I'm an indoorsman. Never step outside the house = no sun damage or toxic sunscreen. 
Sunscreen: Good or Bad?
- Thread starter Blade Runner
- Start date
As one of the older gentlemen on the forum, I was born when margarine, seed oils, baby formula, etc., was being foisted on the trusting public (I'm quiet about that due to the animus against boomers, which I understand by the way). My mum used all of those poisons and more, as did most families. Therefore it would be fair to say that boomers were raised on an inflammatory diet. Our only saving grace was food was expensive and wages were low, therefore we ate less and were a whole lot more active.
But the reason I disagree with the theory that diet is causal to being wrinkly, is that the over 50 Greeks I observed were born before the introduction of processed foods. Also because of war and circumstances, they would also have had many periods of fasting. So their diet was not only not inflammatory, they would have been in ketosis and autophagy frequently. And yet they looked like prunes.
Exposure of skin to sun for 15-30 min a day is healthy. Prolonged time in the sun, you need protection (wide brimmed hat and long sleeved clothes. Follow you lawncare professionals attire, they are the experts. If you plan to sit on the beach all day in the sun, you better wear sunscreen if you plan to not be covered up or in the shade.
You are being judgmental and your assessment does not match what I've observed.
Almost every normie I've met thinks like the men on this forum. They hate putting on sunscreen because it takes effort, make up excuses why it is unhealthy, and then age like crazy in the sun. Normies are anti-sunscreen because that is the easiest, path of least resistance position.
So it has nothing to do with the skepticism on this forum, and it has nothing to do with this forum. The beliefs I see here are pretty much boomerpill normiestream as it gets.
I laugh when people ask me why look so young, because I know once I tell them what I do they will just ignore the advice and go right back to doing what they did before. Same with sucrose. Don't eat that stuff. Yet everyone does.
But those were still America Greeks right? They on the American diet, a lot of Greeks are not actually very outdoor people they shop owners so they not in the sun that much, Im Portuguese and our guys were more outdoors as they were into construction (some also shop keepers) but we also played a lot of soccer and cycling so were always in the sun but I cant say they look too bad even the Greeks here?
No, they were Athenians, where I stayed, but mostly Cretans on Crete where I lived and worked.
What's it to be an assessment or a judgement? I'm writing about that which I observe and assess Samseau. There is a plank worthy of being from Noah's ark in your eye by the way, deal with that before you stridently reveal your own prejudices.
I use it, I tan way too easily like 30 minute car ride and my face is red after doesn't even have to be the convertible. I don't know why it's just always been that way, all my family is fair skinned even though we are Mediterranean. If I'm out in the sun for any length of time it's 100% my shoulders, neck and face will be burned so if my shirt is off I use it liberally.
I don't want to be dark, field hands are dark, and I don't want to be red with sun damage to my face. I'm not happy with the concept of putting chemicals on my skin but that's the trade off I guess, everything modern has a trade off.
I don't want to be dark, field hands are dark, and I don't want to be red with sun damage to my face. I'm not happy with the concept of putting chemicals on my skin but that's the trade off I guess, everything modern has a trade off.
Within the last 1-2 years I've noticed I've developed a kind of sensitivity to sunlight that causes me to break out in rashes/hives, as distinct from sunburn. I don't end up getting burned because this conditions f's me up before I'm out long enough to burn. Based on my research I've seen it called "Polymorphous Light Eruption," so far I've found the best solution to be covering up with long sleeves/pants and putting sunscreen on the spots I can't cover (hands, face, neck). If anyone has experience with this or recommendations for best sunscreen I'd appreciate input.
Batman
Heritage
Mineral oil sunscreens are okay, though the chalky residue they leave is just awful looking. Some chemical sunscreens may be okay too, but as a rule of thumb anything over SPF 25 is likely to be more harmful as they use more insane ingredients. You don't really need an SPF over 25 anyway. Personally I just opt to wear sunhats and protective clothing for the most part, though there are a few brands I use.
This website is very helpful for identifying the safety of specific products. https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/
This website is very helpful for identifying the safety of specific products. https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/
I use sunscreen daily for face and hands in the warmer months .
That's the opposite of what I've observed. Sunscreen is advertised everywhere, it's a 15 billion dollar industry and everyone is putting it on at the beach. Doctors act like you'll get instant skin cancer if you don't put it on.
There are plenty of people with severe vitamin D deficiency in even sunny Saudi Arabia. Partly because of the burqas, but also because they just sit in their home or car all day never going outside.
Most people in America aren't farmers or miners or outdoorsmen. We work in an office or factory all day and drive home from work. Many of these people are slothful, sit in front of the TV all weekend and never go outside to exercise.
I aim to get at least 15 mins of sunlight everyday for my health and people tell me I look young and my diet is honestly not great. Healthy sun exposure is the key. Not excessive, and there is a fine line. If I'm in direct sunlight for more than 30-60 mins I prefer to put on sunscreen. Especially if I'm in a southern latitude. But that's also why I prefer to live over around 40° North, so I don't have to worry about it as much.
You made a judgement about the entire forum based on a few posters, I wasn't make a call about your character, only that you went from a few users not liking sun screen to claiming the forum has a vein of paranoid skepticism. I just wanted to point out that wasn't a fair call.
Gerald Bostock
Orthodox Inquirer
Making assumptions on members without proof (in this case, about Samseau's love life)
Well Samseau, the one thing I agree with you on today is splitting this into its own thread.
If you're telling me that outdoor laborers, who made up a much larger percentage of our population 90-100 years ago, were getting less sun on their skin than the average person today who works in an office, commutes to work in a car, and stays indoors after work, I believe you are the one grasping at straws. People are highly "aware" of the centralized dogma that the sun is evil and will give you cancer, and almost everyone has adapted their behavior in some way because of it. The rates are still going up. I am looking at data on numbers of cases per capita. Just because you aren't aware of this data, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
By the way, I am not advocating spending 12 hours a day in the direct sun, as I think some people are interpreting these posts. I am saying that some time every day in the direct sun, without sunglasses/sunscreen, after you've built up a proper tolerance, will promote health to a much greater extent than staying indoors or always using sunscreen outside.
There are a lot more things your body does with sunlight besides simply producing vitamin D. I would never put the substance you linked on my skin except in some extreme situation (out on a boat all day in the tropics with minimal clothing, skiing for hours on end with no mask, etc.).
I disagree with the majority of what you're posting in this thread, but I will still add some hopefully helpful advice that there are natural substances like beef tallow and coconut oil that can provide some level of SPF. If you live in an area where the sun just isn't that strong, these substances would probably work enough for your purposes without loading up your skin with a bunch of chemicals that were synthesized in a lab.
What an incredibly bizarre statement and feeble attempt at a flex. "My future wife, who exists purely in my imagination, will be a lot younger than me because I use sunscreen" might be the strangest thing I've read on the internet this week, and is completely orthogonal to the discussion of whether sunscreen and sunlight are beneficial or harmful.
By the way my wife, who actually exists, is 12 years younger than me. I'm not sure what that proves in this discussion. You can keep bending your life practices around seeking the approval of women, but just admit that's what you're doing without trying to pretend that you've researched or thought deeply about the health implications.
Just because you confidently state that something is "objectively true", doesn't make it so. Do you believe Hollywood actresses that insert plastic into various parts of their body and inject powerful peptides like Ozempic every day to stay thin are healthy just because of their outward beauty? How about men who abuse steroids to achieve a model-type physiques but harm many systems in their body in doing so? There are many people who are conventionally beautiful on the outside who are in poor health because of how they treat their bodies.
No. The other risk you're taking is that if UVA/UVB exposure on your skin is actually beneficial up to certain point, you are depriving your body of a vital source of energy, nutrients, circadian signaling, etc. You may not believe that's true, and that's fine. But it's a topic worth researching.
What thread are you reading? I haven't see anyone deny that overexposure to sun ages your skin, including myself. Some people have questioned whether things like high-carb diets, seed oils, and other environmental or lifestyle factors can exacerbate the effect, which I agree with and think is a worthwhile discussion. In my experience on this forum and others, the posters who call people stupid are often the least coherent and sensible themselves.
Edit: Cleaned up wording of geographical hypothetical
If you're telling me that outdoor laborers, who made up a much larger percentage of our population 90-100 years ago, were getting less sun on their skin than the average person today who works in an office, commutes to work in a car, and stays indoors after work, I believe you are the one grasping at straws. People are highly "aware" of the centralized dogma that the sun is evil and will give you cancer, and almost everyone has adapted their behavior in some way because of it. The rates are still going up. I am looking at data on numbers of cases per capita. Just because you aren't aware of this data, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
By the way, I am not advocating spending 12 hours a day in the direct sun, as I think some people are interpreting these posts. I am saying that some time every day in the direct sun, without sunglasses/sunscreen, after you've built up a proper tolerance, will promote health to a much greater extent than staying indoors or always using sunscreen outside.
There are a lot more things your body does with sunlight besides simply producing vitamin D. I would never put the substance you linked on my skin except in some extreme situation (out on a boat all day in the tropics with minimal clothing, skiing for hours on end with no mask, etc.).
I disagree with the majority of what you're posting in this thread, but I will still add some hopefully helpful advice that there are natural substances like beef tallow and coconut oil that can provide some level of SPF. If you live in an area where the sun just isn't that strong, these substances would probably work enough for your purposes without loading up your skin with a bunch of chemicals that were synthesized in a lab.
What an incredibly bizarre statement and feeble attempt at a flex. "My future wife, who exists purely in my imagination, will be a lot younger than me because I use sunscreen" might be the strangest thing I've read on the internet this week, and is completely orthogonal to the discussion of whether sunscreen and sunlight are beneficial or harmful.
By the way my wife, who actually exists, is 12 years younger than me. I'm not sure what that proves in this discussion. You can keep bending your life practices around seeking the approval of women, but just admit that's what you're doing without trying to pretend that you've researched or thought deeply about the health implications.
Just because you confidently state that something is "objectively true", doesn't make it so. Do you believe Hollywood actresses that insert plastic into various parts of their body and inject powerful peptides like Ozempic every day to stay thin are healthy just because of their outward beauty? How about men who abuse steroids to achieve a model-type physiques but harm many systems in their body in doing so? There are many people who are conventionally beautiful on the outside who are in poor health because of how they treat their bodies.
No. The other risk you're taking is that if UVA/UVB exposure on your skin is actually beneficial up to certain point, you are depriving your body of a vital source of energy, nutrients, circadian signaling, etc. You may not believe that's true, and that's fine. But it's a topic worth researching.
What thread are you reading? I haven't see anyone deny that overexposure to sun ages your skin, including myself. Some people have questioned whether things like high-carb diets, seed oils, and other environmental or lifestyle factors can exacerbate the effect, which I agree with and think is a worthwhile discussion. In my experience on this forum and others, the posters who call people stupid are often the least coherent and sensible themselves.
Edit: Cleaned up wording of geographical hypothetical
Last edited:
I generally don't use it unless I'm spending a lot of time on the river. Particularly around the face. Something about the water amplifies the sunlight. But for working outside or going on a hike or bike ride out in the woods I don't bother. Just wear a hat and light, loose long sleeves and pants. I don't sunbathe, either. Typically I'll get a good burn on during the first part of summer and then bronze up a little bit which prevents further burning.
I know people that lather up anytime they expose themselves to any amount of sun and that just seems silly. I don't have anything against sunscreen and I don't think there's some conspiracy to turn you gay with chemicals or anything, I've just found that it's generally not required unless I spend 10+ hours shirtless and wet in July.
I know people that lather up anytime they expose themselves to any amount of sun and that just seems silly. I don't have anything against sunscreen and I don't think there's some conspiracy to turn you gay with chemicals or anything, I've just found that it's generally not required unless I spend 10+ hours shirtless and wet in July.
Just use olive oil or wear long sleeved cotton clothing if you have to but stay away from all the chemicals.
Being from northern Europe will make you appreciate the sun a whole lot more than when you're from Miami for example. People say vit D is important, yes, but I tell you when spring comes around the mood of people increases ten fold.
To ad to the comment above; it seems to be the same for me in early summer burn a little and then bronze up. A good hat will protect your face and can also make you look good.
Being from northern Europe will make you appreciate the sun a whole lot more than when you're from Miami for example. People say vit D is important, yes, but I tell you when spring comes around the mood of people increases ten fold.
To ad to the comment above; it seems to be the same for me in early summer burn a little and then bronze up. A good hat will protect your face and can also make you look good.
Last edited:
I'm sorry... But not wearing sunscreen is quite dumb.
Ive seen enough Marines with leathery skin and skin cancer to believe that not wearing it on purpose is quite foolhardy.
At a minimum, long sleeve clothes and a large hat is a prerequisite form outdoor sun exposure.
There's a reason cowboys wore large brim hats and light, long sleeve shirts out on the plains.
Ive seen enough Marines with leathery skin and skin cancer to believe that not wearing it on purpose is quite foolhardy.
At a minimum, long sleeve clothes and a large hat is a prerequisite form outdoor sun exposure.
There's a reason cowboys wore large brim hats and light, long sleeve shirts out on the plains.
Though wrinkles are
That's a ridiculous extrapolation.
You apparently do not study much history. It would do you good. It has always been known that the sun absolutely destroys Whites, or light skin, and causes death or illness (the term cancer is a recent invention).
Right from the Confederate Mississippi Declaration of Independence:
As bolded above shows, the entire reason for Black slavery was because of the issue of skin cancer in Whites. If Whites could have been employed on the farms, then Whites would have been enslaved to do so. Whites were tried as slaves, especially the Irish; they all died quickly to the sun from exposure (aka skin cancer).
We can safely assume that the dangers of sun exposure on white skin has been known for thousands of years, judging from the dress of people going back centuries. Furthermore, White laborers who did expose themselves to the sun almost certainly had horribly short lives after developing skin cancer in their 40s or 50s.
I don't need to look up basic medical history to understand this. The dangers of the sun have always been known and you can read about it in documents like the one above.
Additionally, as I've stated before, I only recommend daily sunscreen on the face, hands, and neck. Not the entire body. If you have short sleeves on, for example, and you are just going about town for an hour or so, you will get plenty of Vitamin D through the arms. Similarly for shorts. It's easy to get Vitamin D without prematurely aging the most prominent parts of our body.