Regenerative Health with Max Gulhane, MD
I speak with world leaders on circadian & quantum biology, metabolic medicine & regenerative farming in search of the most effective ways of optimising health and reversing chronic disease.
Regenerative Health with Max Gulhane, MD
90. Solar Powered: Cameron Borg on How the Body Derives Energy From Sunlight
We discuss the profound effects of light on health, specifically the role of sunlight in energy production within the body. We also cover the evolutionary significance of light exposure, the mechanisms by which different wavelengths of light interact with biological systems, and the implications for health and disease, particularly cancer.
Cameron Borg is a qualified nutritionist, practicing pulmonary scientist, podcaster and health coach from Sydney, Australia. He hosts the Ricci Flow Nutrition Podcast, interviewing world leaders including Gerald Pollack, Stephanie Senneff, Scott Zimmerman and more. He is a leader in applied circadian and quantum biology in Australia.
Attend REGENERATE Health summit March 22nd in SYDNEY & March 23rd in Melbourne - https://www.regenerateaus.com/
SUPPORT the Regenerative Health Podcast by purchasing through the following links:
🎤 ASK ME ANYTHING in my Private Skool Community group - weekly Q&A, my 52-page eBook, PDF resource downloads & more. USD20/month, cancel anytime
https://www.skool.com/dr-maxs-circadian-reset
🥩 WOLKI FARM. Highest quality fully grassfed & pastured pork, beef, lamb & eggs raised with holistic principles and shipped around Australia. Code DRMAX for 10% off https://wolkifarm.com.au/DRMAX
🚨 BON CHARGE. Blue blockers, EMF laptop pads, circadian friendly lighting, and more. Code DRMAX for 15% off. https://boncharge.com/?rfsn=7170569.687e6d
🚨 CHROMA. Advanced photobiomodulation devices including D-light (Vitamin D-generating) & Lux vital with OPN3-5 stimulation, cold pillow for the ultimate night's sleep. Use code DRMAX for 11% off. https://getchroma.co/?ref=i6p39fn0
🚨 MIDWEST RED LIGHT THERAPY. Blue blockers, photobiomodulation devices, shipping to USA. Code DRMAX for 10% offhttps://midwestredlighttherapy.com/affiliate/DRMAX/
TIMESTAMPS
00:00 The Power of Light in Health
08:05 Evolutionary Perspectives on Sunlight
14:12 Understanding the Electromagnetic Spectrum
20:18 The Role of Ultraviolet Light
32:11 Melanin: The Body's Energy Harvesting Tool
40:06 Exploring UVB and Seasonal Vitamin D Production
45:07 The Psychological Effects of Visible Light
50:16 Blood, Light, and Energy Dynamics
57:34 Cancer: A Breakdown in Communication
01:08:02 Sunlight, Skin Cancer, and Health Perspectives
Follow CAMERON
Ricci Flow Nutrition Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@RicciFlowNutrition
Website: https://www.ricciflownutrition.com/
Consults: https://www.ricciflownutrition.com/contact
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ricciflownutrition/
Follow DR MAX
Website: https://drmaxgulhane.com/
Private Group: https://www.skool.com/dr-maxs-circadian-reset
Courses: https://drmaxgulhane.com/collections/courses
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MaxGulhaneMD
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dr_max_gulhane/
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1661751206
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6edRmG3IFafTYnwQiJjhwR
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/maxgulhanemd
DISCLAIMER: The content in this podcast is purely for informational purposes and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard on this podcast or YouTube channel. Do not make medication changes without first consulting your treating clinician.
#sun #sunlight #uvlight #ultravioletlight #circadianrhythm #circadianhealth #skincancerprevention #skincancer #skincancerawareness #melanoma #melanomaawareness #mitochon
Purchase tickets to Regenerate here - https://regenerateaus.com/
Okay, welcome back to the Regenerative Health Podcast. Today I've got Cameron Borg joining me back here, and Cameron is a nutritionist, he's a pulmonary scientist, he's the host of the Ricky Flo Nutrition Podcast and I think he's a fellow leader in interrogating light and the photobiological effects and what implications this has for health. So, cameron, thanks for joining me again.
Speaker 2:No, it's a real honor. Love talking to you, Max.
Speaker 1:It feels like a pretty opportune time to jump back on a call because there seems like the thought of light and its effect on health is penetrating more into the mainstream. I mean, we had our mutual podcast guest and friend, Dr Roger Swelt, on Andrew Huberman's podcast. It seems like there's more and more recognition that this is a critical part of health. So maybe I could get you to kick off with how you think about the space now. What excites you and what are you thinking about?
Speaker 2:What excites you and what are you thinking about? I mean, what's really exciting me at the moment is thinking about how light is giving our body energy. I think that's really a key point in this whole field at the moment. I know there's a lot of talk about basically being able to generate energy directly, the same way that plants do this type of photosynthesis. And I think to most people who have embraced the sun this doesn't sound far-fetched at all because you do feel like you get more energy from the sun. I mean, this is a universal experience. When you go outside you always feel better, you always feel more energized. So I guess on the surface it seems like quite a logical thing to explore. But I mean, as far as evidence is concerned, or direct evidence, you know there's still this food first sort of idea coming forward from the literature that you know all energy comes down to food, forward from the literature that you know all energy comes down to food. But I think the idea that we're being bathed in, you know the amount of photons that we can never really quite grasp. I mean it's in the range of numbers that you sort of lose the ability to understand. You know, being bathed in that much light with all these different wavelengths has to be contributing to something, because these photons are interacting with all of the molecules in our body and basically donating sort of vibratory energy. And this is why I reached out to you a few days ago, was? You know, I had quite a long conversation with Bob Fosbury, who was talking about this idea that the primary energy we're getting from the sun is around this one electron volt, you know range, and that seems to be the exact energy that the respiratory proteins in the mitochondria sort of require to help electrons tunnel. So it's sort of like this built-in activation energy that our bodies always evolved expecting. Yeah, why not have a one electron volt barrier everywhere? Because you know that's a given and what's happened is we've basically removed that given and this makes it very, very difficult for energy to flow in the body, and of course, energy flow is the precise thing that sets up cycles in the body.
Speaker 2:I've been really getting into Mei-Wan Ho's work and it's funny. I've been reading her book and I'll read like half the book and then I just start again because, you know, I feel like there's so much more to get out of it and you know she quotes Morowitz, who talks about you know. He basically came up with this law that wherever there is energy flow, at least one cycle is generated flow, at least one cycle is generated. And I think this really comes out of the laws of you know, the thermodynamics of complex systems. She calls it the thermodynamics of ordered complexity.
Speaker 2:She really felt that there was a need to sort of come up with a new formulation of thermodynamics, one that wasn't come up with looking at steam engines, but one that was come up with looking at organisms. And it looks like what our organism is doing is making lots of energy flow but consequently also making lots of cycle and lots of order and lots of structure. And the energy flow is exactly what's sustaining our structure. And of course, structure and function are connected at the hip. They're two sides of the same coin, basically. So it just makes you think that sunlight really is the primary donator of energy. It's just not the electrons that we think of and that's all food is. We're just trying to get electrons from food, and understanding that is really the key to understanding food is that it all know.
Speaker 2:When you learn about this stuff in school, you're sort of given this idea that all electrons in the universe are the same, they're a defined quantity, but of course that's not true. They have all of these other intrinsic properties like spin and vibratory states and energy that differentiate them and clearly, ostensibly communicate different things to the body, them, and clearly, ostensibly communicate different things to the body Particularly. You know the body's hyper, hyper sensitive to small stimuli. It's quite remarkable. So basically, what Bob ran past me was this idea of a phonon bath. I didn't even know what a phonon was until he told me, but I probably won probably won't be 100 correct on this because I've only started learning about it but when a photon interacts with a molecule it can basically impart a vibratory energy on it and this is not lost as thermal energy straight away. So you basically the photon you know interacts with the molecule and then leaves some sort of energy in a vibratory state and that's a phonon, this vibratory energy that's passed on. And you think, if you're getting bathed by all of these around this one electron volt energy, your body just gets blown up like a balloon with all of these one electron volt.
Speaker 2:This phonon bath is what he's called it, and he said he's run this idea past quite a few quantum biologists, which is great because he has access to a lot of them now, because he's working with the Guy Foundation, so he's been able to run this idea past people and it seems, it seems to seems to be quite logical that all of this activation energy has been provided. And, of course, when we're sitting inside, all of that, you know, activation energy that is, you know, an evolutionary given for two billion years has all of a sudden been switched off. The light, the light has been, you know, flicked, and I think that's a really fascinating way to think about what's going on and a different way to think about how light is providing energy to the body. And clearly we need electrons to make the energy flow. That's where food comes in.
Speaker 2:But, you know, I think most people who have embraced the sun realize that they probably don't need to eat as much when they're in the sun or they're living, you know, just like a normal, natural human being. You don't need to eat that much because you're being provided lots of energy by the sun. Um, you know what? What is this? Something that you've been thinking about too, max?
Speaker 1:yeah, absolutely. And the, the default state of irradiation is what I've been thinking about as as it relates to how humans would have walked the earth and the, the evolution, the product of evolution, of homo sapiens, homo sapiens going from this primitive all the way back to the beginning of unicellular life, then multicellular life, all the way up to animalia, amphibians, and then we became hominids and we stood upright. The given there is full spectrum sunlight from dawn till dusk, and that begins with visible and infrared light at peaks in the midday, with penetration of a whole bunch of short wavelength light in the UV range depending on your latitude and season, and then essentially a reversal of that process. And when you tell people that the default is to be irradiated with full-spectrum UV-containing light, you almost get a funny look because the statement in and of itself implies or suggests danger. It suggests perhaps even cancer, and I think that's been a very powerful meme that's entered the discourse via concerns about skin malignancy. But really that's what happened and that was what our default state was.
Speaker 1:The nuance here is that, depending on where in the world your ancestors came from, there was a differential amount of epidermal melanin that was cultivated in response to the ambient ultraviolet conditions.
Speaker 1:But if you are in Australia, that means that you ended up as a Fitzpatrick 6, extremely dark, indigenous Australian Aboriginal with extremely dark skin, because there's high intensity UV year round. But if you lived north in Scandinavia, then half the year the UV index is peaking at six and then the other half of the year there's absolutely no ultraviolet B light at all. So no matter where you are in the world or no matter where your family or ancestors are, from the morning to dusk full spectrum of radiation was the norm and, as you alluded to before, cameron, this is something that's been taken away now that we're all living inside. I'll just quickly make the point for those who aren't familiar with Professor Bob Fosbury. He's an astronomer, astrophysicist, who's since turned his hand to understanding light-life interactions, and he's been a mutual podcast guest, and I think his most famous quote maybe to date, was that life on Earth is an antenna for solar radiation, and I think that really sums up so far what we've been talking about.
Speaker 2:It's exactly the quote that needs to be spoken very loudly now. And he was telling me that him and Scott it's nice they communicate at least once a week and they've been finding all of these coincidences that relate to how life has evolved with the energy that's provided by the sun. And you know he listed off a bunch of these coincidences that all relate around the specific energy that the sun provides and how all life has sort of evolved. This activation energy of about one electron volt, this is one of them, and then he named a few more. And it just starts to become so obvious that life is just all specifically tuned to the solar spectrum At its most fundamental level. That's exactly what it's tuned to.
Speaker 2:And, yeah, it's just so unfortunate that our eyes have evolved to see only such a small portion, because we've just become so myopic about the way that we perceive these questions around. You know being exposed to the sun and even you know you said before radiation. You know, unfortunately that term resides in a lexicon where, you know, everyone hears that and thinks that's bad. Yet at the same time they have their phone in their pocket without realising that it's the same thing. The things coming out of your phone are photons. They're just in a different range, they're slightly up past the infrared and it's hard to get this point across in a lexicon that sort of doesn't allow us to speak about this in a way that's understandable, in a way that's not going to get confused in any other way.
Speaker 2:But yeah, I mean, it's always quite frustrating to think, you know, people are so concerned about the invisible radiation from the sun, the UV, whilst having their phone in their pocket. It's always been, you know, don't people realize that the same sort of thing is happening? And why wouldn't you be concerned about the other side of the spectrum, which clearly has biological effects? I think everyone would agree that probably putting their phone up to their head during a call for a long period of time is probably not a good thing. I think most people, even with no scientific background, would say, yeah, that's probably not a good idea. But if you push them and said why you start to come up with answers that clearly these invisible wavelengths have biological effects, it just happens to be that the ones we lived under are going to be the ones, the ones that we evolved under, are probably going to be the ones affording us some, uh, adaptive benefit and some fitness um benefit as well yeah, and I think that'll be a topic we'll get into later in the discussion.
Speaker 1:But really I think the semantic high ground has definitely been taken and maybe commandeered by, and perhaps the dermatology profession more broadly in their attempts at primary prevention of skin cancers and that's, as I mentioned, has really shaped people's thinking about this idea of sunlight radiation and perhaps also more around ionizing radiation and perhaps its connotations and allusions to nuclear power, nuclear weapons and these kinds of things. But we don't get taught about the electromagnetic spectrum at school and maybe maybe we people do at physics. I I actually didn't take physics, nor biology, interestingly, but uh, it seems to have found me, me neither.
Speaker 1:But I think it's incredibly important and as medicine and health evolves into this new frontier of what you and I I guess are part of this decentralization that I think, and quantum biology, learning about the electromagnetic spectrum and as it relates to solar photons and also endogenously generated photons and how light is influencing life, I think it's going to become more and more important. But I wanted to ask you about, now that we're on the topic of light and it's imbuing or transferring energy to life, and we know that that's happening predominantly through mitochondria in a variety of different mechanisms. But it's commonly you hear this statement that we're only supposed to get 30% of our electrons from food, and it kind of gets repeated. I don't want to use the word parroted, but maybe that's somehow sometimes what it feels like. What's your take on the scientific validity of a statement like that? Because on the surface it seems difficult to believe, especially if someone doesn't have any understanding of light-life interactions.
Speaker 2:That's a great question. I think if I had the answer, you and I would probably have a Nobel. But yeah, it's a difficult thing to try and unpack because, first of all, how do you even go about investigating something like that thing to try and unpack, because you know, first of all, how do you even go about investigating something like that? And then you know there's this idea of earthing providing electrons, and you know I've heard some criticism about that too that I've been exploring that perhaps the effects of earthing are not mediated by um, the uptake of free electrons from the earth, um, which is an interesting idea. That that's not. That's not why, uh, it seems to have a benefit, um, yeah, I mean, I really don't know.
Speaker 2:I I know, um, that people have looked at um pectin in the eye of birds and this is sort of this melanin structure that interacts with light to generate glucose, generate electrons, basically, and this is probably behind why migratory birds can fly for days or weeks without stopping and eating, because they have sunlight, they're literally photosynthesizing, they don't need to stop and eat because they're being supplied electrons from the sun. And this is, you know, this is in the literature, but no, this is old, you know I haven't seen any recent work on it and I said this, I told this to Bob because Bob was like you know, we have to think about these migratory birds that you know go, have to think about these migratory birds that go weeks on end without eating. And I said, oh, I think people have talked about the pecten in the eye and he said, oh, that makes total sense because they're being supplied the electrons. All they need is electrons. They don't need food, they just need electrons. Of course, after some period of time you do need food because you need other things other than electrons. You need minerals and so forth to basically provide the building blocks for life. But ostensibly all you need is electrons to have energy flow. And where you have energy flow, you will have dynamic adaptation and you'll be able to maintain your structure and you'll be able to maintain your structure.
Speaker 2:So this idea I'm not sure where the idea of 30% comes from food, but that wouldn't surprise me because food is such a small part of what we do. It's not like we're eating all day, because if we needed electrons only from food, we'd be sitting down doing nothing but eating all day. And humans I mean longest water fast, I think is over a year, so it's quite clear we're able to get energy elsewhere. In what form that takes, I really don't know.
Speaker 2:There's all these other sort of interactions going on, and there's other particles from the sun that we get, like even things like neutrinos are coming through, um, no one's talking about those, but we don't know what the biological implications of those particles interacting with life are. So it wouldn't surprise me if, if it's, you know, the amount of electrons we're getting from food is quite low, um, and you know, perhaps we needed, needed much less food when we were living in an environment that was, or when we had a food environment that was so rich in micronutrients that you could eat a smaller portion and get way more nutrition. Basically, and get your electrons elsewhere and get your electrons elsewhere. But whatever has happened, we've sort of lost contact with this source, or sources rather, of electrons that we probably would have got. But your guess is as good as mine as to where they're coming from.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think it's going to be useful to break down maybe the different parts of the terrestrial solar spectrum as it relates to potentially giving the body energy. Maybe we can do that, from UV to visible to infrared. And the reason why I think it's worth laying this out, to always bring this back to clinical and individual relevance, is that we're framing or understanding chronic disease in this day and age as a mitochondrial problem. And again, to go back to Doug Wallace, he's the researcher who's really done the groundwork to show every form of chronic disease is simply organ-specific mitochondrial inefficiency I think that might be a better word than dysfunction or maladaption and depending on which organ your mitochondrial inefficiency shows up in which is influenced by your environmental choices and your genetic predispositions, that kind of dictates the flavor of chronic disease that you get. So maybe let's start with the ultraviolet and then go through to the infrared to explain to people what are the mechanisms by which light is actually providing energy to the body.
Speaker 2:Ultraviolet's the best one to start with, because it's probably one of the main reasons life was able to begin in the first place, because it's able to provide such a large amount of energy to chemical structures. So uv light can can change chemical structures. It can make new chemicals by interacting with them and that's exactly what we see in the synthesis of vitamin d, the. The uvb photon is sufficiently, it has a sufficient amount of energy to actually change the chemical structure. And clearly that's really really important in terms of the beginnings of life in general. You know, to generate, to supply the right amount of energy to make new chemicals and to allow these chemical structures to make new things. And anyone who's looked at Andrei Slominski's paper something along the lines of how UV light touches the brain you know he puts out very clearly in that paper why UV and perhaps probably even it was uvc, even stronger photons that was a major, major player in the beginnings of life, in the beginnings of chemical complexity at least and you know we see that everyone's familiar with vitamin d you need a really high energy photon to provide that energy to the chemicals in the skin. So uh, it's. And you know the fact that Gerwitch found in 1923 that this mitogenic radiation, these biophotons, I guess perhaps even predominate in the ultraviolet range, clearly says that the ultraviolet is very important, or the energy of those photons is very important for cellular and subcellular communications.
Speaker 2:I think it's fairly well understood now that mitochondrial communication is happening, at least in part, in the UV range. Nature doesn't do things, you know, by accident. You know clearly UV, that range is important for some specific reason and it probably has something to do with the fact that water absorbs quite strongly in the uv and in the the infrared. So we don't really understand the uv interactions with water. But you know, if you look at a spectrometer reading of um, the absorption spectrum of water, there's quite large peaks at around these, like 280, 270, which is quite strong uh photons. So uv is interacting not only with chemicals but also with water, which is what life is built on as well yeah, I'm glad you brought up um dr slominski and we can definitely talk about his, his work.
Speaker 1:He was a well, he is a us uh, they're called dermatopathologists, uh, over there, so I guess a dermatologist that is also uh anatomically uh trained in anatomic pathology, so diagnosing and then then actually looking at skin biopsies to potentially diagnose skin malignancies.
Speaker 1:But his work and that paper that you referenced, it's almost heresy within centralized dermatology because it's really illustrating how important ultraviolet light is in a physiological way and maybe my biggest takeaway from that paper was that the skin is actually acting like an accessory pituitary gland pretty much it's almost acting like a central endocrine organ. In and of itself it's able to secrete a whole bunch of these peptide hormones that again, normally the hypothalamus or the pituitary gland is secreting, but on exposure to ultraviolet light it can make these pro-encaphalin compounds, obviously the melanocortin and POMC compounds and all these other products that are needed for proper endocrine function, and that is completely even separate from the circ circadian signaling role and it's obviously separate from the infrared um light interactions yeah, the, the skin is a is a compounding pharmacy and it takes its orders from the spectrum that you give it.
Speaker 2:Um, I think that's. You know. We have to start thinking of of the skin the same way that we think of the brain. The skin is just an extension of the brain and it takes its orders from what it's exposed to and unfortunately for most people, what it's exposed to is absolute garbage. So it has no idea how to continue regulating in a way that's beneficial for the body. But yeah, speaking andre was crazy because I think he realized quite early that he had to be careful with the way that he was talking about ultraviolet light. So he sort of created his own niche you know, this dermatopathology, um, this a neuro endocrine, uh sort of connection to make it sound legitimate. And he sounded very aware that that's what he had to do if he wanted to pursue effects of light. He had to sort of create this new role in order to legitimize what he wanted to investigate. He sounded very, very aware, which was really interesting to me.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's almost like disclosing or cloaking the true narrative in a way that just makes it palatable to centralized scientific funding models and I really enjoyed your episode with him because it was very insightful for that reason and the way he was able to get funding, I believe through the NIH specifically, I guess, emphasizing certain aspects of the research and using certain framings.
Speaker 1:But it does make sense.
Speaker 1:This role of the skin in the context of embryology and the common neuroectodermal origin of both the skin and the brain and I think that's a point that Jack Cruz will continue to emphasize until he's pink in the face, which is the light that you're showing your skin has dramatic importance for health through its connection to the brain and, even more that this evolutionary idea that the loss of hair enabled, you know, greater essential harvesting of light to therefore enable the growth of our, of our two frontal lobes, which is obviously larger than any any other, any other primate.
Speaker 1:And to emphasize the point as it relates to ultraviolet light and energy generation, I think the key point here is melanin. Melanin is probably the key way how the human body is deriving ultraviolet light and therefore using it, and maybe in medical school we get taught that melanin absorbs and dissipates ultraviolet energy as heat, and absolutely it does. But I think maybe the next interesting thing and the step that isn't taken or isn't explained is that what is the body doing, perhaps on a quantum biological level, with that heat energy that's dispersed from the absorption of ultraviolet light in melanin pigments?
Speaker 2:Well, it's really interesting. You bring up this idea of dissipation as heat. One thing Mei-Wan Ho really pushes home is this idea that the energy in complex systems is coherent. And what she means by that is when you think of heat dissipation, you think of it going off equally in all directions, and she says that's not coherent, that's incoherent, that's just sort of equilibrium sort of stuff.
Speaker 2:What we think of coherent is when we're dissipating energy, it's all being directed in one specific way. So it's not just dissipating energy, it's all being directed in one specific way. So it's not just dissipating outward, you know, it's not just radiating outward equally in all directions. It's able to take that energy and dissipate it specifically in one way. And I think that's probably what's happening when we think about energy from the sun being used in some way, is that it's being captured, and we don't know. Melanin's probably one way. There's probably a thousand other ways. Energy is being captured from the sun but instead of then just dissipating randomly, it's being directed in some way. It's being sort of funneled specifically throughout the body in order to do what needs to be done. And I think this idea of coherence really makes sense of this idea. You know this energy capture, storage and then dissipation. This is all happening in a very coherent manner and it's happening in sort of a nested manner where you know one cycle will capture energy and within that cycle there's 10 other cycles and it just keeps passing it through these cycles and you think when you have a cycle that keeps repeating, it's a zero entropy cycle because you're not losing anything, there's no waste, it's all the energy stays within this cycle and the sub-cycles within, and I think that's what's happening. You know we're getting all of this energy and the sub-cycles within, and I think that's what's happening. We're getting all of this energy from the sun and it's being very, very carefully and coherently captured, stored and then dissipated in a way that is most effective for the body.
Speaker 2:And there's probably countless molecules. Melanin's probably one of them, and you know Lord knows how many different types of melanins there are. My melanin's probably different to yours. You know melanin evolved many, many different times. I think at least three to five. I think is where we're at at the moment the amount of different times it evolved, which is why you know African people's skin is a different color than you know the people in Southeast Asia. They have a different type, a different mix of different melanins and you know, I don't even think we've been going to scratch the surface onto how these different melanins are reacting. But you know, probably whatever is happening it's all coherent, it's all being able to be very well controlled and directed in the body, whatever that energy is doing.
Speaker 1:That makes sense to me and when you said that it evoked an image of an internal combustion engine. And an internal combustion engine takes the combustion of oxygen and a hydrocarbon fuel in the form of diesel or gasoline and it combusts it and channels that energy through pistons into a prop shaft, propeller shaft that then turns the wheels of a car or the wheel of a motorbike or a chainsaw. So what you describe seems to me a full stack of an ability to capture light energy, turn it into a hydrocarbon fuel, burn it into an engine and turn a piston and repeat the cycle. That makes sense. That makes complete sense to me on a high level.
Speaker 1:With respect to the melanin and the mechanism of how it's actually potentially one of the mechanisms that's working, I think we're left with a somewhat unsatisfying hypothesis of Arturo Herrera, the Mexican researcher whose a lot of his work has been around this idea of human photosynthesis and the ability of melanin to charge separate water, and this seems to be a legitimate hypothesis. However, in terms of the amount of evidence that we have to back that up, right now I would say it's I don't know, maybe pitiful, is too intense, but it's incredibly small and so it feels like in this area of quantum biology. We're a little bit out on a limb in terms of a small number of people making pretty large claims about how this interaction between melanin and charge separation of water is occurring, but we don't have as much to go off. It makes sense as a mechanism, but I I'd really like to see more research.
Speaker 2:I I couldn't agree more. I think we're sort of in in this, in this space. We're sort of waiting for someone to make, make some discovery that allows us to safely say that we're making energy from something other than food. I think that's sort of what you know intuitively. I think we know that, and it's definitely connected to the sun. How that's happening, we just don't know at the moment. But I mean, for me it's sort of a non-issue, because I just take for granted that it is happening. And you know, we can charge separate water. I think that's primarily what ATP is. This is what Gilbert Ling hypothesized.
Speaker 2:Atp wasn't the purveyor of a high-energy phosphate, it was something that was the cardinal adsorbent of water in the cell, and when it adsorbed water it was generating these positive and negative areas. That was acting like a battery, and this is sort of where Pollock's work comes in. I think water's doing a hell of a lot more than that. But I'm not sure. I'm not sure where the melanin story comes in. And I think, arturo, the language barrier for him is actually quite frustrating for us English speakers, because perhaps he does have the mechanistic evidence, but you know, we just don't have access to it, or it's in Spanish and we don't have any idea about it. It would be interesting for someone who speaks Spanish to do like a proper interview with him and then tell us all about it. It would be interesting for someone who speaks Spanish to do a proper interview with him and then tell us all about it.
Speaker 2:But yeah, I think I asked Gerald Pollack about it because I think he knows Arturo and he said, yeah, sometimes people's ideas get too far ahead of them, and I think that was his way of nicely saying. I think he's got hypotheses that you know are probably too far out there, given the evidence so far. But you know, it's good to have people like that who are really putting interesting ideas out there, because hopefully someone sees that you know, maybe a young PhD and wants to test it. And then you know, maybe a young PhD and wants to test it. And then you know, even if that's not true, at least we're one step closer to figuring out you know, the right direction to be looking in.
Speaker 2:It wouldn't surprise me if melanin's doing something like that, though, but you know the question arises. You know, how are different skin types taking advantage of this? Uh, actually, so many questions arise from that, but yeah, um, we're all looking for that holy grail of you. Know what's making energy other than food?
Speaker 1:absolutely.
Speaker 1:And I want to move on to visible light and how that's potentially interacting with with, with sunlight, to give us energy.
Speaker 1:But the final point I want to make about uh, melanin and and it alludes to the point of there being at least five different types there are some form of I believe they're fungi that were discovered growing in Chernobyl that are essentially using melanin to harvest radioactive, really really high energy photons to power themselves.
Speaker 1:And another point of information is the synthetic use of melanins in semiconductor and battery-type and solar-type applications. And then when you throw in Scott Zimmerman's work anatomically, his anatomical optic analysis, suggesting that the epidermal-dermal junction, the dimpling of that that is optically optimized to essentially concentrate light photons in the same way as a solar panel, then it really gives more circumstantial evidence to support the role of melanin as an energy harvesting tool. But look the question about to which degree different skin types and ancestries can harvest light energy. It's very, very interesting because obviously a Northern European person seasonally would have an absence of UV light in their environment and they don't have the amount of eumelanin that a Sudanese or an Australian Aboriginal person would have. So perhaps that is more evidence to suggest that that person needs to consume more high-energy, animal fat-rich food during those low-light times to kind of make up, perhaps, for the light energy that they're unable to harvest.
Speaker 2:It's an interesting thought, and this was something that Bob also spoke to me about, because he sort of nonchalantly brought up that UVB was available all year round, no matter where you are on the globe. And I was like, hang on, everyone's told, you know, at certain times, at certain places, uvb, the sun, the angle of the sun is too low to allow the passage of UVB. And he said well, yeah, that's true if you're looking at direct radiance, but the scatter from the sky, you're always getting UVB. And he was just speaking. He was speaking about this as if everyone knew. And I was like, are you serious? And he said, yeah, even if you get right to the pole, you actually get more UVB relative to visible light because of some sort of scattering phenomenon. And he sent me all these graphs of his models about ultraviolet B light. You know, in the vitamin D window and you know, even at you know, five degrees above the equator, even at five degrees elevation sunlight which is like nothing the sun's just come up You're getting all this UVB coming not directly from the sun, but from the scatter down from the sky.
Speaker 2:He calls it skylight. You're getting UVB from skylight. And he was like oh yeah, you can definitely make UVB during the winter, no matter where you are. He said the reason people don't is because they're wearing clothes. And I thought, well, I mean more questions came to my mind than anything else and I've still been thinking this through to my mind than anything else and I've still been thinking this through. But you know, it is an interesting thought that the UVB is still there, it's just not coming directly. And you know I've been asking him so many questions about this because if that is true and it seems his models do, clearly show that UVB from skylight is there, even at one degree above, at one degree elevation, you know, makes things very interesting.
Speaker 2:With regard, to, you know, thinking about seasonal differences in vitamin D and whether the amount that's coming from the skylight is clinically relevant. I think that was my biggest question. Yeah, it might be there, but you know how much is it sufficient? And obviously, people living, you know, really far from the equator, you know, of course they're going to be in clothes all the time, they're not going to be out sunbathing. So you know it raises a lot of questions, but you know UV is still acting through the eye, so you're still getting high-energy photons into the eye from the sky and when you're in those regions of the world you've got snow everywhere, which is a great reflector.
Speaker 2:So I mean, lots of questions come up about this and the availability of ultraviolet B light even during winter, even very far from the equator. But to get onto visible light, I think one of the most interesting things with regard to visible light is that it can have quite profound psychological effects. And this is the idea of syntonics using monochromatic light to elicit specific physiological responses. And I don't know if you've ever done any kinesthesiology with Jalal, but he did some with me and it's and you know I knew about all this muscle testing before he did it. So I was like sort of going into it, going oh it's not going to work because I'm so aware of the effect already. But you know he'd ask you to put your arm out and he'd put pressure on it and then if you say a lie, you just you know you lose all tension in your body. You know the body can't lie, basically, and he'll put like the red filter or the green filter or the blue filter over your eyes and it completely changes your muscle tension. So it's always been fascinating to me how much monochromatic light has an impact over the body, which is why I've been, I guess, maybe a bit more critical on blue blockers than most in the space, because I do think that there are people out there who are going to have perhaps negative physiological responses to monochromatic light coming through the eye. Some will probably have really beneficial effects, but I think it's important to be aware that visible light is because it's the light that we see that we interact with. You know consciously that it has quite strong psychological effects. But again, you know even the violets and the blues, they're very high energy photons. They're capable of, you know, we know they're capable of generating lots of reactive oxygen species. They're capable of generating lots of reactive oxygen species. We know that isolated cyan light will absolutely kill mitochondria if they're irradiated with that. There's these great nanolive videos of mitochondria. You know a single mitochondrion being irradiated with cyan light and just over the space of a few minutes it just dies.
Speaker 2:So we know that light in the visible spectrum is very profound. We know Glenn Jeffrey and Mike Powner's paper from last year. They used 660 nanometers visible red light to completely abate a blood sugar, a glucose spike. So across the whole spectrum in the visible range there's probably so many things going on that we're not aware of. I mean, I think Sarah Pugh brought up this idea that no one's looking at orange light or yellow light, you know. But obviously all of them are going to be having, you know, substantial effects and we shouldn't favor red or blue or ultraviolet, they're all going to be irrelevant. Anything, anything that's present within sunlight, if you use it in isolation, is going to probably exert profound effects because you start using light like a drug and that you, I'm sure you, can use it in a positive way. But you know there are likely going to be some other effects that we can't predict when we're using isolated visible light yeah, and look I I'm.
Speaker 1:It's an open question. I'd like to learn more myself about how potentially blue, green, um, you know, yellow, orange light are contributing to energy derivation. I know well, I mean, we have an have an idea about blue triggering melanopsin. From a circadian signaling point of view, we know that green light, green wavelengths 540, 560 nanometers, has a potent anti-migraine effect. And that was work that was done, looking at the different wavelengths and to the degree to which they provoked photophobia in migraine sufferers. And the researchers were surprised to note that green light was actually attenuating rather than provoking migraine symptoms.
Speaker 1:And then obviously, we know a lot about red light through the photobiomodulation field Tina Carew, mike Hamblin and now Glenn Jeffrey and there's obviously absorption by cytochrome C oxidase in the mitochondria, that absorbing red light. But there's also a pretty big absorption band for hemoglobin with red light, hemoglobin um in with with red light, and maybe that's probably, um you know, another pretty unique way that that the body is deriving uh energy from visible light is perhaps through it, through through the effect on on hemoglobin and and maybe the anatomical shape of the red blood cell. I know, I know dr cruz has called blood uh make. What is it called a magnetohydrodynamic fluid with an antenna tuned to sunlight. So it's a variation on what Bob said, but to me that makes sense that perhaps red light itself is a key aspect of helping those red blood cells offload their oxygen cargo and delivering that oxygen to the mitochondria.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I mean, if you're going to pick a target, if you're going to evolve something that's going to interact with light, blood's a pretty good place to start because it's close to the surface, so you have lots of access. It's mobile, so you can have these abscopic effects where you'll radiate one part of the body and everything else on the other side has gets the same effect. Um, and you know, it seems like quite a logical um sort of place to have, uh, quite strong, uh light light life effects is is in in the blood. Um, and you know blood's mostly water as well, which I think you know. From my perspective, water still is the primary chromophore of the body. It seems, you know, if you look at the absorption spectrum in the infrared, water absorbs extremely strongly and water's surrounding everything. But yeah, porphyrins are notoriously good absorbers in the red and of course that has to be having some effect.
Speaker 2:I'm not sure if anyone's looked at the hemodynamics of blood. You know pre and post, you know exposure to sunlight, but you know, even without the ultraviolet effects of nitric oxide, I'm sure there would be a sort of thinning effect. And this has been spoken about quite a lot by Stephanie Seneff based on Pollock's work is that the infrared light is basically like a lubricant. It's allowing the blood to not be like tomato sauce and rather be like a very thin fluid that's capable of flowing very easily. But yeah, the longer wavelengths, I think, are doing so so much, particularly when water is interacting with the infrared.
Speaker 2:I just wish we knew more about what's actually happening when infrared light is irradiating the water in the body, because we know that it's having a profound effect on the structure. And if Pollock is right and that there is a charge separation event when particularly infrared is interacting with water, then that may very well be a way in which we generate electrons. We generate this charge separation, and it seems quite logical to me. I'm not sure if the specific details have been worked out. I'm sure if you asked Gerald he'd say they definitely have not, but it seems like a pretty good place to start thinking about where energy is coming from. If you do in fact believe that ATP is not the source and I think it's only a matter of time before that, you know, sacred cow goes down, but you know, then we're left with where is the energy coming from?
Speaker 1:like we were talking about before, I think infrared light and water probably is a good candidate to start yeah, and and that would really again illustrate the the negative health effects of, of putting someone indoors and and depriving them of this massive source of solar energy. If it does turn out that infrared light, water interactions are playing as big a role in mitochondrial physiology and energy harvesting as we think To tie a bow on the thought of blood and light interactions, it circumstantially also makes sense that blood and red blood cells are designed to be irradiated because of full-spectrum sunlight having such a potent vasodilating effect. I mean, why else would the body react with vasodilatation in response to UVA, uvb and visible blue light if it didn't want that sunlight to essentially be bathing and irradiating the blood volume? So that again makes so much sense, makes a lot so much sense.
Speaker 1:And uh, when you tie in the role of clotting and you know workhouse triad um in in terms of of uh, that like vascular pathology and blood clotting, then then that plugs really elegantly into a, into a quantum and biophysical, quantum biology and biophysical model of of ischemic heart disease and cardiovascular disease, which is not something that anyone really in the cardiology world is talking about. I think that they're well and truly stuck in a lipidology-focused model and I don't think anyone's making any progress with respect to truly reversing the incidence of new cardiovascular disease. But we've arrived at infrared light and this is the one that you and I, I think, have really spent a lot of time exploring. And you interviewed Bob Osborne and Scott Zimmerman very early on and I was grateful to get some introductions from you and talk to them on my podcast. But these are two gentlemen who are doing such pivotal work to understand this massive part of health that I think I have a hunch that in the next maybe one to five years will become a much more discussed and talked about story.
Speaker 2:I hope so, and I don't know if you've spoken to Scott recently, but he's got his hands on they're basically continuous glucose monitors but they measure melatonin and cortisol in real time so you can just track them and it's absolutely fascinating what he's seeing, because melatonin and cortisol go up and down like crazy depending on what you're doing during the day and of course when you go out in full spectrum sunlight they go up together and you know when you come out you know they go down together and, depending on all the stresses that you're exposed to, you get wildly different reactions in these you know, sort of stress chemicals, I guess you could say, and I think just little things like that will start to get people interested in the effects of light and start to think actually you know, if melanin and cortisol are responding that drastically just by walking outside man light must be having some pretty strong effects throughout the body.
Speaker 2:You know, what else could we be looking at? What else does sunlight start to change? So I think the fact that they don't have biology backgrounds has been their biggest help, because they've been able to ask questions and investigate in a way that biologists don't, and I think that is why they seem to be pushing this field forward so much, even though they don't have a biology background. I think that's their biggest strength, to be honest, and the way they speak about biology. It's way better than any education that I've had in biology courses. They actually understand what life is, and Bob was talking to me about rereading Schrodinger's book.
Speaker 2:In biology courses they actually understand what life is. You know and Bob was talking to me about, you know, re-reading Schrodinger's book what Is Life? You know over and over and over again, because you know he thinks he got it right. You know back in what was written in the 40s or 30s or something. But yeah, I think they're really changing, or they are changing the way that we're talking about this in a really really powerful way, and hopefully more people start to get infatuated with this idea that just going outside as much as possible is really the best thing that you could possibly do for your health.
Speaker 1:Absolutely. Have you read Nassim Taleb? No, I haven't. He's an interesting author but in one of his books he has a section on scientific breakthrough and this idea of the tenured or kind of the English gentleman who doesn't have any mundane distractions like having to earn money or anything that is demanding on his time.
Speaker 1:So he's basically got an incredibly free, creative and intellectual mind and he references a couple of interesting people I mean I think Newton himself, maybe it was Francis Bacon and a couple of other reverends or pastors who were obviously employed by the church. They were essentially able to do all kinds of fascinating multidisciplinary lateral thinking, unshackled and tethered by different conventional or intellectual orthodoxy, and were able to make all these incredible breakthroughs. And when we're talking about Scott and Bob, which we do so fondly, that image is conjured in my mind. And really so much of scientific progress, I think, is unlearning the incorrect paradigm that perhaps people were brought up in and that's perhaps why some of these engineers and other thinkers outsiders, intellectual outsiders are able to make so much progress is because they have got less to unlearn Exactly.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I couldn't agree more.
Speaker 1:Let's wrap. I want to get your thoughts about sunlight and cancer, because I think it does tie into this energy story and, from a mainstream point of view, we're still anchored in a genetic somatic mutation model of cancer. We've got people like Professor Thomas Seyfried, who's talking about cancer as a mitochondrial metabolic disorder and really advocating for low-carb, ketogenic type diets, which is definitely, I think, a massive step in the right direction type diets, which is definitely, I think, a massive step in the right direction. But how do you conceive about cancer in the context of mitochondria and maybe this conversation that we've been having?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think my thoughts on cancer have mostly been based around Becker's old work and probably the work by Mike Levin that's being done at Tufts that cancer is basically a disease of a loss of multicellular cooperation and communication. A loss of multicellular cooperation and communication. And this is basically the idea that if the communications whether that's through light, whether that's through fields I think it's probably both when a cell that's one small part of a massive multicellular organism suddenly loses communication with everything around it, it reverts back to this amoeba-like state, this single-celled state, where it's focused on two principal things moving around and reproducing, just as a unicellular organism would. And I think thinking about that from a philosophical point of view actually gives us more of an insight into what cancer really is. It's not sort of the body making a mistake. It's a cell doing exactly what it thinks it should be doing, given what it's the environment that it thinks it's in, given the environment that it thinks it's in. And the reason I think this is because there has been quite a bit of work coming out of Levin's lab that shows that if you, for instance, give I think it's Tadpoles, they use the oncogenic. You know the KRAS mutation, which is notorious for being one of the best mutations to give to have tumor growth from dropping the voltage, the millivolt in the cells, from dropping by adding, you know, specific ion channels, even though they have the mutation, there's no tumor growth, there's no malignant growth, and that's something that is well known, that you know. In cancer cells the charge on the membrane drops and I think this is related to, you know, loss in gap junctions. That's one thing that oncogenic mutations actually do is they cause a loss in cell-cell communication by basically breaking down gap junctions. So the KRAS, like these oncogenic mutations, might actually be oncogenic just by virtue of the fact that they're breaking down communications. It's not because they're causing aberrant proteins to be made or anything like that, it's just because they break down the communications.
Speaker 2:Thinking about cancer at the moment, but another one was put forward to me. I spoke to Alistair Nunn last week and he said to me oh, there's this idea that you know, when you have conglomerates of single-celled organisms sort of cooperating, kind of like an ant colony, you have this sort of superorganism. This is before multicellular organisms. If all the cells sort of conglomerate together and then the environment shifts in a way that's bad for the colony, everything dies. But if you have one cell that goes, you know I'm going to go my own way, I'm going to get out of here, I'm going to go in my own niche. If an environmental shift comes along and wipes out the colony, that one that got away might actually survive.
Speaker 2:And he said it might actually be just an unfortunate coincidence of evolution that cancer is sort of a runaway cell trying to find a new niche and it might just be sort of baked into evolution to a certain degree. I'm not sure I buy that wholesale for sure. But it's an interesting point to think that multicellular organisms all derived from unicellular organisms that were cooperating and perhaps it is a bit of a hangover from unicellular times that it's maybe not the most advantageous thing for all the cells to stick together all the time. Maybe it was beneficial in some circumstances for some cells to find their own niche and sort of make their own way. Interesting idea. I have no idea if there's any validity to that whatsoever but it's interesting to think about. But at the end of the day I really think cancer is a breakdown in communication and I think it can be explained by aberrant fields and probably aberrant well, not probably aberrant metabolism uh, definitely I think the fields are probably just a result of metabolism in general.
Speaker 2:So when you know when they both break simultaneously you get sort of growth. That's not characteristic of cooperation.
Speaker 1:That makes sense to me. And if we consider that the mitochondria is the site of biophoton release that is, coordinating cell-cell communication, and then if mitochondria start failing, start browning out because of the environment that you choose to put yourself in whether that's blue light, toxic, deprived of infrared, rich in all kinds of oxidatively stressful foods and perhaps lack of hormetic stresses like exercise and cold, and perhaps lack of hormetic stresses like exercise and cold Then the energy production of the mitochondrion drops, the negative charge of the cell drops, the inter-cell communication becomes, the fidelity of that signal is impaired and then that makes complete sense that the cell might respond with immortality or uncontrolled cell replication. There's also a point that I'd emphasize that made me think of when you raised that, which is a talk that one of the Garland brothers made with respect to vitamin D and its effect on colorectal cancer and on a cellular level. It was noting that vitamin D was having some kind of promotion of adherence or to upregulate gap junctions between cells. So when the vitamin D level dropped, then the ability of that cell to maintain adherence to its neighbors was impaired and they were speculating that was one potential mechanism to account for the fact that vitamin D deficiency and colorectal cancer seemed to be so strikingly related, and obviously he wasn't abreast of the bifotilin story and what we've just talked about, but it's a, it's an elegant, another kind of piece of the.
Speaker 1:The story that I think is is is is interesting, interesting and relevant, and, and maybe maybe to tie that into again, something that Dr Jack Cruz has talked a lot about, which is how do you prevent cancer? Dr Jack Cruz has talked a lot about, which is how do you prevent cancer? Perhaps in this brave new oncogenic environment that involved a widespread intervention that was taken up almost ubiquitously, how do you prevent a potential oncogenic transformation in cells? Perhaps in a situation, and his answer is that you prevent the negative charge of the cell dropping by exposing to as much solar radiation as is practical to maintain the so-called solar redox and therefore hopefully prevent oncogenic transformation.
Speaker 2:I mean, that makes sense and and it probably also plays into why ketogenic style diets probably have quite a large therapeutic value, uh, in in these situations, I think principally because they're supplying so many electrons, um, you know, through through the high fat content and you know, when you couple that with the right environmental inputs, it wouldn't surprise me at all that that amount of energy supplied to the body coherently is probably going to be one of your best chances. I don't know, but probably one.
Speaker 2:I'm going to give you a much better chance at reestablishing communications and reestablishing the lost fields that are generated in those malignant growths.
Speaker 2:I mean, another thing that's just an interesting point that Pele Lingvist told me was that, you know, I was sort of I wasn't sure whether to believe him when he first told me, but I found the paper and, sure enough, people who use sunscreen in Sweden have 10 times the risk of malignant melanoma compared to people who don't use sunscreen.
Speaker 2:So and you know, he said it like it was nothing, but of course no one knows about this here and you can buy 50 plus sunscreen in every pharmacy here, even though you have fewer than 10 days a year with a high UV index. That's supposed to be coordinating the body. Even if it seems like a relatively small thing, blocking a small signal can lead to large effects. The unfortunate thing, or perhaps the fortunate thing, about non-linearity in the body is that small signals can have large effects and vice versa. So yeah, just an interesting point about preventing cancer is you want to receive the most unadulterated signal from your environment as you possibly can, because that's ultimately the one that your body's looking for to coordinate itself in the best possible way.
Speaker 1:Yeah, very interesting. And look, the skin cancer and sunlight story is maybe a topic for another podcast and I think maybe I'll quickly share my perspective and then, cameron, I'll get you to share yours. Some claims that sunlight is unrelated to or, you know, not lying on the causal pathway of skin cancers. I don't think that's helpful and I think we need more nuance in the discussion. I think that this ionizing radiation UVA, uvb is undoubtedly causing de-inhibitations in keratinocytes. I mean, you can read a couple of papers, you'll find that out. Uvb via direct photo products, uva via oxidative stress. The nuance is that if someone's in, if they're matched to their latitude, their skin type is matched to the area which they evolved and their ambient UV conditions, then I believe that that person has built in the DNA repair mechanisms, the antioxidant pathways to harness and repair that UV stress on the keratinocytes, the melanocytes, the other cell types that are exposed directly to UV radiation directly to UV radiation and providing all the other input signals, like the circadian signals, like the food input signals, are not highly processed and not rich in lipid peroxidation products and other HNE and the rest. If that all is the case, I think that people can safely get the exact amount of sunlight that is in their environment, based on that area they're involved in.
Speaker 1:What's gone wrong in today's day and age is that you've got Fitzpatrick One people living in Australia or Southern Africa who are extremely mismatched with regard to their epidermal melanin and their ambient conditions.
Speaker 1:But on top of that, they're also doing everything wrong from a circadian perspective.
Speaker 1:But on top of that, they're also doing everything wrong from a circadian perspective, they're not building up any form of hormetic buffer or protective factor. So these are the nuances that need to be made, and if you look at the Melanoma Institute of Australia with respect to their melanoma risk calculator, the key things that influence risk of developing melanoma is age, it's the state you live in, and then it's questions that ascertain your Fitzpatrick skin type. If you're red hair and you're a Fitzpatrick 1, then you're much, much, much orders of magnitude more likely to get a melanoma. And so there's a very small number of people that have to worry legitimately about melanoma with respect to chronic sun exposure, and they're people that really evolved in the situation that you describe in Cameron, which was a UV index of six for three days a year, as for everyone else the benefits of full-spectrum sunlight and titrated appropriately. For the reasons we've discussed with respect to mitochondrial metabolism and cell energy provision, seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of regular daily full-spectrum sun exposure in a sensible way.
Speaker 2:I couldn't have put it better myself and I think it's really interesting to look at the people who do even develop skin cancers, you know, even focusing on malignant melanoma, the one that's the most dangerous, even the people who get the malignant melanoma, they actually live longer than those who avoid the sun, for instance, and there's actually quite a real survival advantage for redheads here in Scandinavia they get more melanoma than people who don't have the genetics for red hair, but they still live longer. And I think that's what's really interesting is that avoiding melanoma may actually just put you at a high risk of heart disease or type 2 diabetes, which we know is the case. So it's kind of this sort of trade-off. But again, we're looking at the general population. We're looking at a population of people who are eating seed oils every day, who are, you know, staying up on their phone till midnight every day, who aren't getting enough sleep, who are doing, are doing things that we would probably never think of doing, and I think this is where epidemiology needs to be. You know, we need to step back and go.
Speaker 2:Okay, we're talking about a general population here. What about the person who's doing everything right, you know? What about the person that has, you know, a kill switch on the power to the house, so that when they go to bed you know they've got no electricity flowing through the house at all. You know what about the person that's eating? You know from their local organic farmer next door, every single day, you know. Do these rules apply? You know, can we apply the epidemiology to them? And I'm not sure that we can, because what we're talking about is such enormous differences in environmental exposure that perhaps the epidemiology is no longer relevant, or at least it's relevant only peripherally. So, yeah, it's an interesting thought, but yeah, the skin cancer topic itself is a whole series of podcasts, unfortunately.
Speaker 1:That is such a great point, cameron. And again I'll emphasize an anecdote that I had in sitting in with a dermatologist at a skin cancer clinic in Queensland, which is one of the world capitals of melanoma and there would be, and from speaking with him who's seen, thousands upon thousands of patients with melanoma, non-melanoma skin cancer. He said to me you can have two gentlemen who had the same Fitzzpatrick skin type. They have the same sun exposure habits, the hot their whole life, whether they were working in the field, working sun exposed, you know lifeguards etc. And those two gentlemen that there could be one that has never had a solar keratosis, a precancerous sct, never had any any form of suspicious pre-melanoma or melanoma-type lesion. And then you can have another guy who is coming in every six weeks getting BCCs cut out, sccs cut out, melanomas cut out.
Speaker 1:So there's clearly a massive space for environmental and lifestyle and behavior to influence our risk of skin cancer. And maybe even in that guy who is the frequent flyer of the dermatologist, he's still probably living longer because he's avoided the stroke and the heart attack that's killed the sun avoider. But all that to say is that lifestyle is key. Sun avoider. But um, all that's, all that to say is that that lifestyle is key. And, um, maybe I'll, I'll. We can finish with with a quote that you actually said on our first podcast, which is avoiding the sun to prevent melanoma is like taking up smoking to prevent parkinson's disease. Yeah, so I think, yeah, I, I, I love that and I think that's really apt yeah, yeah, I think it's very simple.
Speaker 2:I'm not sure it's mine, I'm almost certain I stole it from someone, but yeah, the sentiment rings true, particularly today. So the story is turning around, I think. I think people are starting to understand how important sunlight is and weighing up the costs and the risks.
Speaker 1:Amazing, Well Cameron, any parting thoughts or handoff you want to give to the listeners.
Speaker 2:You know it's interesting. I'm sitting here, there's snow outside, it's freezing and I'm looking at you going. I wish I was there right now. I'm missing Australia so much. I've seen my family go to the beach and I'm just like. It's freezing here and the days are so slowly getting longer. It's crazy, but I'm hanging in there. But, yeah, get out in the sun for me if you're listening to this, because, uh, it's going to be a while before I can great.
Speaker 1:Well, uh, yeah, sending you um, send you getting as much sun, vicariously, I hope we deliver some to you but, uh, thanks for coming on.
Speaker 1:And, yeah, check out cameron's podcast ricky for nutrition. Check out his recent talk at regenerate albury that is now up on youtube. That's an absolute powerhouse of a talk and actually covers a lot of the backstory of kind of what we talked about today. And if you're interested in learning more about sunlight and cancer, I'm actually going to be synthesizing my thoughts and delivering them in person in Regenerate Melbourne and Sydney on March 23rd and 22nd 2025, in about a month. So, thank you, cameron, for fertilizing the ground in my brain for this topic. But, yeah, it's always a pleasure and enjoy, enjoy Sweden.
Speaker 2:Thank you so much, man. I really appreciate you having me on Talk soon. Cheers.
