Time to sunburn • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to sunburn

#31

Post by simonsarris » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:35 PM UTC

jeremyw wrote: post #21

Consider removing omega-6 seed oils from your diet. Like many others who have tried it, I now have a normal tan response, where in the past I burned in a heartbeat. Note: you do need to wait a few months for the fatty acid composition of your skin to turn over.

Same: I suspect a good omega 3 ratio greatly reduces skin damage with sun. Anecdotally it's worked for me and my wife when we started eating a lot more eggs/red meat and less O-6 products. We haven't used sunscreen in a few years now because of it.

There are some studies that suggest this is true, such as: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7561154/ (note: N = 13)

And Oregon State "Essential Fatty Acids and Skin Health" primer, which goes over what's going on in healthy skin. https://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/health-disease/skin-health/e...

Their conclusion:

> Supplementation with n-3 fatty acids in particular exerts protection from photodamage and photoaging.

Re: Time to sunburn

#32

Post by pdr94 » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:35 PM UTC

cryptoz wrote: post #10

Worth mentioning that UVA and UVB are different, and that there are multiple sunscreen scandals happening right now where UVA protection is insufficient. UVB causes burns and tanning but UVA causes more cancer; and American suncreens especially - but also globally - are not telling the truth about how much protection they offer. You've got to be careful to really apply multiple layers of sunscreen with UVA protection…

This happened in South Korea, there were 3 brands that needed to pull their products because of this. https://www.nssgclub.com/en/pills/25875/solari-coreani-contr...

Re: Time to sunburn

#33

Post by hprotagonist » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:38 PM UTC

I _hate_ sunscreen. It's unpleasant to wear. I always do, but it's not my favorite part of summer by far.

This year i am experimenting with rashguards and big stupid floppy hats.

Re: Time to sunburn

#34

Post by throwawaycities » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:38 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #17

Equiet wrote: post #5

There's a video which shows how you look like to a UV camera when you put sunscreen on. Also glasses with UV filters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9BqrSAHbTc

The video was cool but I'd also be skeptical of how they imply that freckles (including UV spectrum freckles) are "damage" to the skin or undesirable. It's neat that people look different under UV, and it's a cool adaptation that our skin pigments seem to target UV differently that visible spectrum... that's all I would confidently take away from the video

I live in south Florida (tropical weather climate) and my shoulders are covered in freckles from sunburns growing up. Basically following the sunburn the skin would begin to peel, which started off as little circles (which I always assumed became the freckles).

I don’t know much about the process but always classified it myself as damage/scars. Though I could see calling non-sunburn induced freckles scars or damaged skin (or undesirable) as being inaccurate and just insensitive to people born with freckles.

Re: Time to sunburn

#35

Post by 49531 » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:38 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #16

For those who, like me, started to wonder how using sunscreen affects vitamin D production, here's the conclusion of "The effect of sunscreen on vitamin D: a review" : "There is little evidence that sunscreen decreases 25(OH)D concentration when used in real-life settings, suggesting that concerns about vitamin D should not negate skin cancer prevention advice. However, there have been no trials of the high-SPF sunsc…

Fortunately Vitamin D supplements are a safe and effective way to get the recommended amount. UV exposure is the most preventable cause of skin cancer[1] and not worth the risk.

EDIT Forgot my link: 1. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/call-to-action-preve...

Re: Time to sunburn

#36

Post by outworlder » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #11

janci5243 wrote: post #2

This might be completely a common knowledge, but I just learned recently that SPF (the number on most sunscreen products) is actually a multiplier of the time you can spend in the sun without any protection So having an SPF of 50 increases a time 50 fold, which really puts things into perspective. Never leave the house around lunchtime without sunscreen.

Also remember however that the SPF numbers on most sunscreen are aspirational. They usually require you to apply a much heavier coat than most people think is reasonable and have shorter than you would expect full effectiveness window. As the article discusses it also depends on your skin. If you are a fair ginger then yeah, sunscreen is your life. If you are more swarthy then you can get away with some midday sun.

> then you can get away with some midday sun

No you can't. Or rather, you shouldn't. If you have more melanin you obviously have more protection. But your skin will still get damaged by a midday sun, and it will age faster than normal.

This misconception that darker skin does not need protection is really harmful. Maybe that allows you to skip sunscreen for short periods of time, or in early morning, late evening. Not midday, unless "some sun" means just a few minutes.

Re: Time to sunburn

#37

Post by kingabzpro » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

This is amazing interective dashboard like notebook.love it

Re: Time to sunburn

#38

Post by lettergram » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

I almost exclusively refuse to wear sunscreen. The data isn’t exceptionally clear if wearing vs no wearing leads to overall more or less cancer system wide. Further, it definitely reduces vitamin D production and has harmful chemicals when in the water supply and absorbed into your skin.

You can wear very lose light cotton clothing, hats and avoid too much direct sun. Further, going out regularly will typically keep a tan (for most).

The Amish have notoriously low rates of cancer and don’t use sun block AND work outside all day. I typically try to imitate their methods.

Re: Time to sunburn

#39

Post by ahelwer » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

hprotagonist wrote: post #33

I _hate_ sunscreen. It's unpleasant to wear. I always do, but it's not my favorite part of summer by far. This year i am experimenting with rashguards and big stupid floppy hats.

Hats are good, as is sun-protective clothing in general. There are a number of companies providing some kind of ultra-thin sun-protective hoodie which is surprisingly comfortable to wear even in hot temperatures. I have a few echo hoodies from outdoor research.

Re: Time to sunburn

#40

Post by cpncrunch » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #24

version_five wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The video was cool but I'd also be skeptical of how they imply that freckles (including UV spectrum freckles) are "damage" to the skin or undesirable. It's neat that people look different under UV, and it's a cool adaptation that our skin pigments seem to target UV differently that visible spectrum... that's all I would confidently take away from the video

But in many (most?) cases, they are damage. I have visible 'freckles' in my shoulders. I wasn't born with them. There's further damage in some areas that had heavy exposure to sunlight. Same on the more exposed areas in my arms. Zero "freckles" or spots of any kind outside these zones. There's plenty of literature on this. Sure, they are an adaptation. One that's best avoided _while you can_ Every time you get a "sun…