|
Sunlight As Medicine
by Richard Hobday
In the right hands sunlight is a medicine. Throughout history it has been
used to prevent and cure a wide range of diseases, and a few doctors still use
its therapeutic properties to good effect. However, at the present time it is
widely held amongst certain sections of the medical profession and the
population at large that the damaging effects of sunlight on the skin far
outweigh any benefits. Public health campaigns reinforce this message in an
attempt to curb the annual increase in skin cancers. Any illusions about tanned
skin being a sign of health or providing more than minimal protection to further
exposure to the sun's rays seem to have been dispelled.
Sunlight may cause skin cancer, but there is also evidence that it could
prevent a number of very common and often fatal diseases: breast cancer; colon
cancer; prostate cancer; ovarian cancer; heart disease; multiple sclerosis; and
osteoporosis. When combined, the number of people who die from these conditions
is far greater than the number of deaths from skin cancer; which is why the
current bias against sunlight needs, in my opinion, to be redressed.
But before going any further, let me explain how I came to write The
Healing Sun. Usually books of this kind are written by doctors of
medicine, or medical journalists, and not doctors of engineering. However, my
background is a little unusual in that for many years, while I was designing or
evaluating what could broadly be called solar energy technologies of one form of
another -- solar collectors; equipment for use in spacecraft; and
energy-efficient buildings -- I was also studying complementary medicine.
Working alongside architects on one particular project I became aware of a
'lost' tradition of designing sunlit buildings to prevent disease, rather than
to save energy, and I became interested in the healing powers of sunlight.
I began to study the history of sunlight therapy and found that the
physicians who practiced this ancient healing art, and the architects and
engineers who supported them in their work, used sunlight very differently from
the way many of us do today. In comparing this with some of the latest findings
from medical research on sunlight and health I have, as you will see, come to
some rather controversial conclusions.
The sun transmits energy in the form of electromagnetic waves: radio waves;
microwaves; infrared radiation; visible light; ultraviolet radiation; and
x-rays. Only a small amount of the sun's energy reaches us, as most of it is
filtered out by the earth's atmosphere, so solar radiation at ground level is
composed of visible light, and ultraviolet and infrared waves. Until the latter
part of the 19th century it was thought that the 'heat' of the sun -- what we
now know to be the infrared rays -- caused sunburn. Then scientists discovered
that it is the ultraviolet component of sunlight which causes the skin to tan,
and they began to use ultraviolet radiation on skin diseases. They then found
that they could get better results with sunlight itself.
Sunlight therapy has a habit of being discovered and then falling from favor,
and when this happens it disappears almost without trace, sometimes for hundreds
of years. It was very popular at the beginning of the 20th century, but has
since seen a dramatic reversal in its fortunes with the result that a great deal
of knowledge about the healing powers of sunlight has been ignored or forgotten.
Did you know, for example, that sunlight kills bacteria and is quite capable
of doing so even when it has passed through window glass? Also, were you aware
that sunlit hospital wards have less bacteria in them than dark wards, and that
patients recover faster in wards which admit the sun? As infections actually
caught in hospital are now the fourth most common cause of death after heart
disease, cancer and strokes, it is worth bearing in mind.
The human race evolved under the sun, and the sun's healing powers have been
worshipped for thousands of years. In fact, your forebears were probably better
informed about the sun's healing properties than you are: people hold very
different views on sunbathing depending on when they were alive and where they
happen to live. Take, for example, a typical well-educated resident of Essen or
any industrial city in Germany in the 1920s. Let us say he had served in the
German army during the Great War, was wounded, and returned home having
recovered from his injuries. Someone in these circumstances would have held
sunlight in much higher regard than many of us do today. He would probably been
aware of the scientific discoveries that had been made about light in the years
immediately before the war: in 1903 the Nobel Prize for medicine was awarded to
the Danish physician, Niels Finsen, in recognition of his success in treating
tuberculosis of the skin with ultraviolet radiation.
Then again, during the war, military surgeons may have used sunlight to
disinfect and heal his wounds at a sunlight therapy clinic in the Black Forest,
or a similar institution in the Swiss Alps. Had he contracted tuberculosis on
his return to Germany, sunlight therapy, or heliotherapy as it became known,
might have been used to aid his recovery. The physicians who supervised the
treatment of his wounds or tuberculosis would have paid very close attention to
the way he responded to sunlight and, in particular, how well his skin tanned.
In those days, the deeper the tan, the better the cure.
Sunbathing for health in this way required the services of skilled physicians
who knew precisely the conditions most favorable for their patients: the best
time of day to expose them to the sun; the best time of year; the correct
temperature for sunbathing; what foods to give; how much exercise to allow in
each case; which type of cloud cover would let enough of the sun's rays through
to cause burning and so on. Then, as now, the overriding concern was to prevent
burning; but it was the actual process of tanning which dictated the progress of
the treatment and whether or not it was successful.
During the 1930s sunbathing was encouraged as a public health measure.
Diseases such as tuberculosis and rickets were common in the industrial cities
of Europe and North America at this time and it became accepted practice to
expose anyone considered susceptible to either of them to sunlight. So the sun
was used to prevent disease as well as cure it. Also, architects were
introducing sunlight into buildings to prevent the spread of infection because,
as we have already seen, it kills bacteria. They designed hospitals and clinics
for sunlight therapy and even included special window glass so that patients
could tan indoors during bad weather -- ordinary window glass prevents tanning
because it acts as a barrier to ultraviolet radiation.
In marked contrast to our German friend of the 1920s, someone living in
Britain today would have a very different impression of sunlight and its effects
on the human body. The received wisdom is that there is no such thing as a safe
or healthy tan, and that a tan is a sign of damaged skin trying to protect
itself from further injury. Children and adults are advised to protect
themselves from the sun; particularly during periods of sunny weather during the
spring and early summer. They are to avoid the sun between the hours of 11 am
and 3 pm and protect themselves with T-shirts, hats and sunscreens. As you can
see, there has been a complete reversal in thinking on the subject.
Reasons for the current antipathy towards the sun are not hard to find. After
the Second World War, improvements in housing and nutrition led to a marked
decrease in the incidence of the very diseases which sunlight had been used to
treat. When antibacterial drugs such as penicillin and streptomycin became
widely available in the 1950s medical practice changed out of all recognition.
These new drugs offered the prospect of rapid cures for a wide range of
infections, and so the hygienic and medicinal properties of sunlight were no
longer considered to be as important as they had been. Sunlight therapy became
unfashionable, and was soon relegated to the position of historical curiosity.
More recently there has been a great deal of emphasis on the harmful effects
of sunlight. There is now a 'hole' in the ozone layer to worry about, as well as
a year-on-year increase in the incidence of skin cancer. Sunlight is undoubtedly
a powerful accelerator of skin aging, and can trigger cancer in susceptible
individuals but, paradoxically, it is essential to our health. The human body
needs sunlight to manufacture vitamin D by synthesizing it in the skin.
The optimal level of vitamin D for health is not known, and so the amount of
sunlight exposure needed to perform this vital function is still very much open
to question. What this means is that warnings about sunlight being essentially
harmful need to be treated with caution. Sunlight may cause skin cancer but,
there is evidence that the sunlight could be crucial in preventing a number of
diseases that are associated with low levels of vitamin D. Also, relatively
little importance has been attached to the influence of nutrition in the genesis
of skin cancer. Yet the limited amount of research carried out on the subject
shows that what you eat determines how your skin responds to sunlight. The
proportion of fat in your diet, together with the vitamin and mineral content of
your food, could decide how likely you are to sustain skin damage in the sun.
The medical literature on sunbathing is contradictory: one field of
investigation highlights the benefits while another stresses the dangers. One of
the more unfortunate developments in modern medicine is a trend towards
specialization. In these circumstances it is difficult not to be unduly
influenced by the views of experts in one field or another and miss the wider
picture. It becomes much more difficult to see the wood for the trees or,
rather, the sunlight through the trees.
Indeed, to fully appreciate the beneficial effects of sunlight it is
sometimes advantageous to put aside conventional medical thinking altogether and
look to other traditions of healing. Sunlight, when used as a medicine, does not
lend itself to the western reductionist method of analysis: trying to fathom its
therapeutic effects at a molecular level, to the exclusion of all else, may not
be the best way to unlock its secrets.
When sunlight has been valued as a medicine, architects have often produced
buildings which admitted the sun's rays. But when sunlight is out of favor with
doctors, as is the case at present, there is little incentive for architects to
make provision for it in their buildings. There has been a tendency for
therapeutic properties of sunlight to be held in much higher regard during
periods when prevention was considered to be as important as cure. In these
circumstances the demarcation between physician and architect was often much
less marked than is the case today. In the past, architects were encouraged to
have some knowledge of medicine.
During the last thirty years the hygienic and medicinal properties of
sunlight have had little influence on the building professions. Where solar
architecture has been adopted it has been for the purposes of energy
conservation rather than health; even though it has long been recognized that
getting sunlight into buildings has a favorable impact on the well-being of
occupants.
Sunlight penetration into buildings is now regarded as 'beneficial' or
'desirable' but this aspect of design still receives a relatively low priority.
Indeed, the benefits of getting sunlight into buildings, other than
psychological, would not be obvious to anyone reading the current literature on
building design. As we now spend so much of our time indoors, I believe the
advantages of living or working in a sunlit space need to be more widely studied
and appreciated than is the case at present.
Sunlight therapy was a medicine of the pre-antibiotic era, when infectious
diseases were commonplace and the only defense against them was a strong immune
system. Since then, for about fifty years, tuberculosis, pneumonia, septicemia
and a host of other potentially fatal illnesses have been kept under control by
antibiotics. Unfortunately an increasing number of bacteria are becoming
resistant to drugs and there are signs that the development of new antibiotics
is falling behind the ability of organisms to adapt and acquire resistance. If
matters do not improve, then therapies which increase our natural resistance to
disease may receive rather more attention than they have in recent years. The
emergence of resistant bacteria may also come to have an influence on building
design.
Please note: There are medical conditions which are made worse by exposure to
sunlight, and some drugs, such as antihistamines, oral contraceptives,
antidiabetic agents, tranquilizers, diuretics and a number of antibiotics,
increase sensitivity to the sun. Anyone about to embark on a program of
sunbathing should check with their doctor if they are in any doubt about their
health or any medicines which they are taking.
This
article is excerpted from the book "The
Healing Sun", ©1999, by Richard Hobday. Reprinted with
permission of the author. Published by Findhorn Press. www.findhornpress.com
Info/Order
this book.
About the Author
Richard
Hobday, MSc, PhD is a member of the British Register of Complementary
Practitioners and has studied traditional Chinese Medicine and Chinese exercise
systems in China. Dr. Hobday has many years experience of solar design in
buildings and is a leading authority on the history of sunlight therapy. Visit
the author's website at http://www.healingsun.co.uk
Printer Friendly Page |