| Quote: |
A revolutionary digital camera that photographs instant images of skin damage may prove to be wake-up call for those who spend hours sunbathing on the beach, thinking a tan is a fashionable accessory.
The camera, the only one of its type in Australia, is being used as part of a groundbreaking Queensland University of Technology project to investigate damage caused by sunbaking.
It has the ability to reveal damage to the lower layers of facial skin as black areas- highlighting the risk of skin cancer.
When used on a group of 14-year-olds from Brisbane's Dakabin State High School recently, many students were shocked to find that their skin age was actually 25.
Professor Michael Kimlin, of QUT's AusSun Research Laboratory, said teenagers often believed they were invincible.
"Unfortunately young people still spend hours sunbaking on the beach and think a tan is a fashionable accessory," the Courier Mail quoted him, as saying.
"These photos showed them that wrinkles, sun spots and blotches are already starting because the sun has caused changes in the lower layers of their skin.
"The benefit of the new camera is that people can see the damage there and then, and have irrefutable evidence that not protecting their skin is having consequences.
"None of these students were using sunscreen, so seeing their faces with all the black areas gave them a reason to rethink their attitude," he added.
|
Source:- http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20090412/862/ttc-revolutionary-camera-reveals-skin-da.html^.^
Ha ha! The stupid people realize that radiation is bad for them!
If you've ever sat out in the sun just to get a tan, you deserve skin cancer.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
^.^
If you've ever sat out in the sun just to get a tan, you deserve skin cancer. |
Only as much as people who do the opposite deserve Rickets. 
| AftershockVibe wrote: |
| Only as much as people who do the opposite deserve Rickets. |
I thought that provided there is sun in the part of the world where you live, that you would be getting enough exposure for sufficient Vit D to be able to prevent something like that. This could only be a problem in countries where there is hardly any sunshine during the year. And if that is the case, there are artificial ways that you can get the equivalent of sun rays, as well as you can take added vitamins and calcium. | AftershockVibe wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | ^.^
If you've ever sat out in the sun just to get a tan, you deserve skin cancer. |
Only as much as people who do the opposite deserve Rickets. |
Quite so. If you deliberately hide from the sun, you deserve Rickets.
If I get a tan, its because I was outside working or playing. This gives just the right amount of exposure, and doesn't involve stupidly trying to change your own skin tone.What you mean UV radiation will damage my skin!!! All those times I got sunburnt and I thought it was good for me. I think people that tan just to make their skin darker are some of the most amusing in the world. It's so hard to believe that people put their physical appearance before their health, human being's are so vain!!!
| coolclay wrote: |
| It's so hard to believe that people put their physical appearance before their health, human being's are so vain!!! |
Well, you've got to do something... Being furless is just so... ugly.Like most things they say are bad for you it's actually good for you in moderation.
Kind'a ironic that some of the procedures that are used to get rid of potentially cancer growths involve burning those with radiation or chemicals. Sort of killing it with the same stuff that started it.
In developing countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and many african countries where agriculture is the primary industry, there are hundred and thousands of poor farmers that work from dawn to dusk in scorching sunlight, yet I have never heard about some epidemic skin disease in these areas. I think the skin should have natural defense to the sunlight.
Perhaps sunlight is not the only threat or cause of skin damage. There are other threats as well, such as here in the Middle East where uneducated and really poor workers are handling adhesives and solvents without any protective clothing, gloves or masks. As a small example.
| harismushtaq wrote: |
| I think the skin should have natural defense to the sunlight. |
It's called melatonin, and it makes skin darker. But, too much of it will deprive the body of the sunlight it needs for vitamins, so people come in different skin tones for different levels of sunlight in their native environments.Yeah it's so easy to get skin cancer in australia with ozone layer so thin. And the people with the white skin have a lot of trouble. I hate the australian sun. It is just too bright. Back in other country I used to love to sit in the sun but here I can't. Compared to other places this invention could really help the people in australia.
| binsmyth wrote: |
| And the people with the white skin have a lot of trouble. |
Just look at the natives... That's the skin tone you need to deal with the Australian sun.
I wonder if the white settlers will eventually evolve to the same color?'fashionable accessory' that is completely right. I am really light, the main reason is that I don't stay to much in the sun because it gives me a headache.
But it sounds good that they might be capable to see skin damage or possibilities of skin cancer.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| binsmyth wrote: | | And the people with the white skin have a lot of trouble. |
Just look at the natives... That's the skin tone you need to deal with the Australian sun.
I wonder if the white settlers will eventually evolve to the same color? |
I doubt it. Are you saying that those with a white skin should stick to Europe and colder climates and don't belong in Australia? I thought everyone originated in Africa? The hot spot of the world? Couldn't get any hotter nor more sunshine than in the Middle East. | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | binsmyth wrote: | | And the people with the white skin have a lot of trouble. |
Just look at the natives... That's the skin tone you need to deal with the Australian sun.
I wonder if the white settlers will eventually evolve to the same color? |
I doubt it. Are you saying that those with a white skin should stick to Europe and colder climates and don't belong in Australia? I thought everyone originated in Africa? The hot spot of the world? Couldn't get any hotter nor more sunshine than in the Middle East. |
Which is why the people of the Middle East are also a little darker... it makes me wonder though, since they are not completely black, have they moved there relatively recently in history, or perhaps, have they been culturally accustomed to wearing lots of clothing for so long that it is affecting their evolution?
And yes, supposedly, everyone traces back to Africa. People who went to colder, sunless, climes evolved whiter skin though, in order to better produce a certain vitamin that can only be made with sunlight, which is difficult for a dark skinned person to do in an environment that has little sun to begin with, and encourages wearing heavy clothing during much of the year. While people who moved to hot, sunny climates tended to keep or re-develop their darker coloring to protect against sunburns and skin cancer. | ocalhoun wrote: |
Which is why the people of the Middle East are also a little darker... it makes me wonder though, since they are not completely black, have they moved there relatively recently in history, or perhaps, have they been culturally accustomed to wearing lots of clothing for so long that it is affecting their evolution?
And yes, supposedly, everyone traces back to Africa. People who went to colder, sunless, climes evolved whiter skin though, in order to better produce a certain vitamin that can only be made with sunlight, which is difficult for a dark skinned person to do in an environment that has little sun to begin with, and encourages wearing heavy clothing during much of the year. While people who moved to hot, sunny climates tended to keep or re-develop their darker coloring to protect against sunburns and skin cancer. |
Interesting theory. So how do you explain the Inuits in Northern Canada, as well as the Indians in Northern America? | deanhills wrote: |
| Interesting theory. So how do you explain the Inuits in Northern Canada, as well as the Indians in Northern America? |
Exposure to wind, perhaps, for one thing... (Ever experienced 'wind burn'?)
Also, possibly the emigrated from somewhere else (South America: refugees from the Aztecs?) and hadn't evolved away the darker coloring yet? | ocalhoun wrote: |
Exposure to wind, perhaps, for one thing... (Ever experienced 'wind burn'?)
Also, possibly the emigrated from somewhere else (South America: refugees from the Aztecs?) and hadn't evolved away the darker coloring yet? |
If the Bering land bridge migration theory is correct, then they came from somewhere in south Asia, maybe even India, before going through Siberia to Alaska. If they did this in a relatively short time, then in conjunction with wind burn(and the sun up there does burn bright when it's out), they could have retained their coloring.
Also, the migrating from South America theory is interesting. There was an anthropologist years ago(I may research all this later) who claimed that an ancient language from the southern tip of Chile is the oldest known to man. He posited a theory that people in fact migrated north from there, rather than(or in conjunction with)people migrating south from the arctic regions. | ocalhoun wrote: |
I wonder if the white settlers will eventually evolve to the same color? |
not in one lifetime | atul2242 wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: |
I wonder if the white settlers will eventually evolve to the same color? |
not in one lifetime |
Of course not, but what about in 100 lifetimes?
