jimenato

No - odd I know - but she's dead right about this one.

Domino

having sat and watched some of the videos and stills for places in Malaga and Marbella (although I could never afford the properties) I have to say that "taste" very much seems to be a mote in the eye rather than anything else - so hard to make an assessment as to the size of some properties they are stuffed so full.

my preference is really more the Japanese simple layouts, but then where would I put all my computers, books, memento's etc etc

me me

Nigeria consumes more champagne than the whole of Russia, while the poorer remote areas, people live on 60 p a day.

It pumps 2 million barrels of oil a day.

tommy.irene

http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature...t-until-autumn

tommy.irene

The end for lotion? World's first drinkable sun cream goes on sale - and just a teaspoon will offer three hours' protection
Harmonised H20 UV claims to offer wearers factor 30 protection
US company Osmosis Skincare is selling 100ml bottle for £17
Works by molecules vibrating on skin, cancelling UVA and UVA rays


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/ar...#ixzz329qkHkhD

Madridboy

I prefer Melanotan II....the sooner it's legal the better

jimenato

Obvious pseudoscientific rubbish. The trouble is some people might believe it so it's dangerous.

Dick Dasterdly

Yeh, takes a bit of swallowing doesn't it, though I for one certainly won't be trying a slug of it.

I'll stick to rubbing on a bit of the old tractor grease as usual, very effective and lasts a bit longer.

jimenato

I stay covered up and out of the sun. I leave the silly stuff to tourists.

andyrich666

When I got back yesterday I fell asleep on the sunbed for about 6 hours, my back absolutely roaring red, today I got pains everywhere and could not sleep at all last night.

I did not think the sun yesterday was that strong though. Feeling it now though

two tubes of toothpaste

During the Second World War, hundreds of thousands of lily-white British lads were sent to fight in the desert and the Far East under the blazing sun. They weren't there for a fortnight, they were there for years. You can see photo's from those days of men in only shorts and boots operating the artillery. It is alleged that Churchill squandered the forces sun-cream money on Spitfires and the such like.

So after the war, there must have been a huge spike in the numbers of skin cancer victims amongst the troops. There wasn't one.

Skin cancers have only become known since the sixties when it was first fashionable to have a suntan and products came out to promote a tan.

I wonder if there has ever been a statistical analysis made between the amount of sun-cream sold at €10 a tube and the number of skin cancers which keep on rising ?

tommy.irene

https://www.euroweeklynews.com/news/...eaten-to-death

jimenato

Looking for correlations such as you have suggested is fraught with difficulty. It seems on the face of it straightforward; lots of white skinned troops exposed to the sun should equal lots of skin cancer but it didn't, lots of people using sun cream and cancer increases therefore it is sun cream and not sun which causes cancer. If only it were that easy.

There are many factors involved - change of habit, change of environment and earlier diagnosis are three and another, as with most cancers, is age.

The incidence of skin cancer increases with age as you can see from this

Add to this the fact that in the 1940s the male life expectancy for males was below 60 and it is now around 80 (therefore the incidence would naturally increase) and you can see that this makes it difficult to pin down any one reason.

Still, the 'sun cream causes cancer' theory has been around for years so you would have thought that someone would have done a study on it.

The problem I have with the theory is that, apart form the apparent correlation between sun cream use and cancer, there is no evidence to support it that I can see.

Here are some false correlations...

This one's my favourite...

two tubes of toothpaste

Thank you for that wealth of information which has on cursory reading given me much food for thought and some interesting reading. The statistical quirks gave me a laugh too.

Some points that spring to mind are -

1) There is no data prior to 1975. Were skin cancers in the preceding years dismissed as natural causes ?

2) You couldn't get a more homogenous data sample, with the troops being nearly all men, fit and within a certain age group and exposed to the sun for similar lengths of time cutting down the number of factors needing to be taken into account.

3) What is the average "incubation period" for skin cancer after high exposure to the sun ?

Can I just say that although I do not use sun-creams, (after 10 years here, I have learned when to come out of the sun, and have long since given up spending hours on a sun-lounger in my speedos looking at my beer belly), I would never discourage anyone from using sun-creams.

jimenato

Well let's not make it a sun cream thread but I too don't use them - not because I have doubts about them but because I hate them - all slimy and greasy and uncomfortable.

I just stay out of the sun.