based emulsions, as well as commercial sun products containing any one of these molecules, have been tested with phorbol myristate acetate on mice. The effectiveness of these sunscreens products is quantified using two indicators: SPF (sun protection factor) and PF-UVA (protection factor-UVA) by in vitro method. We were thus able to show that certain sun products have an anti-inflammatory effect, which in turn causes the SPF value shown on the product to be overestimated, indeed sometimes by considerably large margins.

Influence of certain ingredients on the SP... [Arch Dermatol Res. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

---------------------------------------------------------

PF-UVA (UVA Protection Factor)

Sunscreen products: what do they protect us from? [Int J Pharm. 2011] - PubMed - NCBI

---------------------------------------------------------

Although sunscreens prevent sunburn [48-50], epidemiological or laboratory evidence that they prevent melanoma in humans is still missing.

The inorganic agents, which protect the skin by reflecting and scattering UV, are nanoforms of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and zinc oxide (ZnO). These sunscreens are very efficient, photostable and offer protection extending into the UVA and visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum with almost negligible irritation. However, these molecules which reflect/scatter UV can cause whitening of the skin. Therefore, metal oxides are now frequently processed as microfine or nanoparticles (10-50 nm). Nanoparticles reflect/scatter and absorb UVA and UVB, and they are transparent on the skin, thus enhancing the cosmetic acceptability of the product [51] [MORALEJA: SI TIENE QUE USAR UN "FOTOPROTECTOR", EVÍTESE LOS RIESGOS DE LAS NANOPARTÍCULAS PIDIENDO UNO "QUE DEJE LA PIEL BLANCA"]

It was thought that the UV-filter acts as "artificial melanin" but most of sunscreen organic chemicals cannot dissipate the energy of the excited state as efficiently as melanin or DNA (Table.​(Table.1)1) and, therefore, the penetration of sunscreen ingredients into the lower layers of skin increases the amount of ROS

if sunscreen penetrates the epidermal barrier and gets into contact with living tissue, the DNA damage can be amplified many times, causing damage to living tissue even at very low concentrations (e.g. 10 μmol/L) [57-59].

Alcohol-based formulations appear to increase sunscreen absorption
[EVITAR "FOTOPROTECTORES" CON ALCOHOL]

Some ingredients in sunscreens protect only against direct DNA damage, but increase indirect DNA damage [59,58,67]. It is assumed that this causes an increase in melanoma cases found repeatedly in sunscreen users compared to non-users [68-71]

Cosmetic ingredients are absorbed through the skin. Some chemicals may penetrate the skin in significant amounts, especially when left on the skin for long periods, as in the case of facial makeup. Cancer risks from substances in cosmetic and personal care products have been reported (Table ​(Table3)3) [82]

Skin penetration of organic UV filters such as ethoxylated ethyl-4-aminobenzoate (PEG-25 PABA), benzophenone, benzophenon-3 (oxybenzon), salicylic compounds, octocrylene, octylmethoxycinnamate has been reported [52,60,61]. Skin penetration of metal nanoparticles also causes mistrust of sunscreen products usage [62].

Outdoor workers can get three to nine times as much solar UVR exposure as indoor workers [88,89]. Paradoxically, outdoor workers have a lower incidence of cutaneous malignant melanoma compared to indoor workers [90-92]. It is supposed that indoor solar UVA exposure, which causes mutations, depletes vitamin D3 in the skin [93]. In the early 20th century, due to life style changes, people tended to stay indoors during the day, which drastically decreased their daily amount of cutaneous vitamin D3. The UV barrier created by window glass separated UVB from UVA, so that the vitamin D making UVB was excluded from our indoor working environment [¡ES EL EFECTO PRODUCIDO POR LOS "FOTOPROTECTORES, QUE SIEMPRE PARAN MÁS UVB QUE UVA!]. It is hypothesized that this unnatural UV environment, which existed for decades in buildings and cars, caused cutaneous malignant melanoma incidence to increase steadily about 20–30 years later in the mid-1930s. Increased UVA exposure and decreased cutaneous Vitamin D3 levels may be responsible for the increasing incidence of melanoma [94]

Despite claims from the tanning industry, artificial tanning is not a safe or useful way to increase systemic vitamin D levels [93,95]. Many studies indicate a significantly increased risk of cutaneous melanoma subsequent to sunburn/sunlamp exposure, especially among individuals who are young, Caucasian, and female [96-98]. A European study showed that 40 hours of sun bed use resulted in a 55% increased risk for melanoma

...exposure to other environmental factors such as sunscreen, photosensitising drugs, and exogenous hormones may also increase the risk of melanoma

Associations between environmental factors and incidence of cutaneous melanoma. Review

---------------------------------------------------------

Cancer-preventive effects of sunscreens are uncertain.

Provocative findings have been published suggesting that the use of sunscreens may promote skin cancer. A recent meeting of international experts on the use of sunscreens and skin cancer was held at the International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon. The workshop concluded that the topical use of sunscreens reduces the risk of sunburn and that sunscreens probably prevent squamous-cell carcinoma of the skin when used mainly during unintentional sun exposure. No conclusion could be drawn about the cancer-preventive activity of topical sunscreens against basal-cell carcinoma and cutaneous melanoma. The use of sunscreens can extend the duration of intentional sun exposure, such as sunbathing. Such an extension may increase the risk for cutaneous melanoma. The workshop warned against relying solely on sunscreens for protection from ultraviolet radiation.

Cancer-preventive effects of sun... [Scand J Work Environ Health. 2000] - PubMed - NCBI

---------------------------------------------------------

Rising trends in melanoma. An hypothesis concerning sunscreen effectiveness.

Incidence rates of melanoma have risen especially steeply since the mid-1970s. The two principal strategies for reduction of risk of melanoma and other skin cancers are sun avoidance and use of chemical sunscreens. Rising trends in the incidence of and mortality from melanoma have continued since the 1970s and 1980s, when sunscreens with high sun protection factors became widely used. Commonly used chemical sunscreens block ultraviolet B (UVB) but are virtually transparent to ultraviolet A (UVA), which makes up 90 to 95% of ultraviolet energy in the solar spectrum. Because sunscreens prevent erythema and sunburn, and inhibit accommodation of the skin to sunlight, their use may permit excessive exposure of the skin to portions of the solar spectrum other than UVB. If melanoma and basal cell carcinoma are initiated or promoted by solar radiation other than UVB, as laboratory data suggest, then UVB sunscreens might not be effective in preventing these cancers, and sunscreen use might increase the risk of their occurrence. Alternative explanations for the rapid rise in the incidence and mortality rates of melanoma, such as changes in patterns of recreational sun exposure, are discussed. Traditional means of limiting overexposure to the sun, such as wearing of hats and adequate clothing and avoidance of prolonged sunbathing, may be more prudent than reliance on chemical sunscreens.

Rising trends in melanoma. An hypothesis conce... [Ann Epidemiol. 1993] - PubMed - NCBI

---------------------------------------------------------

Prevention of overexposure to ultraviolet light should focus instead on avoidance and the use of clothing and broad-brimmed hats to provide protection from the sun. Sunscreen does prevent sunburn. Whether or not the use of sunscreen prevents melanoma remains unknown. The present study, well executed for testing nonmelanoma skin cancer, did not prove that sunscreen use prevents melanoma. Because of the false sense of security engendered by sunscreen use, it may actually increase the risk of melanoma.

Increased Melanoma After Regular Sunscreen Use?

---------------------------------------------------------

[Sunscreens. Protection against skin cancers and photoaging].

Experimental animal studies have unambiguously demonstrated that topical sunscreens can prevent squamous cell carcinoma and photoaging (damage of collagen and elastic fibers of the skin). Although data from clinical studies and surrogate markers also indicate such photoprotective effects in man, there is a lack of controlled, prospective clinical trials to provide definite evidence in man. Because of inadequate data, no definite conclusions can be drawn about the cancer-preventive activity of topical use of sunscreens against basal cell carcinoma and malignant melanoma.

[Sunscreens. Protection against skin cancers and ph... [Hautarzt. 2003] - PubMed - NCBI

---------------------------------------------------------

Advertising for sunscreens and labeling of sunscreen bottles should inform consumers of the carcinogenic hazards associated with sunscreen abuse

Sunscreen abuse for intentional sun exposure. [Br J Dermatol. 2009] - PubMed - NCBI

__________________

Insisto en que las hidrosolubles no parecen el principal escollo.

Ahí van las tres primeras referencias bajo "pubmed hypervitaminosis"

Hypervitaminosis A - PubMed Health
Hypervitaminosis A and bone. [Nutr Rev. 2000] - PubMed - NCBI
Hypervitaminosis A. A cause of hypercalcemia.

Tengámoslo en cuenta para...:

A lo mejor tengo que volver a repetirlo....Por motivos que no vienen a cuento,me hago analisis de sangre cada 3 meses y nunca me han dicho que sufra ningun desequilibrio.Ya llevo cerca de un año vitaminadome y mineralizandome(como superraton ) y aquí estoy,sano y fuerte.

Con las liposolubles(A,D,K) llevo mas cuidado,pero aun así tomo unas cantidades superiores al %CDR.
Hago mucho deporte(2 horas al día) y entiendo que mis necesidades son bastante superiores a las de una persona sedentaria.


Tomar complementos vitaminicos debería ser habitual en todas las personas.Si al hecho de no comer equilibradamente le unes el que durante el proceso de cocción se destruyen muchas vitaminas y minerales, te podrás dar cuenta de las carencias que puede llegar a sufrir cualquier persona.

__________________

Añadidos a los posts principales del hilo (el inaugural y los enlazados desde el inaugural) más de una docena de interesantísimas referencias.

Apasionante, apasionante, apasionante me resulta todo este asunto, en el cual confluyen:

* La codicia de los mercachifles de los ungüentos de satanás.

* La necedad suicida del público que quiere ponerse "morenito".

* La credulidad del público, que se cree lo que le digan sin examinar en qué está fundado.

* La incompetencia, negligencia y (en casos contados) posible corrupción de los profesionales médicos que deberían saber e informar al público que los "fotoprotectores" NO son la buena idea que se nos dice que son.

* El olvido total de las trolas que nos contaron hace 15 o 25 años sobre los "fotoprotectores". Ahora reconocen en sus artículos científicos que nos mintieron o que no tenían ni puta idea sobre lo que hablaban. ¡Pero les seguimos creyendo!.

Todo junto formando un caldero de brujas con este resultado final:



¡¡¡Tanta mierda de "diagnóstico temprano de cáncer de mama", tanto fraudulento PSA y nadie sale por la tele haciendo algo tan sencillo y tan eficaz frente al cáncer cutáneo como decir alto y claro "BAJEN SU RIESGO DE SUFRIR CÁNCER: NO SE PONGAN AL SOL"!!!.

Reconozco que mi tendencia de rebuscador obsesivo y regodeante en temas de corrupción intelectual ha encontrad un nuevo y riquísimo filón: La Gran Impostura de los "fotoprotectores".

Les narro mi conversación con una amiga DOCTORA en Farmacia, persona concienzuda y con un genuino interés por ayudar a los clientes y no simplemente vender por vender:

AR2 Me estoy interesando por la controversia sobre los fotoprotectores.

FARMA ¿Controversia?. ¿Qué controversia?.

AR2 Eeeehr...pues que no se sabe si sus efectos son negativos en vez de positivos...

FARMA ¡Oye!, ¡Yo si voy a la playa sin fotoprotector me quemo, y como yo casi todo el mundo!. [ Una doctora en farmacia diciéndome lo que podría decirme la última choni del país, analfabeta funcional]

AR2 Verás, es que el que no te quemes no quiere decir que no estes aumentando tu riesgo de cñancer. Antes bien: El quemarte hace que en el futuro te pongas menos al sol. De hecho a más uso de "fotoprotector" más melanoma. ¿No sabías nada de todo esto?.

FARMA Pueees.....no. [Percibo el estupor y la perplejidad en mi interlocutora, que me suele escuchar con atención a las "cosas raras" que cuento]

AR2 Oye, en el contexto de la recaudación de la farmacia en la que trabajas, ¿los "fotoprotectores" son poco importantes o muy importantes?.

FARMA Son muy importantes. Es una de las cosas que más dinero da.

AR2 Si quieres te dejo de hablar de esto. No quiero crearte problemas de conciencia ni que te echen a la calle.

Me parece increíble que una persona estudiosa y concienzuda con un DOCTORADO en Farmacia no sepa más de "fotoprotectores" que lo que sabe cualquier persona del público.

Lo que he dicho siempre: NI DIOS lee PubMed, y eso que en PubMed hay GEMAS de información, totalmente desaprovechadas.


Coincido con usted. Yo voy a revisar mi ingesta de liposolubles.

__________________

Es normal que te lo parezca. De hecho, es mucho más creíble pensar que cualquier persona del público, alguien que no tiene un doctorado en nada como, por ejemplo, usted, y que en repetidas ocasiones en sus hilos ha dado una flagrante exhibición de ignorancia sobre medicina, sepa menos de fotoprotectores que la gran mayoría de la autoridad científica del mundo. Pero eso significaría renunciar a su almidonada autoestima y a su mesiánica labor foril, lo cual sería mucho pedir. ¿No?

¿Es usted tan amable de explicar qué nivel académico tengo?.


¿Es usted tan amable de enlazar los posts en los cuales haga "flagrante exhibición de ignorancia sobre medicina"?.


Si lee usted este hilo (con el primer post del hilo para empezar le basta) verá que enlazo a CIENTOS de científicos que ponen muy en duda que los "fotoprotectores" hagan nada bueno.

¿Es usted tan amable de enlazar bibliografía primaria probando que los "fotoprotectores" hagan algo bueno por la gente?.

__________________

Ya barruntaba que el forero que tan acerbamente me critica no iba a ser capaz de contestar una sola de mis preguntas.

¿Quieren ustedes distinguir a impostores intelectuales de gente que de verdad sabe de que habla?: HAGN PREGUNTAS. Discutir por discutir no lleva a ninguna parte, hacer preguntas llega mucho más lejos. Método socrático.

Más referencias a integrar y elaborar

sobre la vitamina D

Chronic sunscreen use decreases circulating co... [Arch Dermatol. 1988] - PubMed - NCBI

Sunscreens suppress cutaneous vitami... [J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1987] - PubMed - NCBI

Los fotoprotectores son posibles disruptores endocrinos:

Sunscreens: are they beneficial for health? An ... [Int J Androl. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

In vitro and in vivo estrogenicity o... [Environ Health Perspect. 2001] - PubMed - NCBI

En 1977 anunciaban que los "fotoprotectores" posiblemente serían eficaces contra el cáncer de piel. Se equivocaron. ¿En qué se equivocan ahora?:

Sense in the sun. [Aust Fam Physician. 1977] - PubMed - NCBI

__________________

Pero qué asco de gente, qué GHDLGP, qué repugnancia me causan ellos y sus mentiras.

Observen el MENTIROSO dibujo que publican los de las de la Skin Cancer Foundation (pagados por los fabricantes de "fotoprotectores"):



Understanding UVA and UVB - SkinCancer.org

¿Lo ven?. Los "fotoprotectores de amplio espectro" reflejan los rayos UVA en su integridad. ¡Ya puedne ponerse al sol sin preocupaciones!.

Bueno, pues esto es MENTIRA:

In 2006, a minimum requirement for UVA efficacy of sunscreens was chosen in Europe. [12] A UVAPF of at least 1/3 of the SPF of the product is now required

Need for a well-balanced sunscreen to protect human skin from both Ultraviolet A and Ultraviolet B damage Moyal D - Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol

Los fotoprotectores "de amplio espectro" sólo detienen 1/3 de los UVA con respecto a los UVB de su SPF.

Esta gente MIENTE abiertamente. Mentiras sencillas de comprobar y flagrantes.

¿Confían aún en sus "fotoprotectores"?.

__________________

Paso poco por el foro, y este hilo ni lo había seguido. Cómo estaba arriba, echo un vistazo, y...

OWNED histórico.

Él owneado es el que dice que se ha leído no sé cuántas publicaciones científicas .