In the city of Utrecht NL they have free sunblock stations spread around the city. It shows the temp and UV rating. But buying it in store is crazy expensive and often the quality is poor. Some fancy tiny spray bottles go up to 12 euros, only good for 3 to 4 uses. wtf. Imagine being ginger, there's a ginger tax called sunblock.
I'm not buying the fancy expensive shit. But the cheap stuff fills pores and creates pimples. Also, don't use the one from last year, it has an expiration date. The protection goes down significantly.
I buy the store brand from the local supermarket. €2,99 for a 250 ml bottle of SPF 30 and it works great. I never get sunburn, even during multi hour bike rides in the blazing sun.
I have autistic sensory issues and the cheapest one I can at all tolerate to have on my skin is 15€ for 50ml. I have so many of the 5-10€ bottles at home and can't handle any of them. Fml
In the US it's cheap but unregulated and full of shit that's terrible for you. Or you can pay an arm and a leg for stuff that's better but still not up to the standards of most other countries. I learned this by getting a chemical burn in my eye from sunscreen... meant for my face.
US sunscreen is way worse than sunscreen in other parts of the world like the EU. It doesn’t block the harmful radiation as well. The reason is that it’s more strictly regulated in the US. IIRC it’s not considered a cosmetic product but instead it’s a medical product.
As such it’s subject to much stricter regulation and requires much more (expensive) testing before being allowed on the market. Due to this it’s considered too expensive to introduce the newer, more advanced sunscreen products in the US so you’re stuck with the older, crappier sunscreen.
I'm not sure I'd call US sunscreens way worse (they are still very effective at blocking UVB, just not UVA as effectively), but there are definitely better options abroad. There definitely aren't many options; that's part of why Hawaii banning two common sunscreen ingredients for marine toxicity reasons was such a big deal.
I guess you went to the wrong shop then. In pharmacies or shops open at crazy hours this might be true. We usually buy all products for Hygiene and beauty in shops we call "Drogerie". The most common two chains are Rossmann and DM. There you get sun screen for 3-15€ from various Brands.
There's no fire in the sun. Fire is some material oxidizing, and that's not what's happening (or at least not in relevant amounts). What creates the radiation is nuclear fusion.
The heat could dry out your skin, which, if I'm not mistaken, is essentially what a burn is. However, as the other person noted, a sunburn is damage from radiation, not heat. So I think you could stretch the common definition of a burn to call heat induced dry skin a burn but calling it a sunburn would not be accurate.
@[email protected] If you sit at a magnesium fire, it burns at 3300K, which is hot enough to produce sizeable ultraviolet rays. So you can get your sunburn from that, damaging the DNA in whatever of your remaining cells have not been melted away by heat.
Note to self - Don't sit near a magnesium fireplace if you don't want to tan your bones, which are now exposed due to the flesh getting melted off by the said fireplace.
Heat is also (thermal) radiation. So is light, radio waves, microwaves, etc. However, the radiation from a fire or the other stuff I mentioned isn't ionizing, so unless the heat itself does damage it won't do cellular damage.
You also give off thermal radiation, but so does anything higher temp than absolute zero.
The sun emits a wide spectrum of radiation due to the nuclear fusion reactions occurring within it's core. This includes everything from low energy non-visible radio waves and thermal radiation to high energy X-rays and gamma rays. Fortunately for us, the Earth's electromagnetic field and atmosphere (especially the ozone layer) protects us from all but a tiny sliver of ionizing radiation or we wouldn't be here to talk about it.
Also, hello again AES_Enjoyer, hope you've been well :)
Isn't most of that radiation blocked by the outer layers of the sun, though? Like, sure, there is a non-negligible amount of high energy photons escaping, but the overwhelming majority of the radiation comes AFAIK from blackbody radiation from the plasma at the temperature of the surface of the sun?
Maybe they read something about the titanium dioxide contained in some sunscreen products. There is some research indicating that its not as safe as we thought and that it might be carcinogenic.
This and nowadays (at least here in Europe) you find lots of sun screen without titanium dioxide.They all have a label with corals on it (they call it in hawaian agreement?). So its very easy to avoid nanoparticles AND protect skin. Also, its not like a few years ago that you look like a vampire when using sun screen without nanoparticles.
...and Florida, and Jamaica, and Mexico, and (I presume) Spain. There is no corner of the earth in which the English will not challenge the mighty Helios until they are as red as the cross of St. George.
Australia is a different beast though. I went out for like 10 minutes without a hat or sunscreen on a particularly hot december noon and my nose damn near fell off the day after 😅 Not because I thought I'm too tough to get sunburnt but if you live your entire life in Europe you just can't imagine the sunshine being this potent. Never happened again after that incident 😄
In New Zealand the sun feels like it's stabbing you after 10min in summer. I can feel my skin prickling like tiny fire ants.It doesn't take long to burn here. serious respect for the sun and upper atmosphere
Its not the ozon hole (well its a little bit the fault of the ozon hole) but its because due to the eleptical orbit of the earth around the sun the southern hemisphere is closer to the sun in summer than the north hemisphere.
Maybe tens of thousands of years ago, but 2000ish years ago 60ish was old age. The main reason life expectancy has gone up isn't that old people didn't make it to 50, it's that young people didn't make it to 2. If a couple has 5 kids, 3 of them die as toddlers and the other two make it to 70 the average life expectancy is about 30, but that doesn't mean living past 30 is unusual.
Also, tens of thousands of years ago there was an ice age, but for the last 10k years light-skinned Europeans still had normal summers and worked in the fields.
You must know how averages work. The poster is correct. Average age at death is a horrible metric when you have gigantic birth and infant mortality rates.
No, I mean that for the brunt of humans evolving to be genetically roughly what we are today, it is unlikely many people were living much past their prime. I am talking about roughly 100,000 years ago up to around 10,000 years ago when humans developed from a largely hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
People who live a hunter-gatherer lifestyle today live 65+ regularly. The average may be lower for uncontacted peoples for various reasons, or higher because of reduced disease transmission. I imagine it depends on the group.
Now, I will give you that humans have refined their techniques of hunting etc over that 90k years in a way that caused less accidental deaths.
The crux of the matter though is that the statistical averages you have seen are flawed by infant mortality. In these societies, if you made it past toddler age you were statistically likely to live a long time.
What would be killing people much past their "prime" and how do you define prime?
I'm allergic to something in most brands of suncream so if I run out I'm having to deal with rashes all over where I used it.
I hate how it makes me feel slimy after using it
There's this Loreal suncream spray I like that I can't seem to find that feels like water and when it's dry, it doesn't feel like you have suncream on. It's perfect for me! I'm not allergic to it either so I can actually go in the sun without turning red and blotchy!
It's actually irritating to me that the sun is bombarding us with ionizing radiation
(I know, not the same intensity) but think about the amount of precautions we take before turning on a UV lamp. Or before turning on a very bright LED which you are not supposed to look directly at. Well, neither you should look directly at the sun, but you get the idea
In a perspective, sun is so radioactive it can even decay paint and plastic! It can literally cook you alive and make your skin fall in pieces. This just seems usual to us because we were born with it, people would freak the hell out if a medical procedure had the same side effects
Look, I can make a right wing campaign out of this! BAN THE SUN SAVE YOUR KIDS FROM 800T (Terahertz) RADIATION
Yeah, my experience jibes with that too. I wear sunscreen everyday and I feel like I'm pretty conscientious but I end up getting red by the end of the day often. The problem with it, i find, is that it's time consuming to do one's exposed skin properly or it involves another person. I'm either working or recreating outside so I know I miss applications due to impatience and inattention. I switched to pants, hats, and long sleeves for outdoor living the past decade or so and it's a huge improvement. Just sweatier.
My excuse is that the weather was predicted as "cloudy" when we left in the morning. When we were on the trip, though, the sun was burning down to extinct humanity instead.
>be me
>white as everliving fuck
>put on 60 spf sun screen, as you should, and set a timer for an hour and a half to reapply, earlier than the recommended 2 hours
>alarm goes off, reapply
>STILL GET SUNBURNED
I used to have that problem. I switched to 30 spf and don't get burned anymore. I can't really explain it, but my theory is that 50+ is marketing BS and doesn't actually do anything. Or it could be that Banana Boat brand just really sucks and Hawaiian is more like lotion so it actually stays on my skin and also moisturizes, which probably helps because dry skin = gonna get burned.
The difference between SPF 60 and 100 is like 1.1% better UV blocking, anything over SPF 50 is in a practical sense nearly useless.
For instance SPF 30 blocks 97% of UVB rays, is it worth paying more and slathering more potentially harmful (to the environment) compounds on your skin for 98% blocking? I think not.
I used to think the same thing, but the thing is we don't care about the energy that goes into the sunscreen, we care about the remaining percent that goes into the skin. If you go from a sunscreen that absorbs 98% of the sun's energy to one that absorbs 99% you are halving the amount of energy your skin is exposed to.
If you're still getting burned with 98% absorption, then increasing that number by 1% would actually make a huge difference. And that's without even considering things like having a safety margin for improper application.
From another thing I read, people have a tendency to not apply enough sunscreen or apply it correctly. I'm sure if everyone did it perfectly it wouldn't matter. All I know is anecdotally, when I switched to 100 I stopped getting sunburns, and I have been in situations with people who used their own lower spf, got a little burned still, and I came out of it pale white.
The price might be higher, but a quick look on Amazon and I'm seeing more than spf affecting that. The brand I buy is about 1.80 (usd) per ounce, and i see other brands with less spf for more. I see other brands with the same spf for less, and it seems like it's between ~1.10 per ounce to ~2.80 per ounce so I'm not really bothered by my price. I don't know anything about the environmental differences between spf so I won't comment on that.
I put on sun screen every morning to ward off basal cell skin cancer. It sucks but it's cheaper than going to the dermatologist to have basal cell skin cancer removed. The worst part is getting it in my eyes. On the plus side, the splotchy age spots on my temples have disappeared
@bees There have been some recent studies that have solidified the relationship between autism and the MMR vaccine in particular. Gates live Polio vaccine has killed around 500,000 Africans, who knows how many it's maimed, and not to say Polio isn't worth vaccinating against, I have friends who were partially parallelized by it, but if you're killing 500,000 people something is wrong, and one of my children got heart issues after covid vax, further, he at 40 had two vaccines, damage done on the second, had three incidents of covid and the third involved a 102.9 fever, I by contrast got no covid vax, got covid twice, both times it was your average head cold, and the highest fever I had was 99.1, never went down into my lungs, same for my wife and my other son who did not get vaccinated. Vaccines are immensely profitable to the pharmaceutical industry, and just like profit in the military complex keeps wars going even if it means killing and maiming people, so to the pharma profits force unnecessary and dangerous medical interventions.
@bees Actually the UV creams have shown to be themselves carcinogenic, so it's not about to have cancer or not, but how to get it. All things in moderation, including sun, your body does need vitamin d3 which it produces in the presence of UV.
@Railcar8095 With respect to vaccines and autism, there is a correlation but as the old saying goes casuality is not causality until it is. In my view it warrants research. And I've got no doubt that the number of vaccines they are giving toddlers and children these days is overloading their immune systems.
Autist here who loves to read research about autism.
There is absolutely no correlation between autism and vaccines. Neurodivergence cannot be caused by immune system problems.
People are born autistic with a brain programmed by their DNA to form alternative neurological connections compared to neurotypicals. A neurotypical cannot be turned/mutated into being autistic and vice versa.
The only correlation that exists is that people who are neurodivergent are prone to develop some unhealthy habits (from extra stress, sleep schedules, and being a picky eater etc) which in turn can lower your immune system.
Feels weird that i have to explain this, but not all Research is funded by big pharma.
The majority of research on autism is not about Vaccins either but about understanding the many properties from which it emerges.
By understanding what autism actually is, which is often studied by autistic researchers who are motivated to understand themselves better it becomes self evident that we are far from reaching a technological point where we can create a drug to cause or even simulate the complex nature of it.
You could just aswell claim that vaccins cause people to shapeshift into cats, if you understand the subject matter thats just as non-realistic
If you want to bash vaccines you could state that an experimental accidental wrong mixed variant could cause death. Which would still be an incredibly unlikely freak accident but at least reality allows the technical possibility for such a mistake.
@webghost0101 Here are the facts. 100 years ago, Autism rate is 1-in-40000, today it is 1-in-16. The increase in autism has paralleled the increase in vaccines. And the autism rates parallels the vaccination rates in various regions. As I previously stated, this is a casual not a causal relationship, but given the seriousness of the disease and how many it is affecting, it is worth researching the relationship. Only people who could possibly be opposed to that are those whose profits are threatened.
Thats a cute observation but real facts are the following:
Autism was only formally recognized in the 1940s - there’s no reliable data before that, though historical evidence suggests autistic people have always existed. For decades, people deemed “mentally ill” were institutionalized and hidden from society.
The majority of autistic people can mask their traits and present as neurotypical - they had strong incentives to do so given the historical stigma.
Diagnosis happens more frequently in areas with accessible healthcare, which naturally are also areas with higher vaccination rates.
We now have better diagnostic tools and a less punitive society for people with neurological differences. The diagnostic criteria have expanded significantly - many people (especially women) who wouldn’t have qualified under older definitions now do.
And if we want to include the more modern research done by the autistic community we learn that autism is a part of a bigger phenomenon called neurodivergence which includes adhd and many others. Who also used to be completely excluded by the dogmatic labeling of neurotypicals.
Also you referring to autism as a serious disease shows how little you actually know about it. Just like anyone else neurodivergent people can have psychological disabilities but because they are neurodivergent those disabilities are often different from neurotypical ones. In ““high functioning”” autism disabilities are subjective in context of living in a neurotypical world and are increasingly less disabling with social acceptance and understanding.
Oh FFS this isn't the benzene thing again, is it? Benzene is a trace contaminant in everything from the air you breathe to the water you drink. The highest number Valisure came up with was 6 ppm in a sunscreen sample, that's 0.0006%. Even if you decided to inject the whole bottle of sunscreen directly into your veins it would be a fraction of your total exposure for the day.
Using people's fear of cancer to scare them away from effective cancer prevention measures is fucking shameful, do better.
@GingerGoodness Benzene in trace amount is an issue, but also Oxybenzone: Some studies suggest it may be an endocrine disruptor, meaning it could interfere with hormones, and research in animals has raised questions about potential cancer risk, but it's important to note these were high-dose studies not directly relevant to typical human use. Other UV Filters: Ingredients like octinoxate and homosalate have also raised concerns about potential endocrine disruption, and some are banned in certain regions due to their impact on marine life
Look, if you want to smear yourself with chemicals, inject yourself with artificial DNA, etc, go for it, just don't require it of me and my offspring.
mate it's £5-10 for a 200ml bottle I'd hardly call that cheap
In the city of Utrecht NL they have free sunblock stations spread around the city. It shows the temp and UV rating. But buying it in store is crazy expensive and often the quality is poor. Some fancy tiny spray bottles go up to 12 euros, only good for 3 to 4 uses. wtf. Imagine being ginger, there's a ginger tax called sunblock.
As a ginger- the petrol money to go shop in Germany at DM or Rossmann is cheaper than the ginger tax here.
Then don't buy the fancy spray bottles, but the big one that lasts for a year or three?
I'm not buying the fancy expensive shit. But the cheap stuff fills pores and creates pimples. Also, don't use the one from last year, it has an expiration date. The protection goes down significantly.
Good point with the expiration date, but the one I have has >1 year, possibly longer since I cannot remember when I bought it
WTF are those prices. I'd start looking into importing from abroad ...
Cost of living in the UK is up 25% since Brexit happened in 2021.
"We've become the first country in the history of the world to have placed economic sanctions upon itself" -James O'Brien
We're a population of morons who will still blame anything but ourselves for the position we're in.
The British are the Americans of Europe, so that makes sense.
Like father, like son.
Here in the Netherlands it’s expensive as well. Like a small bottle of name-brand sunscreen is €30.
I buy the store brand from the local supermarket. €2,99 for a 250 ml bottle of SPF 30 and it works great. I never get sunburn, even during multi hour bike rides in the blazing sun.
I have autistic sensory issues and the cheapest one I can at all tolerate to have on my skin is 15€ for 50ml. I have so many of the 5-10€ bottles at home and can't handle any of them. Fml
Cheap is not the case everywhere. In Germany it's cheap, in the Netherlands it's much more expensive and in Croatia a bottle is like 25 Euro
In the US it's cheap but unregulated and full of shit that's terrible for you. Or you can pay an arm and a leg for stuff that's better but still not up to the standards of most other countries. I learned this by getting a chemical burn in my eye from sunscreen... meant for my face.
It’s the exact opposite actually.
US sunscreen is way worse than sunscreen in other parts of the world like the EU. It doesn’t block the harmful radiation as well. The reason is that it’s more strictly regulated in the US. IIRC it’s not considered a cosmetic product but instead it’s a medical product.
As such it’s subject to much stricter regulation and requires much more (expensive) testing before being allowed on the market. Due to this it’s considered too expensive to introduce the newer, more advanced sunscreen products in the US so you’re stuck with the older, crappier sunscreen.
I'm not sure I'd call US sunscreens way worse (they are still very effective at blocking UVB, just not UVA as effectively), but there are definitely better options abroad. There definitely aren't many options; that's part of why Hawaii banning two common sunscreen ingredients for marine toxicity reasons was such a big deal.
Edit: Ornery_chemist was a good dude and proved themselves wrong! Hooray! https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/05/18/1251919831/sunscreen-effective-better-ingredients-fda
I'm down voting both of you because neither provided sauce.
Whoever's right, gets the updoot.
You can spent 10 seconds googling: Source
Phenomenal! Thanks for proving yourself wrong!
I didn't present the evidence, ya'll did. It's on you, not nameless strangers on the internet taking a shit or doing other stuff.
Oh, that's bad. Made me think of this sunscreen and in Robocop 2.
The USA is the Wild West when it comes to safety standards of any product.
I was in Berlin last month and spent €16.50 for a 50ml bottle
Weird. In NRW you can get them at DM for less than 10 Euro.
I guess you went to the wrong shop then. In pharmacies or shops open at crazy hours this might be true. We usually buy all products for Hygiene and beauty in shops we call "Drogerie". The most common two chains are Rossmann and DM. There you get sun screen for 3-15€ from various Brands.
Clearly you've never met someone like my wife.
"ball of fire"
Haha, no no. You threw down with a gigantic source of cell destroying radiation. The fire did no harm.
There's no fire in the sun. Fire is some material oxidizing, and that's not what's happening (or at least not in relevant amounts). What creates the radiation is nuclear fusion.
https://youtu.be/sLkGSV9WDMA
Hypothetically speaking, will you get sunburnt if you sit near a fire all day?
The heat could dry out your skin, which, if I'm not mistaken, is essentially what a burn is. However, as the other person noted, a sunburn is damage from radiation, not heat. So I think you could stretch the common definition of a burn to call heat induced dry skin a burn but calling it a sunburn would not be accurate.
@[email protected] If you sit at a magnesium fire, it burns at 3300K, which is hot enough to produce sizeable ultraviolet rays. So you can get your sunburn from that, damaging the DNA in whatever of your remaining cells have not been melted away by heat.
Note to self - Don't sit near a magnesium fireplace if you don't want to tan your bones, which are now exposed due to the flesh getting melted off by the said fireplace.
Heat is also (thermal) radiation. So is light, radio waves, microwaves, etc. However, the radiation from a fire or the other stuff I mentioned isn't ionizing, so unless the heat itself does damage it won't do cellular damage.
You also give off thermal radiation, but so does anything higher temp than absolute zero.
Thanks. I completely forgot that the standard suntan or sunburn is caused by UV rays. A fireplace doesn't create UV rays.
Maybe! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythema_ab_igne
A ball of constant unending nuclear explosion
Why exactly do you think there is UV radiation coming from the sun?
Because the spectrometer says so, mainly. Why?
Hahaha that's a good one
Assuming this is a sincere question:
The sun emits a wide spectrum of radiation due to the nuclear fusion reactions occurring within it's core. This includes everything from low energy non-visible radio waves and thermal radiation to high energy X-rays and gamma rays. Fortunately for us, the Earth's electromagnetic field and atmosphere (especially the ozone layer) protects us from all but a tiny sliver of ionizing radiation or we wouldn't be here to talk about it.
Also, hello again AES_Enjoyer, hope you've been well :)
Isn't most of that radiation blocked by the outer layers of the sun, though? Like, sure, there is a non-negligible amount of high energy photons escaping, but the overwhelming majority of the radiation comes AFAIK from blackbody radiation from the plasma at the temperature of the surface of the sun?
And yo, mate, how's it goin?
Sometimes I think I've heard all the batshit nonsense. Other times I read something like this.
So blind people never get sunburn? Or always get sunburn?
Yeah I've seen an upsurge of people claiming sunscreen is toxic poison. Not sure where the fuck they pulled that from
Maybe this?
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/news/sunscreen-corals.html
Seems bad for coral.
It's a good thing my skin isn't made of coral.
Some of the chemicals do show up a bit in blood, but there's no evidence it's toxic iirc.
Everything that will kill you A to Z.
S is for sunscreen, but also the sun. Both give you cancer, isn’t that fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPz9Fcvb1II
Maybe they read something about the titanium dioxide contained in some sunscreen products. There is some research indicating that its not as safe as we thought and that it might be carcinogenic.
It might be but sunburn is definitely carcinogenic.
This and nowadays (at least here in Europe) you find lots of sun screen without titanium dioxide.They all have a label with corals on it (they call it in hawaian agreement?). So its very easy to avoid nanoparticles AND protect skin. Also, its not like a few years ago that you look like a vampire when using sun screen without nanoparticles.
Every English tourist in Australia.
...and Florida, and Jamaica, and Mexico, and (I presume) Spain. There is no corner of the earth in which the English will not challenge the mighty Helios until they are as red as the cross of St. George.
*Me in Vitoria, Spain: "You guys get sun?"
Large parts of the north of Spain are basically UK in terms of weather.
Australia is a different beast though. I went out for like 10 minutes without a hat or sunscreen on a particularly hot december noon and my nose damn near fell off the day after 😅 Not because I thought I'm too tough to get sunburnt but if you live your entire life in Europe you just can't imagine the sunshine being this potent. Never happened again after that incident 😄
In New Zealand the sun feels like it's stabbing you after 10min in summer. I can feel my skin prickling like tiny fire ants.It doesn't take long to burn here. serious respect for the sun and upper atmosphere
there's a hole in my ozone dear lyza, dear lyza..
Its not the ozon hole (well its a little bit the fault of the ozon hole) but its because due to the eleptical orbit of the earth around the sun the southern hemisphere is closer to the sun in summer than the north hemisphere.
I'm just stayin inside
Ok Bo Burnham
but they're specifically avoiding burning their hams
Went out to look for a reason to hide again
On the other hand, what bullshit is it that my stupid human body can't survive being outdoors without medicinal cream. My ancestors would be ashamed.
Mud and henna masks and other full skin coverings are extremely common among indigenous people and presumably your ancestors as well.
We also used to have much more hair, shadowing the skin from sun
Your ancestors had melanin production to fit their sun exposure and seldom lived past 40
Maybe tens of thousands of years ago, but 2000ish years ago 60ish was old age. The main reason life expectancy has gone up isn't that old people didn't make it to 50, it's that young people didn't make it to 2. If a couple has 5 kids, 3 of them die as toddlers and the other two make it to 70 the average life expectancy is about 30, but that doesn't mean living past 30 is unusual.
Also, tens of thousands of years ago there was an ice age, but for the last 10k years light-skinned Europeans still had normal summers and worked in the fields.
Yes, that is when we evolved
You must know how averages work. The poster is correct. Average age at death is a horrible metric when you have gigantic birth and infant mortality rates.
No, I mean that for the brunt of humans evolving to be genetically roughly what we are today, it is unlikely many people were living much past their prime. I am talking about roughly 100,000 years ago up to around 10,000 years ago when humans developed from a largely hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
People who live a hunter-gatherer lifestyle today live 65+ regularly. The average may be lower for uncontacted peoples for various reasons, or higher because of reduced disease transmission. I imagine it depends on the group.
Now, I will give you that humans have refined their techniques of hunting etc over that 90k years in a way that caused less accidental deaths.
The crux of the matter though is that the statistical averages you have seen are flawed by infant mortality. In these societies, if you made it past toddler age you were statistically likely to live a long time.
What would be killing people much past their "prime" and how do you define prime?
And only then?
Speak for yourself.
Your ancestors didn't shave
I don't either, but my nose isn't hairy and it would burn to a crisp outdoors.
as a man I have the primal urge to pick a fight with the giant ball of fire in the sky, I lost this time but one day.
Let me let you in on a little secret...you gotta attack at night.
Unfortunately I've already committed to it happening one DAY.
Not wearing sunscreen and getting a sunburn is a psyop to get men to buy more aloe vera.
Which, btw, might feel kind of nice, but you'll still get skin cancer.
You got to give props to the people who convinced idiots that sunscreen causes cancer.
Yeah... The number of times I've heard something along the lines of "the sunscreen is worse for you than the sunburn" is too many.
I hadn't heard that one. Somehow I'm not surprised though.
Put that shit in the refrigerator, it's awesome.
I would wear suncream more often, but:
There's this Loreal suncream spray I like that I can't seem to find that feels like water and when it's dry, it doesn't feel like you have suncream on. It's perfect for me! I'm not allergic to it either so I can actually go in the sun without turning red and blotchy!
Yeah, and it’s also def NOT cheap.
What does water feel like when it's dry?
New question for the "water isn't wet" fools unlocked.
But it isn't. Technically.
Orly? Then:
Tiny tiny bits of electricity.
Nuh uh.
Key word being "and".
only one way to find out
It's actually irritating to me that the sun is bombarding us with ionizing radiation
(I know, not the same intensity) but think about the amount of precautions we take before turning on a UV lamp. Or before turning on a very bright LED which you are not supposed to look directly at. Well, neither you should look directly at the sun, but you get the idea
In a perspective, sun is so radioactive it can even decay paint and plastic! It can literally cook you alive and make your skin fall in pieces. This just seems usual to us because we were born with it, people would freak the hell out if a medical procedure had the same side effects
Look, I can make a right wing campaign out of this! BAN THE SUN SAVE YOUR KIDS FROM 800T (Terahertz) RADIATION
Yeah, it's called a sunburn!
I'm sure you could get signatures as long as you don't use the word sun, similar to that ban dihydrogen monoxide bit. Take video.
If the cream wasn't such a goddamn sensory nightmare...
UPF clothes FTW
If you spend 8 hours in the sun, the sunscreen doesn't seem like it helps entirely.
Reapply q2 hours and every time you use a towel. I don't think most sunscreen is advertising all day Protection.
I mean of course, I'm saying even adding more periodically. Just feels like always some gets through
Yeah, my experience jibes with that too. I wear sunscreen everyday and I feel like I'm pretty conscientious but I end up getting red by the end of the day often. The problem with it, i find, is that it's time consuming to do one's exposed skin properly or it involves another person. I'm either working or recreating outside so I know I miss applications due to impatience and inattention. I switched to pants, hats, and long sleeves for outdoor living the past decade or so and it's a huge improvement. Just sweatier.
My excuse is that the weather was predicted as "cloudy" when we left in the morning. When we were on the trip, though, the sun was burning down to extinct humanity instead.
You should be putting sunscreen on regardless, and reapplying every 3 hours.
If you hate the feel of sunscreen like I do, check out UPF clothing 👍
>be me
>white as everliving fuck
>put on 60 spf sun screen, as you should, and set a timer for an hour and a half to reapply, earlier than the recommended 2 hours
>alarm goes off, reapply
>STILL GET SUNBURNED
mfw
I used to have that problem. I switched to 30 spf and don't get burned anymore. I can't really explain it, but my theory is that 50+ is marketing BS and doesn't actually do anything. Or it could be that Banana Boat brand just really sucks and Hawaiian is more like lotion so it actually stays on my skin and also moisturizes, which probably helps because dry skin = gonna get burned.
Get 100 spf, I've never even tanned on that shit.
The difference between SPF 60 and 100 is like 1.1% better UV blocking, anything over SPF 50 is in a practical sense nearly useless.
For instance SPF 30 blocks 97% of UVB rays, is it worth paying more and slathering more potentially harmful (to the environment) compounds on your skin for 98% blocking? I think not.
what if your skin has a hit point system and that 1% difference is the breaking point of sunburn
They've cracked the code....
I used to think the same thing, but the thing is we don't care about the energy that goes into the sunscreen, we care about the remaining percent that goes into the skin. If you go from a sunscreen that absorbs 98% of the sun's energy to one that absorbs 99% you are halving the amount of energy your skin is exposed to.
If you're still getting burned with 98% absorption, then increasing that number by 1% would actually make a huge difference. And that's without even considering things like having a safety margin for improper application.
Fair point
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_paradox
Seems like in real world use it makes a difference.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0190962219327550
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29291958/
From another thing I read, people have a tendency to not apply enough sunscreen or apply it correctly. I'm sure if everyone did it perfectly it wouldn't matter. All I know is anecdotally, when I switched to 100 I stopped getting sunburns, and I have been in situations with people who used their own lower spf, got a little burned still, and I came out of it pale white.
The price might be higher, but a quick look on Amazon and I'm seeing more than spf affecting that. The brand I buy is about 1.80 (usd) per ounce, and i see other brands with less spf for more. I see other brands with the same spf for less, and it seems like it's between ~1.10 per ounce to ~2.80 per ounce so I'm not really bothered by my price. I don't know anything about the environmental differences between spf so I won't comment on that.
The average person should almost certainly not be using it, but maybe it would make the difference for extremely sun sensitive people.
If someone is that sensitive to sun they should start picking up fashion tips from the Bedouin.
I have never in my life seen anything seen anything higher than 50+
I once somehow got sunburned while inside my bedroom
But it's gross :C
(summer sunshine is also gross even without sunburns, though)
Cancer or disgust, we all have to choose our preferred consequences.
Or just don't go into the sun if you can help it ...
The worst is when is a cloudy Summer day and you're like there's no sun mf, no need to sunscreen! But you still get burned the fuck out.
My wife can spend all day in the sun and turn a nice shade of brown.
Not me. There is no "tan" for me. It's either pasty white or lobster with no middle ground whatsoever.
I turn a lovely tan. It just happens after two weeks of bright red and screamy and a few days of pale and peeling.
Pour one out for the back of my calves. Every summer I forget.
Same until I got a bicycle
I put on sun screen every morning to ward off basal cell skin cancer. It sucks but it's cheaper than going to the dermatologist to have basal cell skin cancer removed. The worst part is getting it in my eyes. On the plus side, the splotchy age spots on my temples have disappeared
I don't remember it being cheap
Mate. I'm a ginger living in New Zealand. Sunburn is an inevitability.
You choose new Zeeland over Australia due to the lack of venomous animals, but forgot to check for unprotected astronomical nuclear reactor in the sky
Melanoma is the New Zealand flavor of poison damage
Me too. Get burnt from a sunny day at the movies
Baking in the sun risks skin cancer. But people like to be tanned, so cancer is worth it for a good look.
I get a little pink from being outside for like ~20 minutes. That's not really hubris lol.
And then theres me who does not go outside that often, never uses suncream and doesnt get a sunburn when I decide to go outside for longer times.
One day I'll win, you all will see!
@bees There have been some recent studies that have solidified the relationship between autism and the MMR vaccine in particular. Gates live Polio vaccine has killed around 500,000 Africans, who knows how many it's maimed, and not to say Polio isn't worth vaccinating against, I have friends who were partially parallelized by it, but if you're killing 500,000 people something is wrong, and one of my children got heart issues after covid vax, further, he at 40 had two vaccines, damage done on the second, had three incidents of covid and the third involved a 102.9 fever, I by contrast got no covid vax, got covid twice, both times it was your average head cold, and the highest fever I had was 99.1, never went down into my lungs, same for my wife and my other son who did not get vaccinated. Vaccines are immensely profitable to the pharmaceutical industry, and just like profit in the military complex keeps wars going even if it means killing and maiming people, so to the pharma profits force unnecessary and dangerous medical interventions.
Fallen London vibes
@bees Actually the UV creams have shown to be themselves carcinogenic, so it's not about to have cancer or not, but how to get it. All things in moderation, including sun, your body does need vitamin d3 which it produces in the presence of UV.
And vaccines cause autism \s
@Railcar8095 With respect to vaccines and autism, there is a correlation but as the old saying goes casuality is not causality until it is. In my view it warrants research. And I've got no doubt that the number of vaccines they are giving toddlers and children these days is overloading their immune systems.
I would mock you, but nothing I saw would make you look more foolish than your own words.
Please go back to Twitter.
Read again my previous comment, then turn of the phone/computer and go hiking. Just disconnect for a bit.
@Railcar8095 I have a better idea I will just put you on ignore.
Autist here who loves to read research about autism.
There is absolutely no correlation between autism and vaccines. Neurodivergence cannot be caused by immune system problems.
People are born autistic with a brain programmed by their DNA to form alternative neurological connections compared to neurotypicals. A neurotypical cannot be turned/mutated into being autistic and vice versa.
The only correlation that exists is that people who are neurodivergent are prone to develop some unhealthy habits (from extra stress, sleep schedules, and being a picky eater etc) which in turn can lower your immune system.
@webghost0101 Yes said the big pharma industry to whom vaccination is incredibly profitable, but statistics say otherwise.
Feels weird that i have to explain this, but not all Research is funded by big pharma.
The majority of research on autism is not about Vaccins either but about understanding the many properties from which it emerges.
By understanding what autism actually is, which is often studied by autistic researchers who are motivated to understand themselves better it becomes self evident that we are far from reaching a technological point where we can create a drug to cause or even simulate the complex nature of it.
You could just aswell claim that vaccins cause people to shapeshift into cats, if you understand the subject matter thats just as non-realistic
If you want to bash vaccines you could state that an experimental accidental wrong mixed variant could cause death. Which would still be an incredibly unlikely freak accident but at least reality allows the technical possibility for such a mistake.
@webghost0101 Here are the facts. 100 years ago, Autism rate is 1-in-40000, today it is 1-in-16. The increase in autism has paralleled the increase in vaccines. And the autism rates parallels the vaccination rates in various regions. As I previously stated, this is a casual not a causal relationship, but given the seriousness of the disease and how many it is affecting, it is worth researching the relationship. Only people who could possibly be opposed to that are those whose profits are threatened.
Thats a cute observation but real facts are the following:
Autism was only formally recognized in the 1940s - there’s no reliable data before that, though historical evidence suggests autistic people have always existed. For decades, people deemed “mentally ill” were institutionalized and hidden from society.
The majority of autistic people can mask their traits and present as neurotypical - they had strong incentives to do so given the historical stigma.
Diagnosis happens more frequently in areas with accessible healthcare, which naturally are also areas with higher vaccination rates.
We now have better diagnostic tools and a less punitive society for people with neurological differences. The diagnostic criteria have expanded significantly - many people (especially women) who wouldn’t have qualified under older definitions now do.
And if we want to include the more modern research done by the autistic community we learn that autism is a part of a bigger phenomenon called neurodivergence which includes adhd and many others. Who also used to be completely excluded by the dogmatic labeling of neurotypicals.
Also you referring to autism as a serious disease shows how little you actually know about it. Just like anyone else neurodivergent people can have psychological disabilities but because they are neurodivergent those disabilities are often different from neurotypical ones. In ““high functioning”” autism disabilities are subjective in context of living in a neurotypical world and are increasingly less disabling with social acceptance and understanding.
Can you actually avoid vitamin d production if you stay long enough in the sun that you need sunscreen to avoid sunburns?
@rumschlumpel I live close to Seattle. If we're lucky here there might be three days in the year where you can get sunburn.
Oh FFS this isn't the benzene thing again, is it? Benzene is a trace contaminant in everything from the air you breathe to the water you drink. The highest number Valisure came up with was 6 ppm in a sunscreen sample, that's 0.0006%. Even if you decided to inject the whole bottle of sunscreen directly into your veins it would be a fraction of your total exposure for the day.
Using people's fear of cancer to scare them away from effective cancer prevention measures is fucking shameful, do better.
@GingerGoodness Benzene in trace amount is an issue, but also Oxybenzone: Some studies suggest it may be an endocrine disruptor, meaning it could interfere with hormones, and research in animals has raised questions about potential cancer risk, but it's important to note these were high-dose studies not directly relevant to typical human use. Other UV Filters: Ingredients like octinoxate and homosalate have also raised concerns about potential endocrine disruption, and some are banned in certain regions due to their impact on marine life
Look, if you want to smear yourself with chemicals, inject yourself with artificial DNA, etc, go for it, just don't require it of me and my offspring.