Moderators: JeffN, f1jim, John McDougall, carolve, Heather McDougall
Lyndzie wrote:I follow Dr. McDougall’s recommendations about getting natural sunlight, but also use sunscreen. Usually I go outside for a while, then apply. How long I wait depends on multiple factors - location, time of year, length of exposure, activity, weather, etc. The damaging effects of excess sun exposure isn’t a farce, so I try to balance the two so that I don’t cause unnecessary premature aging yet get the necessary benefits of direct sunlight.
I have young children, and strive to get them outside for 1-3 hours a day, which would be quite a lot of sun beyond what is needed for good health.
Andreas Moritz also said that sunglasses works in the same negative way on our health as sunscreen does, filtering out the necessary sun for our eye health, as well.
Lyndzie wrote:The list of sunscreens from EWG does not test effectiveness and whether it preforms as well as stated. We tried a 50 spf sunscreen based on information from that website and got burned. Consumer Reports tested various sunscreens, and that is how we found the only one that actually protects my little freckled red-head from burning
JeffN wrote:The question is, if you spend time in the sun beyond the recommended 10-20 minutes a day, which will be your greater risk, the potential risk of the chemicals in the effective ones, or the potential risk of skin cancer from the ones that don't protect you.
While the answer depends on your situation and how much time you spend out in the sun, where you live, etc, I live in Florida where the sun is very strong. So, from my perspective, the risk of skin cancer is much greater then the risk from the chemicals.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests