As always, the issue is that people want things to be simple, when the reality is in nuances.

_the poison is in the dose_.

People spending hours everyday under direct sunlight are at risk.

And so does people putting sunscreen everyday, even when they don't go outside but they seat next to a window.

The amount of sunscreen you need depends on your genetics, your history with sun exposure, the place you live and the amount of time you spend under direct sunlight. There is no "sunscreen is a scam" and "life is not sustainable without sunscreen".

▲

skeeter2020 4 days ago | parent [-]

it feels like you're setting up a false eqivalancy; I didn't read anything here about people putting on sunscreen religiously who never go outside, nor you'll die without sunscreen. It seemed to be clearly seperated themes:

1. people are mad about the original topic - false claims of effacicy, when sun exposure can be very damaging and cause cancer.

2. alternatives to these sunscreens, including mechanical like hats and clothing; questions about mineral alternatives

3. wild theories like this one, where a base tan or early season burn somehow protects you. These are wrong and should be called out.

	▲	xyzelement 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		How do you know? I would default to the natural approach of yes sure keep in the shade but also man people evolved / were created spending a lot of time outdoors.