Most active commenters
  • calebm(3)
  • trhway(3)
  • Arainach(3)

←back to thread

279 points petethomas | 45 comments | | HN request time: 0.215s | source | bottom
1. calebm ◴[] No.45298453[source]
I am very white, but getting sun feels very healthy for my skin. Obviously I don't want to get burned bad, but good sun exposure helps my skin feel softer and less inflamed. My grandfather also spent most of his days out in the sun gardening, and my mom was just commenting a few months ago about how surprisingly smooth his skin is (and he's 92).
replies(4): >>45298462 #>>45298598 #>>45298775 #>>45304728 #
2. quaintdev ◴[] No.45298491[source]
Anyone thinking of doing this, don't. There's a reason we don't directly look at solar eclipse. Here's a excerpt from [1]

> Usually we close our eyes in reflex due to intense light from the Sun, but on day of an eclipse, the intensity of sunlight is decreased and we can view the Sun through naked eyes. While we watch a solar eclipse without any protection to our eyes, the ultraviolet rays penetrate our eyes and cause retinal burn, leading to loss of central vision.

[1]: https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/partial-solar-eclips...

replies(3): >>45298590 #>>45298708 #>>45298943 #
3. bob1029 ◴[] No.45298528[source]
I've found the same with direct sunlight exposure. My distance vision is much sharper if I've been outside a lot recently. It seems similar to how exercise works elsewhere in the body. You can definitely get a neuromuscular reaction if the incident angle of the sunlight is direct enough. The trick (as with all forms of exercise) is moderation.
replies(1): >>45298720 #
4. yunwal ◴[] No.45298590{3}[source]
The comment above you said nothing about a solar eclipse
replies(1): >>45298906 #
5. trhway ◴[] No.45298598[source]
>good sun exposure helps my skin feel softer and less inflamed.

The UV light polymerizes collagen in presence of vitamin B. They did experiments by repairing cornea that way:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3018104/

"The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of riboflavin-ultraviolet type A (UV-A) light rays induced cross-linking of corneal collagen in improving visual acuity and in stabilizing the progression of keratoconic eyes.

...

The eyes were saturated with riboflavin solution and were subjected for 30 min under UV-A light

...

Cross-linking was safe and an effective therapeutical option for progressive keratoconus."

I think that this is probably one of the reasons why suntanned skin usually looks like it is in better condition mechanically-wise.

Another my favorite Sun exposure related correlation - vitamin D deficiency and autism, as couple studies on Somali immigrant population in Minnesota and Sweden - where such dark skinned population naturally gets very low on vitamin D - showed such correlation as autism rates in that population is higher than back there in Somali (and that would explain the correlation of low sunlight expo.

And my favorite pet theory is that Neanderthals with their large eyes adapted to the Northern latitudes were significantly impaired by spike of UV radiation - getting highly increased rate of early cataract and other eyesight damage - during that thousand years of magnetic field polar swap 40K years ago, and that caused them to lose to the Cro-Magnon who was coming out of Africa with more dark and smaller eyes more adapted to higher UV levels which are natural to Africa.

replies(2): >>45305199 #>>45306669 #
6. avian ◴[] No.45298641[source]
Recently I've received an email from my eye specialist addressed to all her patients urging people not to look at the sun. At the same time I've also seen a similar public warning published in local media.

Apparently there has been an sharp rise in people coming in with retinal damage from staring at the sun. They didn't go into details why someone would do that, but reading this on HN I can start to guess.

replies(1): >>45298695 #
7. codr7 ◴[] No.45298695{3}[source]
Until I see some definite proof, I'm going to put this in the FUD box.

There's seems to be a concerted effort at making people afraid of the sun. My guess is because the sun fixes a lot of problems, and problems mean profit.

Seriously, take a step back. If spending time in / looking at the sun was dangerous we wouldn't be here.

replies(1): >>45304818 #
8. codr7 ◴[] No.45298708{3}[source]
So suddenly during an eclipse, your eyes have no idea what's painful/harmful anymore? Trust your experience, it's the closest you're ever going to get to truth.
9. harperlee ◴[] No.45298720{3}[source]
Might it be that when outside you tend to look farther than when inside? So distance vision gets used more and body adapts. Similar to how kids that spend time outside are less shortsighted.
replies(2): >>45298751 #>>45304633 #
10. herbst ◴[] No.45298745[source]
Is this some kind of weird meta joke or are people actually arguing about staring into the sun in 2025?
replies(2): >>45298947 #>>45299387 #
11. imp0cat ◴[] No.45298751{4}[source]
Also, bright light will help the eye to focus. It's the same principle as if you were using a camera with a small aperture (and larger DOF, keeping more things in focus).
12. trallnag ◴[] No.45298775[source]
And then another person (of North European ancestry looks) like a brown leatherbag at 50. Anecdotal evidence is sadly not worth a lot.
replies(2): >>45298804 #>>45298953 #
13. Ekaros ◴[] No.45298804[source]
Some pictures of truck drivers are also good counter examples. The side with more exposure tend to look older.
14. Arainach ◴[] No.45298906{4}[source]
In a Solar Eclipse you're getting a tiny fraction of the sun's energy and it is still enough to very quickly cause long-term physical damage to your eyes. Looking at the sun during not an eclipse is even worse.
15. esseph ◴[] No.45298943{3}[source]
Where the fuck are these people coming from???
replies(1): >>45304570 #
16. esseph ◴[] No.45298947{3}[source]
An age of unenlightenment!
17. anonzzzies ◴[] No.45298953[source]
Many of those smoke or used to smoke, a lot (continues). I live in a country village in south EU and you can see immediately which of the farmers smoke and which don't. Most of them do, but the ones that don't have smooth skin and look younger than they are, the others look like leather bags indeed and older than they are. I guess you can get the same skin without smoking, I just don't see those here.
replies(2): >>45301713 #>>45309864 #
18. bloak ◴[] No.45298954[source]
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bates_method#Sunning

Aldous Huxley was taken in, unfortunately: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Seeing

I would guess it's dangerous nonsense, though there are plausible claims that shortsightedness is associated with not spending much time outside as a child so perhaps there's a slight link with something that isn't nonsense.

replies(1): >>45299191 #
19. spacechild1 ◴[] No.45299191{3}[source]
> there are plausible claims that shortsightedness is associated with not spending much time outside as a child

AFAIK that has nothing to do with the sun but rather with looking at things at a larger distance than at home.

replies(2): >>45299379 #>>45304664 #
20. bloak ◴[] No.45299379{4}[source]
That seems likely.

An obvious thing perhaps worth mentioning: if you're shortsighted (or longsighted) then you see better in bright sunlight because the iris closes, giving you greater depth of field, so that might make people think/feel that sunlight "cures" myopia.

(On the other hand, if you have excellent eyesight then you see better in less bright conditions because your vision is being limited by diffraction at the aperture.)

21. blooalien ◴[] No.45299387{3}[source]
> Is this some kind of weird meta joke or are people actually arguing about staring into the sun in 2025?

Why not? People are still arguing in 2025 that the vast majority of the world's climate scientists are wrong about climate change, and there are even some who unironically argue that the Earth is flat. Science is dead. Long live "Whatever I want to believe is true and you're all wrong!"

22. ndsipa_pomu ◴[] No.45301713{3}[source]
It's instructive to look at people who drive for a living. One arm will have significantly more sun exposure than the other and it's trivial to spot the difference as the sun does have a very noticeable aging effect.
replies(2): >>45305307 #>>45307392 #
23. calebm ◴[] No.45304035[source]
So just to clarify - yes, I do think looking at the sun directly for very short periods is good (especially if it's lower on the horizon). But overall, what I as trying to get at is that being outside and getting the bright light of the sun on your eyes is helpful. The best way to do this is on the water. When you look at the sun reflecting off the water, you are getting the bright light, but because the water is reflecting it, and the waves are constantly changing the angles, the sun like gets spread evenly over your eyes.

For the naysayers, if looking at the sun is so bad, why is it not considered bad to look at the sun's reflection on the water? Additionally, when the sun is low, if you look at the brightness of the sunlight, it is less bright than some artificial light sources, and doesn't hurt to look at. How could this be bad?

replies(2): >>45304560 #>>45304730 #
24. Arainach ◴[] No.45304560{3}[source]
>why is it not considered bad to look at the sun's reflection on the water?

Who said it's not? It may hurt you as fast but it's still bad for you.

https://www.aao.org/eye-health/diseases/photokeratitis-snow-...

replies(1): >>45306186 #
25. Arainach ◴[] No.45304570{4}[source]
We are truly in the dumbest timeline.
26. amanaplanacanal ◴[] No.45304633{4}[source]
I'm fairly certain I saw an article recently on HN that claimed it was not the distance focusing which helped but just the exposure to brighter light.

Edit: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31722876/

27. amanaplanacanal ◴[] No.45304664{4}[source]
Maybe not: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31722876/
28. asdff ◴[] No.45304728[source]
Grandfather was southern european but spent so much time in the garden he looked middle eastern. Never any sunscreen as he didn't burn. He wouldn't even feel bee stings. He did not visibly age from his 70s into his mid 90s when he passed, aside from getting quite skinny in those last years.
replies(1): >>45305253 #
29. htek ◴[] No.45304730{3}[source]
IIRC, reflection of the sun off water is 5% when directly overhead to about 65% when at a glancing angle (low on the horizon). I prefer to close my eyes and aim my face at the sun for about 10 minutes a day if I'm working indoors all day plus whatever incidental sunlight I get. I have SAD during the winter months and use a full-spectrum lamp, then.

People who spend more time in the sun have a low-moderate risk of melanoma, but higher risk of other skin cancers, vs those who spend more time indoors having a lower risk of non-melanoma skin cancer and a moderate-higher risk of melanoma cancer.

30. jraby3 ◴[] No.45304817[source]
I don't think it's at all healthy to look directly at the sun.

But I have noticed that my eyes get weaker after spending a lot of time indoors, like if I'm sick. Getting enough time in sunlight seems to be heavily correlated with better eyesight, both in my personal experience fighting farsightedness as a man in his 50s and with studies done on children regarding nearsightedness.

31. mikestew ◴[] No.45304818{4}[source]
My guess is because the sun fixes a lot of problems, and problems mean profit.

And there ya go, the rallying cry of every conspiracy theorist: "They don't want you to know, because money!"

Seriously, take a step back.

Yeah, seriously.

32. EvanAnderson ◴[] No.45305199[source]
> They did experiments by repairing cornea that way:

As a person w/ keratoconus I have read a fair bit about this treatment, corneal collagen crosslinking with riboflavin (C3R).

It does not repair the damage caused by keratoconus. It stabilizes the cornea and slows or halts progression. The collagen in the cornea naturally crosslinks (likely due to UV exposure) over our lives. My our late 30s our corneas are stable. For someone with keratoconus, where the cornea becomes progressively misshapen, stabilizing the tissue with UV (enhanced by riboflavin) slows or prevents further damage.

I was just a few years too early in my diagnosis to benefit from C3R. My eyes have been stable for the last 10 - 12 years. I wish I could have had C3R when my condition was first diagnosed back in my 20s.

replies(1): >>45305357 #
33. ◴[] No.45305253[source]
34. cisasteelersfan ◴[] No.45305307{4}[source]
What's interesting is that sun exposure through a car window removes almost all UVB rays and most UVA rays. So it's closer to comparing lower sun exposure vs sun exposure with sunscreen.
replies(2): >>45305798 #>>45306635 #
35. trhway ◴[] No.45305357{3}[source]
Yes, i see what you're saying. I'm just a layman here, so i talking only based on my recollection of what i read somewhere somewhen. I think i also read another study where there were scratches or some other damage and they did it similar to pothole filling by applying solution/mix of collagen with vitamin B and curing with UV.
36. setopt ◴[] No.45305798{5}[source]
If I recall correctly, the side windows on cars let through more UVA, while the front windows block both efficiently.
37. calebm ◴[] No.45306186{4}[source]
Good point. It's all about balance though. People have been riding on boats on water for a long long time (most of it without the invention of sunglasses). And similar to the truck drivers who drive hours with one side exposed, or people who sunbathe a bunch - that is unbalanced. Staring at the sun at full brightness would be unbalanced. But I think never looking at it is also unbalanced. You can look at it, but keep your eyes moving - don't focus and stare at it for seconds (unless it's really low on the horizon, and then I think it is okay to stare at the sun).
38. apt-apt-apt-apt ◴[] No.45306635{5}[source]
Dangerously incorrect, side car windows do not remove most UVA rays.
39. waterhouse ◴[] No.45306669[source]
> couple studies on Somali immigrant population in Minnesota and Sweden - where such dark skinned population naturally gets very low on vitamin D - showed such correlation as autism rates in that population is higher than back there in Somali (and that would explain the correlation of low sunlight expo.

Or autism among Somalis causes them, or their parents, to want to immigrate to Minnesota and Sweden?

replies(1): >>45307084 #
40. trhway ◴[] No.45307084{3}[source]
No. There the vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy is correlated with autism of the child. In another study child autism was correlated with regular Swedish woman pregnancy with the 3rd trimester in winter when the deficiency is the most frequent / most serious.

It seems that autism got politicized and thus such various correlations, which may or may not be real causations, don't seem to get enough of proper scientific attention/resources. I mean, for example folic acid deficiency causes spina bifida, and it wouldn't be out-of-this-world if vitamin D (which is steroid) deficiency (or some other deficiency) would have affected prenatal development and structure of the brain which is just another body organ. Instead we spend tremendous amount of attention and energy on alleged vaccine-autism connection which hasn't been established even as mere correlation.

41. christophilus ◴[] No.45307392{4}[source]
I wonder, though, if they got full body sun exposure on a regular basis, if that would change things. It seems unlikely that we would have evolved to have a single part of our body exposed to the sun while the rest wasn’t.
replies(1): >>45311972 #
42. astura ◴[] No.45309864{3}[source]
My sister moved to a southern latitude and pretty much immediately aged 20 years. Never smoked.
replies(1): >>45310661 #
43. anonzzzies ◴[] No.45310661{4}[source]
Smoking or not smoking, things don't go 'immediately', so probably something else going on there.
replies(1): >>45312715 #
44. ndsipa_pomu ◴[] No.45311972{5}[source]
> I wonder, though, if they got full body sun exposure on a regular basis, if that would change things

Yes - their whole body would be subject to the ageing effects of the sun.

> It seems unlikely that we would have evolved to have a single part of our body exposed to the sun while the rest wasn’t

And yet it's common for dark skinned people to have significantly lighter palms and soles of feet as they have less exposure to the sun.

45. astura ◴[] No.45312715{5}[source]
After a few years she stated looking like a old shriveled hot dog. There's no "something else," it's sun damage, and it looks awful.