Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#141

Post by DANmode » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 3:30 PM UTC

jodrellblank wrote: post #140

DANmode wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think that happened to her from a single exposure? A handful of exposures? She looks like a football! Who’s hallucinating?

92 years is 33,000 days of being alive, that's plenty of time to rack up damage without doing anything for "too long". If she had tooth decay or dentures would you say she must have been "chewing for too long"?

Chewing bacteria and or acid for too long, yeah. Like most people.

It’s easy to explain away degenerative effects as primarily age-related - until you look at healthy old people.

About whom the model just says “statistical outlier” and moves on.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#142

Post by giwook » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 4:29 PM UTC

smallpipe wrote: post #127

giwook wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a clever idea. Unfortunately, UV exposure is cumulative. So your skin is still getting damaged by the UV rays even if you're not getting burnt.

So how many Joules can you safely sustain in say, a month, or a lifetime ?

I don't think it's really helpful (nor possible) to get into this level of specificity.

Generally, just apply sunscreen and limit prolonged sun exposure when possible (particularly when UV index is high).

Avoiding sunburns (i.e. prolonged sun exposure, particularly when skin is unprotected) is probably the main thing to focus on as I believe studies have shown there is a high correlation between getting burnt and developing skin cancer.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#143

Post by TurdF3rguson » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 10:09 PM UTC

chiply314 wrote: post #139

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but there are common precautionary rule-of-thumb heuristics which lead normal people to believe that every sun exposure brings them a little closer to death. That's exaggerated. Or at least, the claims are widely contested.

Lets be honest here, every additional sun exposre means you lived longer which directly leads you closer to death sooooo ;P

That part really is cumulative

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#144

Post by krupan » Wed, Jul 01, 2026, 10:16 PM UTC

anon373839 wrote: post #93

krupan wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He specifically mentions sunbathers. Not landscapers or construction workers

That is also selection bias. People who spend more time outside relaxing may have lower stress levels? Stress definitely contributes to cardiovascular illness.

Ok, so stop worrying about the exact mechanism, stop arguing on the Internet, and just get outside!

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#145

Post by genewitch » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 2:31 PM UTC

jodrellblank wrote: post #132

picofarad wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have no idea what the numbers were, I took it in as a system idea: more time in sunlight, more UVB, more Vitamin D. Then UVA breaks it down slowly, so more builds up in the skin, more is being broken down, acting as a control-feedback brake on the increase. > " unless they supplement " I have seen plenty of claims that low levels of Vitamin D correlate with many diseases and overall mortality, but that supplementin…

> Is there any consensus on that?

I'm not sure. there's two doctors that i based my supplementation of D3+K2 on, but i cannot remember their names or link the videos. The assertion made was that blood serum 25OH Dwhatever of 100ng/ml (or dl, i always forget, but the one that makes sense) is enough to prevent most disease, like colds, flu, etc.

Another interesting thing vis a vis overdose/excess D3 is that for covid there was a hospital protocol for 50,000 IU given three times to "knock covid out"

I never read a study, sorry, so i can't link.

I started on this path because my wife got cancer and afterward was getting sick and always tired, d3 serum test was 28ng/ml so we brought her up to 100ng/ml and she hasn't been "sick" in 5 years. Additionally she no longer has to supplement calcium, which her oncologist said she'd have to do the rest of her life.

I buy "Micro Ingredients Vitamin D3 10,000 IU + K2 MK-7 200 mcg, 600 Softgels with Virgin Coconut Oil (2 Pack)" - B0D7B94P8D, and have for years. consistently good, and the blood tests prove it's real. Not affiliated.

I supplement a lot of stuff because my diet sucks and it's something i have been working on this year.

Re: Is sunscreen the new margarine? (2019)

#146

Post by LarsDu88 » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 11:21 PM UTC

thayne wrote: post #105

LarsDu88 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

NO2 and blood pressure is not the same as death