-
Being predominantly pale skinned does make them relatively abnormally susceptible to skin cancer.
-
The sun is worse there compared to other areas where pale skinned people live. Note that not one city has a higher UV index peak, 13, than Darwin; including cities like Nairobi. It also does not drop below a UV index of 8, which puts it a pretty restrictive intensity club as well. Get down to Sydney and you are more comparable to Greece, but still more intense sun than most areas with large populations of pale folk.
And in other news, it’s possible to get 100 heads in a row when flipping a coin.
“About two thirds of basal-cell carcinomas occur on sun-exposed areas of the body. One-third occur on areas of the body that are not exposed to sunlight..”
Compared with other pale skinned populations, I mean. Australians aren’t more predisposed to skin cancer; it’s that you don’t find too many other predominantly pale skinned populations getting the same sun exposure.
Fair point about the UV index, yes.
Indeed. A good friend of mine died from skin cancer that started as a basal-cell carcinoma in an area of the body known colloquially as “where the sun don’t shine.”
Your Australian friends are talking total nonsense. There is not a single fact in your post that is correct.
Yeah. Fighting ignorance by letting the ignorant post.
As a British fan of cricket, it was well seen about a decade ago that the Aussie players, even in an overcast England, began to cover their faces in the stuff.
I used to think it was amusing until I engaged my brain and thought about why.
I spoke to my Australian friend earlier today. In the spirit of maintaining his unblemished record of highly opinionated commentary on all things Australian, I feel obliged to report the following:
According to him:
there is currently an epidemic of vitamin “D” deficiency in Australia, across all age groups and population demographics.
As a consequence, this has resulted in an increase in all the associated deficiency afflictions, particularly osteoporosis and similar bone related problems.
This deficiency is being attributed to both the effectiveness of the “slip/slop” campaign, and to life style changes in which the majority of Australians are now urban dwellers who spend most of their time sheltered from the sun.
Currently, the federal government is “the most incompetent in Australian history”, and does not wish to draw attention to this problem in case it is added to their extensive list of failures.
Thought you all might be interested …!
I’m Australian, there are others in this thread. Everything he says is bullshit.
While we don’t have anywhere near the the same amount of conspiracy-theorist nutters that the US does, obviously we do have some.
Is your Australian friend a skin specialist or other expert? A member of the Gillard government so that s/he is privy to the Conspiracy of Silence that deliberately makes children sick? You don’t have to be a fan of the Gillard government to sniff conspiratorial pub talk here.
I will continue to accept what I am told by my (Australian) dermatologist and plastic surgeon, with whom I ruefully have a deep and meaningful relationship with my annual excision ritual.
I well remember being 8 and running around for hours with mates in the summer sun shirtless. It was cool to compare how gross each others’ blisters were. When you put a shirt back on, the friction popped the blisters leaving the back of your shirt soaked, a phenomenon we loved showing off to each other. Good times 
This article about the Vitamin D crisis is from 2007, which is the year the current party was elected to power. If they hadn’t managed to introduce a Vitamin D crisis in the 15 days they’d been in power at the time the article was written, then it must have been down to the previous government, who had been in power for the preceding 11 years.
Your friend is a nutter.
Don’t feel obliged on my account. Please.
Arrrrrgggg. Another wikipedia medical citation I see… an uncited one at that. Awseome.
There are definitely basal cell carcinomas that are not associated with sun exposure, but they are relatively rare. There are various unusual and/or rare syndromes which can result in multiple BCCs for example, in addition to the odd sporadic BCC here and there. But when BCC are classified as occuring in sun-exposed vs non sun-exposed areas, it is referring to chronic sun exposure, or portions of your body that would get sun exposed on a daily basis in regular clothing, i.e face, neck, ears, nose, hands, forearms, etc
BCCs occuring on your torso, legs, etc are sometimes referred to as occuring in non sun-exposed in the literature but obviously, there areas are exposed in swimwear, when going shirtless, etc. These areas can also get a nontrivial dose of solar radiation even when clothed.
The anatomic distribution of bcc is closely correlated with overall general sun exposure. The idea that 1/3 of bcc’s are not associated with sun exposure is flat wrong.
I had a BCC removed from under my chin–an area that had never received any direct sunlight. (They used Mohs surgery, which was quite interesting.) Every time I go in for a follow-up, my dermatologist is amused at the weird location. She zaps a few facial spots with liquid nitrogen & reminds me to avoid the sun.
I had a couple of bad sunburns as a kid–people Just Didn’t Know. But I realized early on that I was not cut out to be a sunbather. So I use sunscreen & find shady ways to amuse myself. Relatives have had skin cancer & I think an uncle far away died from some variety.
Besides, sun damage can turn you into a wrinkled crone before your time. Lots of pale folks here in Texas…
Well your chin will receive a little bit of reflected sunlight. Anyone who has been skiing will know what it’s like to get sunburnt under their chin.
For the folks here that are absolutely terrified of a little sunlight, here’s an article from a few years ago about a world-renowned dermatopathologist who didn’t believe in suncreen:
Sounds just like all of the other branches of medicine.
I don’t know enough about the subject to have an opinion, and have found all of the posts very informative.
However, in re-reading all of the posts above, it seems to me that everything that my friend has said on the subject seems to have been more or less verified in one or more of the posts above.
To me, it looks like his “facts” are more or less correct; the contentions seem to be arising from the interpretation of what those “facts” mean.
So we have posts here that say we should not go to the beach unless we are totally covered up; on the other hand, we have an apparently world renowned dermatologist who says it is a load of crap.
Add to this the report that apparently there is some kind of epidemic of Vitamin D deficiency in Australia and we have consistent verification of what he has told me; at least to the effect that it is a contentious issue.
While I acknowledge that he may be “a nutter”, and has been the source of endless entertainment over all the years I have known him, in this case he may actually be more or less right.
Nonsense. One dermatologist has an outlier view, while the whole field of oncologists and dermatologists (other than him) say the opposite.
And as the cites you have been given on the rickets issue show, the recent increase in Australia is a consequence of other factors. Indeed, it could be nothing else, given that you can get enough vitamin D from a few minutes a day of sun exposure, and no one takes sun protection so seriously that they totally cover up for incidental sun exposure on a day to day basis. Heck, I’d get more sun exposure every day going from my house to my garage in the morning, and in going to buy a sandwich at lunchtime, than a Norwegian would get for six months of the year at a time. And Norwegians don’t have a rickets outbreak.
Your friend is just plain wrong. Such facts as he has right are outliers or irrelevant and don’t mean what he thinks they mean. Don’t fall into the Fox News habit of thinking that because you can always find some crazy with an opposite view, it means there is a real controversy.
It’s actually worldwide; not limited to Australia.
I don’t think your Australian friend is as informed as he thinks he is, Grateful Un-Dead.