HAVING BABIES PROTECTS WOMEN FROM SKIN CANCER

So if you have the sort of "olive" skin that predisposes to melanoma, should you throw away your pills? Not really. The sampling below is impressive but the effects noted were small and melanoma has a very low incidence in most populations anyway (Estimated lifetime risk of 1 in 75 for American Caucasians). The word "parity" below is used in a peculiar medical way -- meaning the number of kids you have had. It's sort of fun that having kids seems to protect men too! Perhaps that's another reason not to take the findings too seriously. If families tend to go out in the sun less than singles, it would make sense, though. That big ball in the sky is the main cause of melanoma. It's nice to see "may be" used in the conclusion to an epidemiological article. We would have got a lot more definiteness if the article had been about "obesity". Journal abstract below:

Reproductive History and Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma: A Comparison between Women and Men

By Jeanette Kaae et al.

To evaluate whether previously observed associations between parity and cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) risk in women reflected a biologic mechanism or resulted from uncontrolled confounding by lifestyle factors associated with parity (e.g., patterns of sun exposure), the authors investigated the effect of reproductive history (parenthood) on CMM risk in both women and men. Using information from Danish national registers (1968-2003), the authors established a population-based cohort of more than 3,500,000 persons with information on parenthood and CMM. Relative risks were estimated using Poisson regression models. Overall, number of children was significantly associated with a woman's risk of CMM (p = 0.004), with the lowest risk being seen among women with many births. Women aged 25 years or older at their first birth had a 24% (95% confidence interval: 16, 33) higher risk of CMM than younger women. Ten or more years after the birth of her youngest child, a woman had a 15% (95% confidence interval: 5, 27) higher risk of CMM than she did in the first 10 years. Similar results were observed in men. The similarity of effects for men and women suggests that lifestyle factors, rather than exposure to pregnancy hormones, may be responsible for the observed associations between reproductive history and CMM risk in women

Source

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)