yes, but my comment was on somebody trying to somehow support how unhealthy it supposedly is with something sciency sounding that is just completely wrong and, as somebody above already pointed out, similar to saying stuff like water is a dangerous oxide or some such. It does the very opposite of being scientific support, namely, it discredits. Let us all stick to what we actually understand when arguing.

The point was to reframe the typical logical fallacy that “sun healthy because natural” with the scary unnatural sounding “nuclear fusion reactor”. Regardless UVA/UVB isn’t healthy and will age your skin, as long as you supplement vitamin D.

3 Likes

Is it not possible, or even likely, that a lot of the benefit of being in the sun has nothing to do with the effects of different portions of the electromagnetic spectrum on your skin, but is rather the result of the effect on your mood? Basically a “placebo” effect? I have no illusions about the harmful effects of UV, and I am very diligent about wearing sunscreen, covering up when possible, and seeking shade when possible. But I love to be outside, like many other people, and can sometimes experience mild seasonal depression in the winter.

I think it’s far more likely that just “being in the sun,” the experience, is the important part and that you should continue to protect yourself from UV as much as possible.

2 Likes

Bright light (10-50x brighter outside than inside) has a mood boosting effect and is used to treat some types of depression, and people like warmth. It has nothing to do with UVA/UVB and you don’t need to expose yourself to that. Infrared goes right through clothes.

4 Likes

NIR (700 to 2500 nm) transmittance for a white cotton T-shirt at 800 nm is 35-45% like with visible red light, 20-25% at 1000 nm where C-H bonds (cellulose) absorbs, and below 10% beyond 1500 nm, mostly due to residual water. Look through a white T-shirt and see how simply having a colored shirt already lowers transmission. You are talking about denim and hats.