Do I really need sunscreen?

Sunburn on kids is often caused by sudden shock at the end of the school year.
First not going outside much throughout spring and then bam!  Outside for half of the day causes terrible sunburns.
And then you have people getting stuck on sunscreen all summer because their bodies still think it's winter, and not putting it on causes shock.
And then people think they can't live without it.

Dc Stewart wrote:It's important to note that a number of questions were raised regarding the study's methodology.

Wow! Thank you, I hadn't seen these critiques of that big study. Very interesting.

Sasha Platte wrote:Sunburn on kids is often caused by sudden shock at the end of the school year.
First not going outside much throughout spring and then bam!  Outside for half of the day causes terrible sunburns.
And then you have people getting stuck on sunscreen all summer because their bodies still think it's winter, and not putting it on causes shock.
And then people think they can't live without it.

This has very much been my own personal experience as well. I start each summer pale and fryable - I've learned to start the hot weather with short, but fairly frequent, doses of sun exposure. Taking care to stay below the level of turning even slightly pink. As I build a bit of a tan over a week or so my skin adjusts and I can cope with being out for longer.  In not too long I can be out all day in full sun without burning. I'm lucky to have skin that tans easily, and goes pretty dark, for good protection. My wife just goes crispy with the same treatment.

Know your skin, adjust your behaviour accordingly.

It's going to really vary person to person. My skin is very much like my grandmother's, so I know what I'm going to look like when I'm old.  She was a Saskatchewan farm girl, out in the sun all day. I have naturally oily skin, which makes me look younger than I am, and I tan in minutes.  Even just looking at my parents gives me clues. My mum is fair skinned, but tans easily. She's getting pretty wrinkly. My dad (son of the aforementioned grandmother) has the same oily skin I have. He's older than my mum and less wrinkly. Incidentally, he was also a truck driver for forty years and doesn't have that one side way worse than the other thing going on.

I actually notice a big difference in skin health when I expose my skin to the sun. All the parts of my body that get the most sun exposure get way healthier looking in the spring time - softer and more even toned and hydrated looking. As soon as it's warm enough I start getting sun on my whole body, and after a few times doing that, the rest of my skin starts looking better, too. For me, I think the sun stimulates more oil production or something. So I generally wear as little clothing as possible in the summer. I also just can't stand the feeling of sweaty clothing on my skin, and I sweat a lot 🙄. My husband has badgered me into wearing a sunhat for the midday hours, though.

My mum likes to tell the story of the one sunburn I had as a kid. She was at the beach with some other mums and they were all horrified she hadn't brought sunscreen along. So she was shamed into putting some on me for the first time ever and... I burned. After that we went back to hanging out on my grandma's private beach where everyone was naked and no one cared about sunscreen 😁

Diet has been mentioned, but nothing specific. I've read beta carotene, lycopene, and vitamin C all reduce sun damage, but you have to ingest them habitually. It's not like you can gorge on watermelon one day at the beach and figure you're good. So eat lots of fruit and veggies and get all those antioxidants.

When I went to Jamaica in 1986 local ladies were using the Aloe Vera.
I have worked outdoors all my life and I still use Aloe Vera.
I just split a small section of leaf and apply to my face.
The rest of my body is covered as we have biting midges here in Scotland.!.
I'm told I look younger than my 76 years !

Our skin makes it’s own “sunscreen” when exposed to the rising and setting sun. Modern habits have us missing those crucial windows and exposing during peak hours (9-4) makes us highly susceptible to skin cancers. Try getting your sun exposure before 9am and after 4pm. If you can’t be indoors midday wear light loose natural clothing to protect from the harmful rays and remember to always stay hydrated with faintly salted water (as we are primarily salt water beings not fresh water)!

I am freckled, redhair and got bad bad sunburns as child. I had my first basal cell cancer taken off at 19. I have to cover up, I'm allergic to nearly everything on my skin.  At 70 I play whack-a-mole with a new crop of little bad bumps every few years, mostly on my face. I got severly Vit D deficient so I have to take presciption high doses Vit D. Personally, I preach don't let your kids get sunburn ever  

I was made to wear sunscreen whenever swimming or out for long periods without shade when I was a child, my mother didn't bother when I was running around from sun to shade and back again or if I was out late in the day or outside briefly.  I'm glad of her approach, because my grandmother, and now my father, have to have "yuckies" removed periodically and so far I've escaped that genetic fate.  When they were both children sunscreen wasn't available so they both got fried too often, as it were.  My mother doesn't have that in her genetic line that she knows of, but there's enough of it on my dad's side for us to be mindful.  It doesn't seem to show up until people are in their middle age, but I'm still pretty sure I won't have it.

As an adult I use sunscreen if
A, I'm performing out of doors (I sing professionally) anytime between 10am and 2:30pm for an extended period of time.
B, when I go swimming between those times of the day above mentioned, those are the sunburn danger hours here in my area, after 2:30pm I basically won't burn, people tell me that's bogus but I find it to be true for my body, even though I'm pale-skinned and freckled.

In the wintertime I don't sunburn at all.  Even when I visit my best friend in Florida I don't wear sunscreen if its Nov. thru Jan.  I think its about the tilt of the earth and so even if I'm swimming I don't burn, but if we're too close to the equinoxes, or anytime between them in the warm times, I'll fry down there without sunscreen.

I think the chemicals in sunscreen aren't very healthy, so that's why we always use it sparingly and only when needed, my mother taught me to know my body in that regard, and I continue to be mindful about safety so only using it when I need it and no more than that.

To add to my previous post, I do wear a hat, sunglasses, long sleeved shirt, gloves, and never wear shorts.

The information in Other countries have better sunscreens. Here's why we can't get them in the U.S. is very pertinent to those of us who depend on sunscreen and those who would like to save their skin from the problems mentioned throughout this thread. Since the US does not allow the latest advances in sunscreen into the market, we are at higher risk for problems than those in other countries. Luckily, US medicine is very good at "chop and drop," though treatment costs are much higher than sunscreen.

I know nothing about cowboys, but I do know landscapers, produce pickers, and construction workers. ( Oh and truck drivers.) I also spend a lot of time on the Atlantic coast. Wear something to cover yourself and yes, sunscreen. I had a roofer friend have bits of his face and earlobes hacked off and still had white patches on his forehead and arms.
My husband has ( had🙏) spots mostly on his left arm and ear ( the side near the driver side window.) VA freezed them off and we hope it's all gone.

I burn. I don't wear sunscreen,but I make a point of wearing hats and lightweight long sleeve shirts when I'm out for more than a few hours. Please take care of your skin. Even if you aren't vain about wrinkles, skin cancer is no joke.

Jennifer, welcome to the forum!

No sunscreen is not necessary.

Clay works.  Maybe it is not pretty, though sunscreen is not either.

Using something to cover up is necessary, sunscreen is not.

Check out some of the people interested in quantum biology on youtube. They are talking about ways to use the sun to create a "solar callus" so that you don't burn. They do say use the shade & hats etc as well but they dont use sunscreen and many are based in Australia where the "slip, flap, slop" T shirt, hat &  sunscreen is national folk law.
( They are also talking about the new science which shows that sunlight powers our mitochondria and artificial blue light is really damaging to us. We are designed to live in sunlight not inside buildings. Sounds bizarre and not main stream but strong science behind it)

My vague and general thoughts:


toxins + sunlight -> skin cancer

So people try to eliminate the sunlight by smearing more toxins on their skin.  

I think a healthier path is to eliminate the toxins.  

I think if you have spent six months in a cave and you are about spend all day in the sun, a bit of coconut oil (SPF 8) sounds wise.


I think the toxins come from gunk on the skin, gunk in food, gunk in air and water ...   lots of places.

Or you can eat your sunscreen.....

https://drhowardmurad.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Eat-Your-Sunscreen-How-the-food-we-consume-can-protect-our-skin-from-the-suns-harmful-rays.pdf

https://www.gaia.com/article/10-ways-eat-your-sunscreen

https://wellnessmama.com/4621/eat-my-sunscreen/

Don’t go eating a helping of pasta sauce and dark chocolate and think you are covered…its a whole diet and regimen…but a healthy one.  

Some interesting reading along these lines.

This is a doc who remains anonymous because he/she is hard at work exposing a lot of what has gone wrong, and what can be done to circumvent the problems and dangers from our current medical systems.
If you like this there's a link to an index of more articles covering a wide range of health issues at the bottom of the page.

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-light-is-an-essential-nutrient?


As far as irrigation, we're in a serious drought but the overhead irrigation is proving it's worth.
Watering at night to cut evaporation.
Likewise experimenting with a 4 - 5" layer of compost in terms of its ability to hold water.
I've been able to cut irrigation times in half and still maintain enough moisture.

About getting wrinkles from the sun: I don't think sunshine is the cause of the wrinkles. In my opinion it depends on your skin type and other factors like what you eat/drink and how (and how often) you wash yourself.

My age is 68 now and often people give me compliments on how good my skin looks! (my hair too btw)
I like riding my bicycle, and work in the garden, in all kinds of weather. So if the sun shines (the Netherlands are more known for cloudy rainy weather, but the sun can shine too) I am riding or gardening in the sun. I do wear a sun-hat and a cotton shirt and trousers, but don't use any chemicals on my skin. Using no chemicals also means: I never use soap, shampoo, lotion, etc. I wash myself only with water and when my skin feels dry I use home-made calendula oil (or cream I make from the oil with bees wax). My diet is as fresh, varied, unprocessed and organic as possible.

Yes, everyone—even children—need sunscreen if they will be outside more than 15 minutes, and you should reapply every so often as sweat and other waters washes it right off. I have worked in skincare for 14 years and lost my mother to melanoma cancer. Please read up on ingredients as some sunscreens have a small level of toxicity. It is best to try to opt for natural shade IF IT WILL COVER YOU COMPLETELY. Find lightweight long-sleeved clothing that will wick moisture. Wear a wide-brimmed hat. Buy a sun sail to hang up where you will be working. Gardening gloves, solar gloves and sleeves-there are a lot of options but PROTECT YOUR SKIN. The damage starts before you see it. I don’t even follow my advice well, but I DO try to follow it, and I will say in all honesty my skin looks so much better than my peers because I makes regular attempts to cover up.

Fascinating thread.  The Dailyish strikes again to take me down a rabbit warren.

So, my personal experience - I'm the son of a farmer and grew up in a small town - in the summer, we were at the outdoor pool on a nearly daily basis.  As a child / youth, I never burned.  Now, a few decades later, I will if I'm not careful.  So that begs the question of what has changed in the last 35ish years?  I've aged, so it's quite possible somehow my body has changed to become less resilient.  Dietary changes have occurred...not necessarily in what I eat per se (although that has evolved over the years).  There's a greater prevalence of various cooking oils that weren't really available in the 1970s (at least in small town Saskatchewan)...then again, I wasn't doing the shopping, but all I remember for oil was corn / vegetable and lard / Crisco / butter / margarine was also used (not saying that's good, but different).  There is much more processed and ultra-processed food around now and it's a challenge to avoid it all.  

Generally when I'm outside now I tend to wear long sleeves, pants and a wide-brimmed hat.  I've had some bad winter excema which has led to pigment loss in my hands, so when I'm working outside, I generally wear gloves although I'd rather not, but those patches around my knuckles burn much more easily so better to protect them.

Some of the posts brought to mind the adage "lies, damned lies, and statistics".  While we are living longer on average in the western world, most of that can be attributed to better sanitation and cleaner water.  Infant mortality has decreased and we are much less likely to die from an infection than we were in centuries past.  Also anecdotally, if you visit old cemeteries, you can find a good number of folks who lived to a ripe old age.  Thus, it may simply be more of us are surviving the things that more likely killed us in childhood / youth / middle age.

In a similar vein, medical studies have become so niche as to become questionable.  By that, I mean they try to get so granular and isolate the impact of a single factor, when it is probably a broader issue.  The media will make a big deal about some new paper (usually not getting the details right in the first place), but of course rarely follow up on retractions of papers or corrections, or others refuting a published paper / study.  Much like this discussion - sunlight may neither good nor bad for us, but there may be situations where it is.  Personally, I believe the benefits of sunlight outweigh the cons.  

Another thing that has changed is the prevalence of synthetic materials.  In some respects, they may be wonderful, but considering out skin as an organ, would one expect natural fibres coloured by natural pigments to be better or worse than synthetic fabrics using chemically based dyes?  My gut instinct would be to the natural side.  Similarly, many of us now spend much more time indoors than generations past and we have a lot more synthetic materials around us (carpets, furniture fabric, building materials like insulation, paints, etc.).  Who knows what impact that has on most of us?

Going back to food, the astounding decrease in nutrient density of food since the industrialization of agriculture (particularly the increased use of chemicals following WWII) is quite possibly a factor.  Then, to compound it all, we have all these different diets with medical professionals backing them up contradicting each other over what we should be eating.

When we visited South Africa, the Zulu women who looked after the landscaping at the game lodge smeared a local clay on their faces.  In the highlands of Peru, I'm not aware of the natives using anything, yet they followed the pattern of some cultures of retaining youthful skin until a very significant age.

I suspect it comes to a myriad of factors and it would be nearly impossible to separate out one from another.  For me, one of the things I'll go with is the idea that wrinkles and grey hair used to be considered signs of an elder who was looked up to and had enough life experience to be able to offer wisdom, so it's a low priority to me to avoid these things.  Something will kill me sooner or later...I'm going to strive to look after myself and look skeptically at everything that is "new and improved".

Sorry for the ramble...that will happen when ones reads a 2+ page thread that covers a variety of related topics.

Exactly. We have been lied to about the sun causing skin cancer. Sun exposure needs to be done sensibly - build up your solar callous (melanin levels) gradually so you can spend more time in sun. Artificial light is the real culprit. Dr Jack Kruse has been joining the dots for 20+ years. Listen to his podcast with Dr Andrew Huberman on the Tetragrammaton podcast to find out more. No research into skin cancer proves the sun causes skin cancer. There is some correlation but the original UV study was using man made UV, not the sun. Linking your lifestyle to circadian cycles is key.

Richard Kastanie wrote:This article from one of my favorite health writers that goes against the grain on a variety of topics mentions sunlight and how it's important for more than just vitamin D. Here's a snippet from it,

Sunlight

I believe one of the greatest disservices the dermatology profession has done to the world has been to spread an immense fear that the sun causes skin cancer (even though the most dangerous skin cancer, melanoma, is linked to a lack of sun exposure). This appears to have come about because the dermatology profession reinvented themselves as cancer fighters (which pays a lot), and part of establishing that cultural belief system revolved around neurotic rituals to avoid all sunlight. I think this is quite sad, because avoiding sunlight significantly increases your risk of death from many different cancers (and overall has a danger of the same magnitude as smoking).

One of the major misunderstandings about sunlight is that its only benefit is vitamin D production. Instead, it has a variety of other ones as well, including:

•Producing cholesterol sulfate.

•Producing nitric oxide.

•Directly creating liquid crystalline water.

Note: I have long wondered if some of the benefits attributed to vitamin D are actually due to it being correlated with the above three occurring.

Since sulfates are used by the body to create liquid crystalline water and maintain the physiologic zeta potential, this function is very important. Since cholesterol sulfate primarily resides in cell membranes (where it is recognized to have a "stabilizing role" for the cell membrane), it provides the critical role of coating the cell with sulfates.

It's certainly possible to get too much though, I can't imagine anyone thinks burning is a good thing. Besides the long term risks and the short term pain, I notice that I feel drained of energy if I get sunburnt. I don't use sunscreen and find that as long as I have enough of a tan I don't generally have to worry much about burning. I do tend to wear a hat when the sun is intense, more for my eyes than for my skin though. My hair is long so it keeps the sun off my neck and upper spine.

Also, I notice that my general state of health and energy makes a big difference toward how I react to the sun. The skin is connected to the body as a whole. I especially notice a strong connection between circulation and sun sensitivity.

Most of these workers are wearing sunglasses which prevents your body making natural protection from the sun. Truck drivers are sitting behind glass which blocks a lot of the beneficial spectrum of sunlight. Red spectrum, which glass blocks, offsets the UV. Building up your solar callous (tan) for protection is best.

Jennifer Phillips wrote:I know nothing about cowboys, but I do know landscapers, produce pickers, and construction workers. ( Oh and truck drivers.) I also spend a lot of time on the Atlantic coast. Wear something to cover yourself and yes, sunscreen. I had a roofer friend have bits of his face and earlobes hacked off and still had white patches on his forehead and arms.
My husband has ( had🙏) spots mostly on his left arm and ear ( the side near the driver side window.) VA freezed them off and we hope it's all gone.

I burn. I don't wear sunscreen,but I make a point of wearing hats and lightweight long sleeve shirts when I'm out for more than a few hours. Please take care of your skin. Even if you aren't vain about wrinkles, skin cancer is no joke.

A good X/Twitter thread on sunscreen. https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/status/1790585689446514718

For anyone using bought sunscreens, I've picked up this about endocrine disruptors (mock hormones):

Avoiding endocrine disruptors in toiletries: https://www.soilassociation.org/blogs/2024/february/06/endocrine-disruptors-in-cosmetics-and-personal-care-what-you-should-know/
Parabens, used as preservatives
4- Methylbenzylidene camphor (may also be called Enzacamene) UV filter in sunscreens
Phthalates, as emulsifiers
Oxybenzone (may also be called Benzophenone-3) UV filter in sunscreens
Triclosan, preservative – antibacterial
Webpage includes a link to a list of organic products

The thing about the eyes making Vitamin D sounds doubtful, it's more likely the eyes transmit messages about the light quality; the actual vitamin D factory being the skin. And being on same side of the evolution tree, mushrooms make vitamin D in sunlight too: https://fungi.com/blogs/articles/place-mushrooms-in-sunlight-to-get-your-vitamin-d

Jack Little wrote:A good X/Twitter thread on sunscreen. https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/status/1790585689446514718

There's a reason dark-skinned people do better in the tropics, while pale skins thrive in the cooler parts. I reckon my pale skin needs some help in hot sun.

Yes that's true but pale skin just need more gradual sun exposure in lower latitudes. It can be done.

Anthony Powell wrote:

Jack Little wrote:A good X/Twitter thread on sunscreen. https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/status/1790585689446514718

There's a reason dark-skinned people do better in the tropics, while pale skins thrive in the cooler parts. I reckon my pale skin needs some help in hot sun.

Jack Little wrote:Exactly. We have been lied to about the sun causing skin cancer. Sun exposure needs to be done sensibly - build up your solar callous (melanin levels) gradually so you can spend more time in sun.

Isn't it rather presumptuous to apply this idea as the whole, absolute, unquestionable truth for billions of people?

I respect your freedom to apply this method to yourself, and accept the consequences of your experiment. I hope it works for you.

I am concerned that it may be unsuitable advice for many others. I personally wish I had known the importance of covering up from direct sunlight decades ago. There is a cost.

I don't believe so. It's not my presumption. There are plenty of studies showing this. There is a strong link between higher mortality rates being associated with lower sunshine exposure. Look up the work of Dr Jack Kruse. It needs to be put in context. If you are under artificial light all week then get burnt on the weekend you will likely get skin cancer. We evolved under the sun yet we are told it is dangerous. You need to look at your entire light environment. Show me a study that proves the sun causes skin cancer. The original study showing UV is harmful was done on babies using artificial UV not full spectrum sunlight. There is a massive difference. https://x.com/DrJackKruse/status/1659534650899853314

Douglas Alpenstock wrote:

Jack Little wrote:Exactly. We have been lied to about the sun causing skin cancer. Sun exposure needs to be done sensibly - build up your solar callous (melanin levels) gradually so you can spend more time in sun.

Isn't it rather presumptuous to apply this idea as the whole, absolute, unquestionable truth for billions of people?

I respect your freedom to apply this method to yourself, and accept the consequences of your experiment. I hope it works for you.

I am concerned that it may be unsuitable advice for many others. I personally wish I had known the importance of covering up from direct sunlight decades ago. There is a cost.

Show me a study that proves the sun causes skin cancer.

https://www.drive.com.au/news/skin-cancer-more-likely-on-drivers-side-of-the-body/

You can hunt for the original studies/underlying data but the link is clear. Increased sun exposure leads to a higher frequency of cancer on the exposed skin.

The problem with this study is that it is not full spectrum sunlight. The glass blocks most of the red spectrum which balances out the blue. It is the blue spectrum which causes the damage when not balanced with red. Artificial lights and screens are predominantly blue spectrum which damages eyes/skin/mitochondria.

Dr Jack Kruse:
"The old famous trucker picture dermatologists like to show and sell the public of why the sun is toxic for skin. They believe under their power of questioning that you’ll believe the left side of his face is worse because as a driver in USA the window is open. It works until you have tons of patients who are truckers and you speak to them. It turns out when you speak to them the habit truckers perform is the close the window closer to them due to road noise and open the one furthest from them as they drive. The implications of just taking a history?  What the dermatologists believe flips 180 degrees. They hope you never wise up and talk to truckers. Sadly for them I have for 35 years. Many are my patients. Why does the picture above really happen?  Apparently, and contrary to what is publicly stated by centralized dermatology the damaged side is actually the window side by filtered sunlight via automotive glass
And the issue was that the window was usually rolled up, so TRUCKERS actually get blue light toxic exposure from that side for years (window glass blocks all of UV and 40-60% of IR-A light, which leaves blue/green to photoage the skin. The solar side is younger because the UV and IR-A glass are unfiltered. This picture represents why screens use ages your cells. This is why modern humans who aren’t truckers get melasma, cataracts, AMD, bleeds ng retina’s and myopia so often. Their toxic light comes from in front of their faces. See how perspective changes reality when you know the decentralized truth about light!"

https://zaidkdahhaj.substack.com/p/sunglasses-a-net-negative-for-humanity
https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/highlights

Michael Cox wrote:

Show me a study that proves the sun causes skin cancer.

https://www.drive.com.au/news/skin-cancer-more-likely-on-drivers-side-of-the-body/

You can hunt for the original studies/underlying data but the link is clear. Increased sun exposure leads to a higher frequency of cancer on the exposed skin.

Jack Little wrote:The problem with this study is that it is not full spectrum sunlight. The glass blocks most of the red spectrum which balances out the blue. It is the blue spectrum which causes the damage when not balanced with red. Artificial lights and screens are predominantly blue spectrum which damages eyes/skin/mitochondria.

Dr Jack Kruse:
"The old famous trucker picture dermatologists like to show and sell the public of why the sun is toxic for skin. They believe under their power of questioning that you’ll believe the left side of his face is worse because as a driver in USA the window is open. It works until you have tons of patients who are truckers and you speak to them. It turns out when you speak to them the habit truckers perform is the close the window closer to them due to road noise and open the one furthest from them as they drive. The implications of just taking a history?  What the dermatologists believe flips 180 degrees. They hope you never wise up and talk to truckers. Sadly for them I have for 35 years. Many are my patients. Why does the picture above really happen?  Apparently, and contrary to what is publicly stated by centralized dermatology the damaged side is actually the window side by filtered sunlight via automotive glass
And the issue was that the window was usually rolled up, so TRUCKERS actually get blue light toxic exposure from that side for years (window glass blocks all of UV and 40-60% of IR-A light, which leaves blue/green to photoage the skin. The solar side is younger because the UV and IR-A glass are unfiltered. This picture represents why screens use ages your cells. This is why modern humans who aren’t truckers get melasma, cataracts, AMD, bleeds ng retina’s and myopia so often. Their toxic light comes from in front of their faces. See how perspective changes reality when you know the decentralized truth about light!"

https://zaidkdahhaj.substack.com/p/sunglasses-a-net-negative-for-humanity
https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/highlights

This one caught me by surprise. I was skeptical of mainstream claims but had hypothesized it was most likely a matter of the optic nerve being shielded from the full spectrum by sunglasses and/or the front windshield, leading to the exposed arm not getting the correct signals from the nervous system (or whichever one triggers dermal chemistry). But the more I drive the more conscious I've become of wanting the driver window closed. Minimizes noise and turbulence.

I think this illustrates how a profit driven medical industry/media will take advantage of common stereotypes to push forward hypotheses that support it's products and false reassurances. I have a clear picture of a 'trucker' as some burly dude driving cross country with his arm out the window from various 70s movies. However, my impression of our recent history is that vehicular A/C became ubiquitous during the 80s, and since then an environmentally conscious messaging that the aerodynamics of a vehicle with windows closed more than make up for the energy consumption of the A/C compressor. Perhaps this is another unproven assumption or doesn't apply to trucks (although the 'doctor' in the Australian article advises exactly that), but that 70s stereotype definitely deserves more examination just because of the constant annoyance of wind disturbance.

This is not to say that absolutely proves anything Dr. Kruse is claiming (at least I'm guessing the subjects of the formal studies in question were not asked about window habits), but to my mind it does become one of the more prominent hypothesis to base research studies on. Sadly, I'm guessing he isn't associated with any international conglomerate corporations selling gunk to rub on your skin to build UV "callouses", so that research will probably be a long time coming.

But for my own gratification, I'm going to start tallying all of the trucks I pass on the road and get a rough estimate of how many have driver windows down or up...

When it comes to diseases of the skin, I have seen issues pop up in the older generations of even my own family. I think it is fair that everyone takes into consideration their personal risk tolerance and act accordingly.

I really can't explain it, but I struggle to kick myself to put on creams/sprays for my skin to protect it. I try to do my work in the shade but I already have my freckles popping for the season and am rocking a farmers tan already. I struggle trying to find quality outdoor work clothes that are long sleeve and breathable because I want to avoid synthetic fiber. I'm considering incorporating some kind of hat while I am outside but need to find something that isn't overly goofy looking.

Something I learned when I was visiting family in the south was to enjoy the inside of the house during the hottest parts of the day. Work can get done when it isn't so intense. That has carried with me back home when the sun is highest in the sky and shade is depleted. I accredit my lack of sunburns this year to doing this.

Michael Cox wrote:

Show me a study that proves the sun causes skin cancer.

https://www.drive.com.au/news/skin-cancer-more-likely-on-drivers-side-of-the-body/

You can hunt for the original studies/underlying data but the link is clear. Increased sun exposure leads to a higher frequency of cancer on the exposed skin.

From the article:

The new research found that 52 percent of melanomas and 53 percent merkel cells appeared on the driver’s side of motorists’ bodies. The upper arms showed an even stronger bias, with 55 percent of merkel cells developing on the left side.

If the supposition is that cancer is a reaction to a simple mechanical process of exposure to pure UV light that is inhibited by closing the window or slathering on sunscreen, why would they point to data about the entire side of the motorist's body, mentioning the exposed arm almost as an afterthought? Are they supposing the average driver spends significant amounts of their driving time standing on the seat with their pants down?

It's interesting that melanomas often appear where there is little or no sun exposure.

Coydon Wallham wrote:

Michael Cox wrote:

Show me a study that proves the sun causes skin cancer.

https://www.drive.com.au/news/skin-cancer-more-likely-on-drivers-side-of-the-body/

You can hunt for the original studies/underlying data but the link is clear. Increased sun exposure leads to a higher frequency of cancer on the exposed skin.

From the article:

The new research found that 52 percent of melanomas and 53 percent merkel cells appeared on the driver’s side of motorists’ bodies. The upper arms showed an even stronger bias, with 55 percent of merkel cells developing on the left side.

If the supposition is that cancer is a reaction to a simple mechanical process of exposure to pure UV light that is inhibited by closing the window or slathering on sunscreen, why would they point to data about the entire side of the motorist's body, mentioning the exposed arm almost as an afterthought? Are they supposing the average driver spends significant amounts of their driving time standing on the seat with their pants down?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8P-IfZeE_0

Sunglasses are not good either https://x.com/zaidkdahhaj/status/1725187110020489564

Most permies are outdoor creatures = nature.

Why living indoors causes cancer. Good video showing light spectrum behind glass.

https://x.com/BlueLightDiet/status/1796193544530448502

Timothy Norton wrote:I struggle trying to find quality outdoor work clothes that are long sleeve and breathable because I want to avoid synthetic fiber.

There outta be a Permies thread on this, I'm currently cycling though 3 pair of polyester camping shirts as they are the only thing I've found wearable in warm weather that protects from excess sun and swarming bugs. I'm in a similar situation with pants.

Linen?

I find my self in the market for new eyeglasses, and the issue of lens coatings has come up. Relevant choices to the discussion here are around UV blocking and some sort of blue spectrum specific blocking treatments.

Just looking into the UV has given me a headache. The main thing that jumps out is any search on the web produces an article that reads like the same moron wrote it. UV is evil, it destroys your eyes and rapes babies! No intelligent content, just the standard fear mongering rhetoric any successful sales people on the web apparently recognize as necessary. The websites I looked through for lenses almost always advertise '100% UV blocking' as a feature of most lenses, but I have yet to actually find and option that doesn't include that. Sign me up... I guess?

Briefly reviewing this thread, I'm gathering that regular glass blocks UVA and leaves an imbalanced, UVB heavy spectrum of light through, which is more likely to help cause cancers?

If so, it would seem the 100% UV blocking would be the best choice because regular glass would filter out only some of the sprctrum and be worse. But I don't think any of the options are actual glass. Everything I can find is marketing BS. I asked at a local shop that offered a choice between "plastic" and "polycarbonate" leses what specific kind of plastic the former was, and she said 'no, it is plastic is the other type is poly.' Welcome to the 21st century where no professional knows the basic facts of anything in the real world outside their siloed little education bubble.

Then the blue blocking stuff~ I thought that UVB was the harmful part of the spectrum related to screens and headlights and stuff? What is the extra coating doing? Obviously at this point I'm overwhelmed by the marketing BS designed to make us all stupid and spend money on crap, can anyone help clarify/organize some of these thoughts?