Has the American Cancer Society became the sales arm of the sunscreen industry

Recent studies have linked lack of Vitamin d to an increase risk of
several cancers. From "Sweeping cancer edit take vitamin d
daily" From Friday's Globe and Mail

June 8, 2007 at 12:00 AM EDT

TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that
all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release
of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk
of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.

The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.

It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.

The American Cancer Society declined to follow and has not raised
the amount of vitamin d it recommend. Can you trust the American
Cancer Society ? I recent story in the New York times raises
questions
from ....
" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.

The public service announcement, financed by the sunscreen maker
Neutrogena, is running in 15 women's magazines this summer. It warns
readers that "left unchecked, skin cancer can be fatal," and urges
them to "use sunscreen, cover up and watch for skin changes."

The woman in the picture is a model, not a skin cancer victim. And the
advertisement's implicit message - that those who die of skin cancer
have themselves to blame - has provoked a sharp response from some
public-health doctors, who say the evidence simply does not support
it."
It appears that evidence is not the only reason the ACS provides
information The article notes that almost all skin cancer deaths are
caused " Almost all of those deaths are from melanoma, which makes up
only 6 percent of all skin-cancer cases." The article notes that some
studies suggest that sun exposure improves survival in melanoma and
that " Until that is made clear, many doctors say, it is premature to
suggest that people are endangering their lives by failing to use
sunscreen. "

As for the effect of sunscreens the story notes..."We do have some
pretty good evidence that sunscreen will reduce your risk of the less
lethal forms of skin cancer," Dr. Kramer added. "There's very little
evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you often
hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the NIH .
What was the response of the ACS?

Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the
American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to
get the message to our target audience."

Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince

bigvince wrote:
Recent studies have linked lack of Vitamin d to an increase risk of
several cancers. From "Sweeping cancer edit take vitamin d
daily" From Friday's Globe and Mail

June 8, 2007 at 12:00 AM EDT

TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that
all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release
of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk
of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.

For such a ground breaking study, I have not heard much press about it.

For some cancers or all cancers, I wonder. I suspect it cuts down the
risk of some cancers, but only for people who don't get enough vitamin D
already (or make it themselves).

The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.

It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.

The American Cancer Society declined to follow and has not raised
the amount of vitamin d it recommend. Can you trust the American
Cancer Society ? I recent story in the New York times raises
questions
from ....
" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.

Wow! The original article was from June 8, 2007, but they cite a July
10, 2007. The author must be good at predicting things.

The public service announcement, financed by the sunscreen maker
Neutrogena, is running in 15 women's magazines this summer. It warns
readers that "left unchecked, skin cancer can be fatal," and urges
them to "use sunscreen, cover up and watch for skin changes."

The woman in the picture is a model, not a skin cancer victim. And the
advertisement's implicit message - that those who die of skin cancer
have themselves to blame - has provoked a sharp response from some
public-health doctors, who say the evidence simply does not support
it."
It appears that evidence is not the only reason the ACS provides
information The article notes that almost all skin cancer deaths are
caused " Almost all of those deaths are from melanoma, which makes up
only 6 percent of all skin-cancer cases." The article notes that some
studies suggest that sun exposure improves survival in melanoma and
that " Until that is made clear, many doctors say, it is premature to
suggest that people are endangering their lives by failing to use
sunscreen. "

As for the effect of sunscreens the story notes..."We do have some
pretty good evidence that sunscreen will reduce your risk of the less
lethal forms of skin cancer," Dr. Kramer added. "There's very little
evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you often
hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the NIH .
What was the response of the ACS?

Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the
American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to
get the message to our target audience."

Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince


I understand your concerns about the ACS. I don't know how valid they
are in real life, though.

I think the ACS can continue to advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit D. Sort of how doctors recommend
eating a healthy diet to prevent heart disease, but, at the same time
recommend excercise.

Jeff

Jeff

Wow! The original article was from June 8, 2007, but they cite a July
10, 2007. The author must be good at predicting things.

Actually those in the know had read
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...andHealth/home
Vitamin D casts cancer prevention in new light and new the results of
the study before it went to press.
Those in the know also have read studies showing impressive risk
reductions with vitamin d in relation to breast, prostate, colon
cancers so I think those who are gobsmacked by this research simply
haven't been keeping in touch with Vitamin d /cancer research. WAKE UP
WAKE UP Pay attention. Remember for eacth person who dies from Skin
Cancer over 30 will die from those cancers that thrive in Vitamin D
depleted bodies.

What you have to realise is that sunlight primes the T cells in your
skin to actually fight cancer, so a LITTLE sun exposure (without that
dratted cancer inducing sunscreen) is part of your skins anti cancer
protection programme.
http://www.sciencentral.com/articles...e_id=218392932

On Jul 12, 11:43 am, Jeff wrote:
bigvince wrote:
Recent studies have linked lack of Vitamin d to an increase risk of
several cancers. From "Sweeping cancer edit take vitamin d
daily" From Friday's Globe and Mail

June 8, 2007 at 12:00 AM EDT

TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that
all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release
of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk
of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.

For such a ground breaking study, I have not heard much press about it.

For some cancers or all cancers, I wonder. I suspect it cuts down the
risk of some cancers, but only for people who don't get enough vitamin D
already (or make it themselves).





The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.

It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.

The American Cancer Society declined to follow and has not raised
the amount of vitamin d it recommend. Can you trust the American
Cancer Society ? I recent story in the New York times raises
questions
from ....
" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.

Wow! The original article was from June 8, 2007, but they cite a July
10, 2007. The author must be good at predicting things.

Jeff it is two separate articles the first .... " Sweeping cancer edict: take vitamin D daily "; Globe and Mail, 7/8/07 " http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...andHealth/home TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.
The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.

It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.

Although it is not known how many of the approximately 160,000 cancer
cases diagnosed annually in Canada might be avoided by regular popping
of a vitamin D pill, the cancer society said these findings are so
compelling it felt it had to start urging people to act on
them......full story at link .
Details the study and the quick action taken by the Canadian Cancer
Society as a result.The ACS did not act on this
information

" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.

The public service announcement, financed by the sunscreen maker
Neutrogena, is running in 15 women's magazines this summer. It warns
readers that "left unchecked, skin cancer can be fatal," and urges
them to "use sunscreen, cover up and watch for skin changes."

The woman in the picture is a model, not a skin cancer victim. And the
advertisement's implicit message - that those who die of skin cancer
have themselves to blame - has provoked a sharp response from some
public-health doctors, who say the evidence simply does not support
it."
It appears that evidence is not the only reason the ACS provides
information The article notes that almost all skin cancer deaths are
caused " Almost all of those deaths are from melanoma, which makes up
only 6 percent of all skin-cancer cases." The article notes that some
studies suggest that sun exposure improves survival in melanoma and
that " Until that is made clear, many doctors say, it is premature to
suggest that people are endangering their lives by failing to use
sunscreen. "

As for the effect of sunscreens the story notes..."We do have some
pretty good evidence that sunscreen will reduce your risk of the less
lethal forms of skin cancer," Dr. Kramer added. "There's very little
evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you often
hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the NIH .
What was the response of the ACS?

Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the
American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to
get the message to our target audience."

Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince


Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...=1&th&emc=th&o...
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince

I understand your concerns about the ACS. I don't know how valid they
are in real life, though.

I think the ACS can continue to advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit D. Sort of how doctors recommend
eating a healthy diet to prevent heart disease, but, at the same time
recommend excercise.

Jeff you can't as the ad is paid for and the message is incompatible
with the facts as the ad claims that sunscreens protect against
melanoma but as the story noted "Dr. Kramer added. "There's very
little evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you
often hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the
NIH . What was the response of the ACS? "and the head of the ACS
said ...." Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer
at the American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," In other words we'll say what we
want and that could cause health problems for those who limit sun
exposure because as the story notes " " Almost all of those deaths are
from melanoma, which makes up only 6 percent of all skin-cancer
cases." The article notes that some studies suggest that sun exposure
improves survival in melanoma and that " Until that is made clear,
many doctors say, it is premature to suggest that people are
endangering their lives by failing to use sunscreen. " Jeff your
argument is with the honest doctors who complained about this practice
of " "We have taken some license in taking that message and using it
the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to get the
message to our target audience." Ad the checks just role on in.

bigvince wrote:
On Jul 12, 11:43 am, Jeff wrote:
bigvince wrote:
Recent studies have linked lack of Vitamin d to an increase risk of
several cancers. From "Sweeping cancer edit take vitamin d
daily" From Friday's Globe and Mail
June 8, 2007 at 12:00 AM EDT
TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that
all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release
of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk
of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.
For such a ground breaking study, I have not heard much press about it.

For some cancers or all cancers, I wonder. I suspect it cuts down the
risk of some cancers, but only for people who don't get enough vitamin D
already (or make it themselves).





The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.
It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.
The American Cancer Society declined to follow and has not raised
the amount of vitamin d it recommend. Can you trust the American
Cancer Society ? I recent story in the New York times raises
questions
from ....
" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.
Wow! The original article was from June 8, 2007, but they cite a July
10, 2007. The author must be good at predicting things.

Jeff it is two separate articles the first .... " Sweeping cancer edict: take vitamin D daily "; Globe and Mail, 7/8/07 " http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...andHealth/home TORONTO - The Canadian Cancer Society plans to announce Friday that all adults should start taking vitamin D, coinciding with the release of a groundbreaking U.S. study indicating the supplement cuts the risk of cancer by an astounding 60 per cent.
The move is believed to be the first time a major public-health
organization has endorsed daily use of the sunshine vitamin as a
cancer-prevention therapy for an entire population.

It follows a flurry of research suggesting the low-cost vitamin
confers a high degree of protection against a wide variety of cancers.
There are also striking study results suggesting that people who
develop the disease often have low blood levels of vitamin D.

Although it is not known how many of the approximately 160,000 cancer
cases diagnosed annually in Canada might be avoided by regular popping
of a vitamin D pill, the cancer society said these findings are so
compelling it felt it had to start urging people to act on
them......full story at link .
Details the study and the quick action taken by the Canadian Cancer
Society as a result.The ACS did not act on this
information

" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline.

The public service announcement, financed by the sunscreen maker
Neutrogena, is running in 15 women's magazines this summer. It warns
readers that "left unchecked, skin cancer can be fatal," and urges
them to "use sunscreen, cover up and watch for skin changes."

The woman in the picture is a model, not a skin cancer victim. And the
advertisement's implicit message - that those who die of skin cancer
have themselves to blame - has provoked a sharp response from some
public-health doctors, who say the evidence simply does not support
it."
It appears that evidence is not the only reason the ACS provides
information The article notes that almost all skin cancer deaths are
caused " Almost all of those deaths are from melanoma, which makes up
only 6 percent of all skin-cancer cases." The article notes that some
studies suggest that sun exposure improves survival in melanoma and
that " Until that is made clear, many doctors say, it is premature to
suggest that people are endangering their lives by failing to use
sunscreen. "

As for the effect of sunscreens the story notes..."We do have some
pretty good evidence that sunscreen will reduce your risk of the less
lethal forms of skin cancer," Dr. Kramer added. "There's very little
evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you often
hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the NIH .
What was the response of the ACS?

Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the
American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to
get the message to our target audience."

Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince


Has the ACS just become a sales rep for the highest bidder read the
full Times story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...=1&th&emc=th&o...
and ask yourself are these guys looking out for me? Thanks Vince
I understand your concerns about the ACS. I don't know how valid they
are in real life, though.

I think the ACS can continue to advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit D. Sort of how doctors recommend
eating a healthy diet to prevent heart disease, but, at the same time
recommend excercise.

Jeff you can't as the ad is paid for and the message is incompatible
with the facts as the ad claims that sunscreens protect against
melanoma but as the story noted "Dr. Kramer added. "There's very
little evidence that sunscreens protect you against melanoma, yet you
often hear that as the dominant message." Dr. Kramer works at the
NIH . What was the response of the ACS? "and the head of the ACS
said ...." Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer
at the American Cancer Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is
aggressive. "We have taken some license in taking that message and
using it the way we've used it," In other words we'll say what we
want and that could cause health problems for those who limit sun
exposure because as the story notes " " Almost all of those deaths are
from melanoma, which makes up only 6 percent of all skin-cancer
cases." The article notes that some studies suggest that sun exposure
improves survival in melanoma and that " Until that is made clear,
many doctors say, it is premature to suggest that people are
endangering their lives by failing to use sunscreen. " Jeff your
argument is with the honest doctors who complained about this practice
of " "We have taken some license in taking that message and using it
the way we've used it," he said, "because that's the way to get the
message to our target audience." Ad the checks just role on in.

Don't tell me who my argument is with. I don't have any argument with
them those you call "honest doctors."

Actually, the Canadian Cancer Society both recommends a little daily sun
and sun screens:

http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_1176359459__langId-en,00.html

http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_1046449084_1049663725_langId-en,00.html

Jeff

On Jul 12, 8:45 pm, Jeff wrote:
Don't tell me who my argument is with. I don't have any argument with
them those you call "honest doctors."


Sure you do Jeff at least a disagreement. The American Cancer Society
ran this ad . Source NYT........" The young woman in the American
Cancer Society advertisement holds up a photograph of a smiling
blonde. "My sister accidentally killed herself. She died of skin
cancer," reads the headline." .......Earlier you
said
I think the ACS can continue to advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit D. Sort of how doctors recommend
eating a healthy diet to prevent heart disease, but, at the same time
recommend excercise.

If you agree that a deceptive ad that even ..."Dr. J. Leonard
Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the American Cancer
Society, acknowledges that the advertisement is aggressive. "We have
taken some license in taking that message and using it the way we've
used it," then you disagree with the good and honest doctors
mentioned in the piece i.e. those mentioned in the story "has
provoked a sharp response from some public-health doctors, who say the
evidence simply does not support it."Jeff see the outrage is about an
ad that distorts the truth for sales. Who our these good and honest
doctors that you disagree with.........Doctors like.." ' And the link
between melanoma and sun exposure is not straightforward. Dr. Marianne
Berwick, an epidemiologist at the University of New Mexico who studies
skin cancer, led a study published in The Journal of the National
Cancer Institute in 2005 finding that people who had a lot of sun
exposure up to the time they got a diagnosis of melanoma actually had
better survival rates than those who had little sun exposure.'
And ...from times story

"Until that is made clear, many doctors say, it is premature to
suggest that people are endangering their lives by failing to use
sunscreen.

"It's just not that simple," said Dr. Barry Kramer, associate director
for disease prevention at the National Institutes of Health.

"We do have some pretty good evidence that sunscreen will reduce your
risk of the less lethal forms of skin cancer," Dr. Kramer added.
"There's very little evidence that sunscreens protect you against
melanoma, yet you often hear that as the dominant
message."
full story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin
Jeff either you agree with the Good [ all leaders in their field] and
honest Doctors quoted above saying that the science not other
considerations should control the info put out be the ACS or you as
you have already stated feel it is alright to " "We have taken some
license in taking that message and using it the way we've used it,"
You have stated that you agree with that view. I could not disagree
more strongly. Thanks Vince

bigvince wrote:
On Jul 12, 8:45 pm, Jeff wrote:
Don't tell me who my argument is with. I don't have any argument with
them those you call "honest doctors."


Sure you do Jeff at least a disagreement.

No, no disagreement at all.

...

full story http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/he...th&oref=slogin

Jeff either you agree with the Good [ all leaders in their field] and
honest Doctors quoted above saying that the science not other
considerations should control the info put out be the ACS or you as
you have already stated feel it is alright to " "We have taken some
license in taking that message and using it the way we've used it,"
You have stated that you agree with that view. I could not disagree
more strongly. Thanks Vince

I wasn't commenting on that at all.

I was merely saying that the CCS says that one should get a certain
amount of sun each day, but should also wear sunscreen to prevent
getting too much.

You appear to have an issue with the ad. I don't care to address the issue.

Jeff

On Jul 12, 10:16 pm, Jeff wrote:


You appear to have an issue with the ad. I don't care to address the issue.


Jeff heres the ad from "" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of
Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer,"

Heres your previous comments ; "I think the ACS can continue to
advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit
D."
Jeff as the Times piece noted well respected physicians objected to
the misleading nature of this ad. You have all ready said you see no
problem with that practice.Sort of the sales mentality which is your
right . but now you try to say you do not care to address the
issue.Jeff you already have .The fact is good and honest doctors have
chosen to talk about the misleading nature of this ad.The ACS
representative said it was alright to Take "some license ' with the
facts.and you "think the ACS can continue to advertise for the
sunscreen people " obviously I agree with the doctors quoted in the
piece they feel that the ACS should present the truth not be a shills
distorting the evidence. Thanks Vince

bigvince wrote:
On Jul 12, 10:16 pm, Jeff wrote:

You appear to have an issue with the ad. I don't care to address the issue.


Jeff heres the ad from "" Doctors Bulk at Cancer Ad ,Citing Lack of
Evidence" New Your Times
July 10
2007
" The young woman in the American Cancer Society advertisement holds
up a photograph of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed
herself. She died of skin cancer,"

Heres your previous comments ; "I think the ACS can continue to
advertise for the sunscreen people
while, at the same time, recommend vit
D."
Jeff as the Times piece noted well respected physicians objected to
the misleading nature of this ad. You have all ready said you see no
problem with that practice.

I never said that I don't see a problem with the practice. If I were
mroe interested, I would examine the issue more carefully before
commenting on it.

Sort of the sales mentality which is your
right . but now you try to say you do not care to address the
issue.Jeff you already have .The fact is good and honest doctors have
chosen to talk about the misleading nature of this ad.The ACS
representative said it was alright to Take "some license ' with the
facts.and you "think the ACS can continue to advertise for the
sunscreen people " obviously I agree with the doctors quoted in the
piece they feel that the ACS should present the truth not be a shills
distorting the evidence. Thanks Vince