UVA is what causes skin cancers. Recommending or dismissing UVA exposure is irresponsible, especially in places with tons of UV radiation. Dermatologists go extra to teach people to choose sunscreen with good UVA protection, meanwhile Applied Science (one of my favourite youtubers) - “UVA penetrates regular window glass; hey its not to be worried about”...
Seems there's actually some debate on the net benefit/risk of this exposure [0]. Yes it raises risks for certain skin cancers but the survival rate of these is very high, meanwhile exposure decreases a collection of other risks whose death rates are much higher.
So I think the right course of action is a little more nuanced than simply saying, "UV increases skin cancer risk therefore ignore everything else as well as magnitudes of net risks/benefits". Should we not weigh all factors?
Actually, there was an article posted here (I think) not too long ago about a study that showed the positive benefits from sunlight were enough to outweigh the slightly increased chances of skin cancer.
Yeah I think it really varies by the region. Sure it's good to go outside in Sweden and England, but not in Aussie and NZ when you can get sunburn in about 15 minutes.
I've had couple of barbecue parties this summer in Auckland and NOBODY went outside until sun was way past 5PM. We preferred to sit in stuffy kitchen rather than enjoy beautiful beautiful outdoors. Even in middle of winter you can feel sun bite you as you stand in front of pedestrian crossing.
The sooner we completely phase out CFCs and other stratospheric ozone depleting gases, the sooner we can go back to the good old days where you could enjoy that sunshine.
The prediction is 2050-2070 we will be back to the 1980 level of ozone thickness.
Scientists have been trying to combat the perception that it is to blame for the high prevalence of skin cancer in Australia for a couple of decades now - it will never be a good idea to 'enjoy that sunshine' the way people used to.
(2001 paper - https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6944/503469e4f779e99884e144...
" Sufferers of skin cancer today should more likely blame their affliction on skin type and sun exposure during their youth than any changes in ozone distributions over the last twenty years. Therefore it is safe to say that even without ozone
depletion, Australia would still have a very high rate of skin cancer.")
Can't agree more. It was pretty crazy in the 70s/80s.
You had people literally baking themselves in the sun with tanning oils. Even after "Slip Slop Slap" was first promoted in the early 80s everyone was still trying to get a tan.
Over Antarctica, yes. But in some conditions (right winds? I forget) thinner patches of ozone do blow over the south coast of Australia, and does increase UV exposure.
