Enlightening strikes twice Oh, so look who's "right" in the eyes of the mainstream twice in one month… Not only was I proven a medical soothsayer when a New York Times article from last month trumpeted a newly released study showing that extreme exercisers drink too much water - a fact I'VE been trumpeting for decades (actually, I maintain that anyone who drinks more than a few cups a day is drinking too much) - but now this: Scientists are now claiming sunshine prevents Cancer! Wow. That's really big news. I've only known it, for, hmmm, let's see… 35 YEARS! But I'm not bitter that nobody in the medical establishment ever listens to me. Not at all. I'm just glad that finally, the word's getting out. I thought I heard some rumblings about this earlier this year (Daily Dose, 4/29/2005), but I dared not hope. The mainstream has a habit of disappointing me on this one. Every year at this time, the stories abound about the dreadful "risks" of not using sunscreen, but nary a word is spoken about the benefits of good ol' fashioned sunlight. Until now, that is. A recent Associated Press story - I've seen the piece echoed by other mainstream news outlets, too - summarizes the findings of four recent studies indicating that Vitamin D (derived from sun exposure, mind you) helped protect against many types of cancer, including lung, colon, prostate, and SKIN. The article also cites research that suggests that the Vitamin D from appropriate sun exposure prevents 30 deaths for every one it "causes." As if this weren't enough of a pleasant surprise to me, the piece also reports that many of the mainstream doctors and scientists who are newly converted to this sun-friendly camp are vocally questioning the benefits of sunscreen - some even going so far as to suggest that they CAUSE cancer by blocking the body's natural production of Vitamin D. Gee, where have we heard THAT before? But I'm not kvetching. The bottom line is that the mainstream's finally coming around and starting to question the sunscreen weenies. Lives will be saved, and made better and more vigorous… And people just might start to question some of the other dogma the medical establishment's spoon-feeding them. Now THAT would be good news, huh? **************************************************** Triumph of the "spirit" The only thing better than being proven right about something the medical establishment has long maligned is being right about a lifesaver that's savory, cultured, and therapeutic for the senses and spirit… I'm talking, of course, about alcohol. Many times I've sung the praises of this "liquid medicine." Whether it's beer, wine, or 100-proof liquor that makes you lick your lips and count the minutes 'til after work or evening time, you're getting some powerhouse health benefits every time you imbibe - as long as you don't overdo it, naturally. I'm glad to say that in recent years, the mainstream's coverage of alcoholic beverages has been fairly sympathetic (or just plain fair, actually). That's especially true of the red wines. Over the last decade, they've garnered loads of ink about their antioxidant and cancer-preventative properties… But now, it appears that even the hard liquors are getting some good press. According to a yahoo.com article from last month, a recent presentation at the Association of Clinical Biochemists conference in Scotland (the birthplace of whiskey, how fitting) revealed that single-malt Scotches are actually richer in a powerful, cancer-fighting antioxidant called ellagic acid than red wine. Does this mean you should go on a whiskey bender? Of course not. What it does mean is that if you've been convinced that red wine is the only type of alcohol that's good for you, you can switch it up with a glass of scotch or a full-bodied beer (the darker varieties are also rich in cancer-fighters) and stay just as healthy. Thinkin' and drinkin' in sunlight's sweet glow, William Campbell Douglass II, MD | 
