Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 146 posts

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#101

Post by zarzavat »

krupan wrote: post #88
jorvi wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess all the grandmas on the beach that look like they have a leather hide for a skin didn't get the memo that the sun doesn't cause damage after all. In all seriousness: don't listen to OP, use sunscreen whenever possible.

You are still missing the point. Leathery skin is (by current beauty standards) undesirable but avoiding sunlight is deadly. Pick your poison

There are other ways to lower blood pressure than sun exposure. Article is insane and confuses necessary and sufficient conditions.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#102

Post by stevage »

> Homo sapiens have been around for 200,000 years. Until the industrial revolution, we lived outside. How did we get through the Neolithic Era without sunscreen? Actually, perfectly well. What’s counterintuitive is that dermatologists run around saying, ‘Don’t go outside, you might die.’”

At least in Australia a big difference is that there is a hole in the ozone layer that stone age people did not have. Sun exposure is much more harmful now.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#103

Post by lucisferre »

LarsDu88 wrote: post #95
krupan wrote: post #53

Wow, it feels like nobody read the article. Findings: - high blood pressure leads to a lot of deaths - people that spend more time in the sun have lower blood pressure - skin cancer is caused by sun exposure, but it kills far, far less people than high blood pressure - people that spend more time in the sun have a lower rate of dying from skin cancer than people who spend less time in the sun! Summary: more sun expos…

Correction. More sun exposure is CORRELATED with being less likely do die. I don't think there's a single causal connection in this article.

You are technically correct. The best kind of correct.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#104

Post by jodrellblank »

layman51 wrote: post #34

Does anyone know whether UVA or UVB is more conducive to producing vitamin D naturally? A quick search shows me that it is mainly UVB that's responsible for that, but unfortunately, this is what gets blocked out by glass windows and sunscreen. On the other hand, UVA is what causes early aging. So this is just an unfortunate situation because I don't think there's a way of just getting UVB into you in a safe way.

UVB makes it.

UBA denatures it[1], which I thought was how we avoid overdose levels building up in the skin when outside, but can't find a source for that.

Suggested as a reason why fair-skinned indoor workers are getting more melanomas, (ref glass blocking UVB and passing UVA): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03069...

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#105

Post by thayne »

LarsDu88 wrote: post #95
krupan wrote: post #53

Wow, it feels like nobody read the article. Findings: - high blood pressure leads to a lot of deaths - people that spend more time in the sun have lower blood pressure - skin cancer is caused by sun exposure, but it kills far, far less people than high blood pressure - people that spend more time in the sun have a lower rate of dying from skin cancer than people who spend less time in the sun! Summary: more sun expos…

Correction. More sun exposure is CORRELATED with being less likely do die. I don't think there's a single causal connection in this article.

> Sure enough, when he exposed volunteers to the equivalent of 30 minutes of summer sunlight without sunscreen, their nitric oxide levels went up and their blood pressure went down.

That is a causal connection.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#106

Post by tiffanyh »

krupan wrote: post #53

Wow, it feels like nobody read the article. Findings: - high blood pressure leads to a lot of deaths - people that spend more time in the sun have lower blood pressure - skin cancer is caused by sun exposure, but it kills far, far less people than high blood pressure - people that spend more time in the sun have a lower rate of dying from skin cancer than people who spend less time in the sun! Summary: more sun expos…

> Summary: more sun exposure makes you less likely to die on at least two fronts!

Is the “more sun exposure” with or without wearing sunscreen?

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#107

Post by sunnydeedee »

Since biological evolutionary forces have forever been fighting the sun are our bodies MORE or LESS suited to dealing with UV damage vs oxybenzone damage? Since oxybenzone can intercalate DNA rungs under extremely high local concentrations (forcing some molecules into cavities), or by photo-oxidation converting to radical cation, or in the presence of ethanol which lowers DNA hydration layers and can widen the inter-pair base gaps, then is it causing MORE DNA damage or LESS DNA damage than the Sun's ultraviolet radiation which can contribute to cancer under real world conditions?

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#108

Post by jona-f »

XorNot wrote: post #66
krupan wrote: post #53

Wow, it feels like nobody read the article. Findings: - high blood pressure leads to a lot of deaths - people that spend more time in the sun have lower blood pressure - skin cancer is caused by sun exposure, but it kills far, far less people than high blood pressure - people that spend more time in the sun have a lower rate of dying from skin cancer than people who spend less time in the sun! Summary: more sun expos…

I read the article and it conjectures a bunch of stuff but fails to prove it or link relevant studies. So consider then: we just did a round of "gloves are contaminating basically all micro plastics research" - it might be worthwhile to be slightly skeptical of a suspiciously anti-sunscreen adjacent narrative (coz "sunscreen might be bad for you" is in the article too). And we should absolutely be suspicious of narra…

I agree, that article is suspicious. One thing, what if you are not at risk of heart disease? I'm not fat, fairly active, have a low blood pressure and use sunscreen to slow down skin aging. Lots of health advice does not apply to me, cause it is meant for the overweight population. There are the biggest possible health gains to have, so statistically everything that makes people less fat is going to "be healthy for humans".

When standing up from a longer squat I tend to blacken out a bit (never fully fainted) and this gets much worse with sun exposure. So I can totally confirm the underlying scientific finding of this article. Sun exposure does seem to lower blood pressure, but the rest is all conjecture and lacks differentiation.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#109

Post by picofarad »

jodrellblank wrote: post #104
layman51 wrote: post #34

Does anyone know whether UVA or UVB is more conducive to producing vitamin D naturally? A quick search shows me that it is mainly UVB that's responsible for that, but unfortunately, this is what gets blocked out by glass windows and sunscreen. On the other hand, UVA is what causes early aging. So this is just an unfortunate situation because I don't think there's a way of just getting UVB into you in a safe way.

UVB makes it. UBA denatures it[1], which I thought was how we avoid overdose levels building up in the skin when outside, but can't find a source for that. Suggested as a reason why fair-skinned indoor workers are getting more melanomas, (ref glass blocking UVB and passing UVA): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03069...

Offhand, what was the overdose level? Because 150ng/ml (adjust if I messed units up) isnt an overdose and most people are around ~50 unless they supplement (I mean people outside the 25th parallel.) I think even approaching 300ng/ml is possibly safe as long as you're accounting for the calcium.

I aim to be around 105ng/ml.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#110

Post by picofarad »

kirrent wrote: post #67
sevenseacat wrote: post #13

Coming from the skin cancer capital of the world (Australia) - no, no it is not

The title is inadvertently correct only because modern margarine is healthier than alternatives such as butter.

Seed oil is healthier than milk fat? Going to need some framing definitions, here...
Post reply on HN