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

Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

cam.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 119 posts

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#61

Post by zamadatix »

tombert wrote: post #24

I've only ever smoked like a quarter of one cigarette when I was eighteen and I thought it was fucking gross so I never picked up the habit (fortunately). That said, I'm a pretty pale dude and my sister has gotten skin cancer twice now [1], so I've started getting a bit worried that that's going to happen to me. I've started wearing a baseball cap every time I go outside to protect my scalp (since my body has decided…

Timing is also a big part. Going out for an hour at 1 pm can be a burn while going from 7 to sunset for the week might not even register.

If you must go out at certain times then the clothing selections from others are probably the best bet.

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#62

Post by ShinyLeftPad »

spacephysics wrote: post #43
bob1029 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can spend a solid hour in the sun before I start to burn, assuming I have a hat on my head. I've also noticed some correlation between my diet and how fast I burn. Whenever my metabolism is running at/near ketogenesis, it seems like it takes a lot longer for the sun to affect me.

I experienced similar reaction when i was doing keto. It became far more difficult to burn that summer

Why did you stop?

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#63

Post by ShinyLeftPad »

Mezzie wrote: post #27
tombert wrote: post #24

I've only ever smoked like a quarter of one cigarette when I was eighteen and I thought it was fucking gross so I never picked up the habit (fortunately). That said, I'm a pretty pale dude and my sister has gotten skin cancer twice now [1], so I've started getting a bit worried that that's going to happen to me. I've started wearing a baseball cap every time I go outside to protect my scalp (since my body has decided…

Strong recommend a UV umbrella. I also hate the feeling of sunscreen and will also fry the minute I so much as look at the sun. Also, linen clothing. Far more comfortable in heat while keeping you covered. Hoodies and jeans sounds miserable.

How is UV umbrella different from any normal umbrella?

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#64

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

kelipso wrote: post #53
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would imply that red meat eaters would be less likely to get cancer which doesn't seem to be the case. I'm not saying that zinc isn't a factor, but I think that saying a blanket "Zinc is needed to prevent cancer" is irresponsible. We should be so lucky that we can narrow it down to a single dietary element or be able to blame it simply upon nutrition.

That’s not how statistical implication works… Learn about sufficient condition vs required condition before you start criticizing people. Taking zinc and smoking cigarettes still increases your chances of cancer, for example.

I understand that entirely. I'm saying that the way that GP is presenting their information it sounds like a "one neat trick", which of course it isn't because nothing ever is, which you and I are in agreement upon.

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#65

Post by tombert »

Mezzie wrote: post #51
tombert wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've more or less gotten used to the jeans. Probably due to a combination of undiagnosed autism and some very mild bullying in middle school (due to me growing rapidly and people making fun of me for wearing "short shorts"), I have been almost exclusively wearing jeans for everywhere but the gym since eighth grade. The hoodies are a more recent thing and are more miserable. I'll check out linen clothing.

Yeah, there are linen pants too, so you don't have to wear shorts if you don't feel comfortable showing your legs. Linen in general is a great option if you want to not die of heat and you don't feel like showing your whole body to the world. Since you're autistic, you might want to buy them in person: the tactile sensation of linens can be pretty different, so you might want to touch them before buying if sensory is…

I don't really have sensory issues and I don't get too picky about the textures of clothing. As I said, never actually diagnosed as autistic, I think I'm more borderline if I am.

Anyway, I'll take a look at some linen stuff. Probably worth an experiment if nothing else.

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#66

Post by pazimzadeh »

Rnonymous wrote: post #32
pazimzadeh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly the best time to go out is at solar noon, when the UVB/UVA ratio is higher. Just go for a shorter amount of time to compensate for the higher overall intensity.

Care to explain? Isn't UVB more harmful than UVA?

No, UVA is stronger and more harmful. UVA penetrates deeper in the skin, since it's stronger. UVB stimulates Vitamin D production, while UVA doesn't.

So almost anything that is "UV-blocking" (sunscreen, UV-treated glass) gets rid of all of the beneficial UVB before UVA starts getting reduced. So you are actually enriching your exposure to the most harmful UV type, and not making Vitamin D.

This might explain the paradoxical finding that people who use sunscreen more can have higher rates of skin cancer

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10840669

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#67

Post by pazimzadeh »

tartoran wrote: post #35
pazimzadeh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly the best time to go out is at solar noon, when the UVB/UVA ratio is higher. Just go for a shorter amount of time to compensate for the higher overall intensity.

That's only if you don't have a lot of time out. If you're planning to be out for a while I'd avoid being too exposed during the 12-3 window.

I agree, but you can titrate your exposure. So at the beginning of the season, in the 12-3 window you can start by going 5 mins without sunscreen for a few days, then 10 mins, then 20 etc. depending on your skin type.

The worst thing to do is to go from low exposure (i.e. winter months, or just constant indoor time) to long periods of exposure, even with sunscreen.

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#68

Post by stevekemp »

brightball wrote: post #29
aantix wrote: post #3

Anecdotally, whenever I go swimming with my kids in the summer, and I don't put sunscreen on right away, but let myself get some intense direct sun, I feel good and sleep really well that night. As long as I don't let myself get in a red, sunburn situation.

I typically do the same thing. I only wear sunscreen if I am planning on being in direct sun for an extended period of time where I can't easily get back in the shade. The more you're able to build up a base tan the less you need it to avoid a burn at least.

I'm a pale-skinned redhead, covered in freckles. For me there is no such thing as a "base tan".

I get can get sunburnt from as little as 30 minutes in the sun at times, and I almost always wear sunscreen in the summer for that reason.

(Biggest issue is wearing sandals and forgetting to cover my feet, or when jumping in the lake after sauna and not covering up again quickly enough.)

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#69

Post by GlickWick »

pixel_popping wrote: post #57
GlickWick wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely not. Vitamin D takes a while to synthesize and build up. A quick fix like this isn't possible.

It's just that getting sun is healthy (in moderation) and our body reward us, we have this new anti-sun obsession which is likely to cause many health (and mental health) issues

I don't think it's that simple, and making it seem that way is counter-productive towards understanding what we should/shouldn't be doing.

There's no anti-sun obsession, either. Sunscreen isn't anti-sun, and people are well aware that Vitamin D synthesis is an issue in farther northern/southern latitudes. There's definitely an increased recognition scientifically that excessive sun is extremely bad, though.

Re: Why DNA damage from smoking and UV rays cause cancer in some but not others

#70

Post by dblohm7 »

crims0n wrote: post #47

As a millennial growing up it was beaten into our head that smoking was a death sentence. I recently looked up what the actual cancer rate among smokers was... about 125k people in the US die of lung cancer annual. 25 million people smoke annually. That is a 0.5% chance for occasional smokers. Even if you smoke a pack a day your entire life, the cancer rate is less than 15%. I am in no way saying it is okay to smoke,…

Cancer is not the only complication...
Post reply on HN