Sun exposure

[Chris S]

If you're follically challenged like me, I would advise a Buff rather than suncream above eye level.  Sweat and suncream mixture in the eyes would have been a pretty good medieval torture device.

Although beware the Buff-line which becomes more and more pronounced as the summer progresses.

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

I don't bother with sunscreen for just going about my business in Edinburgh (apart from anything else, it'd be like wearing wellies in the desert). If I know I'm going to be outside all day and it's a sunny day, I might, but day to day I prefer to expose myself let my skin build up some colour gradually. On beach holidays, I start on F30 and never go lower than F15. I'm allergic to chemical sunscreens so I have to find the physical blockers - I like Neal's Yard and Dr Hauschka.

Having said all that, I noticed today that a small mole on my arm looks a bit funny, so I think I'll ring the doctor next week.

[mattc]

I thought the UV and cheap sunglasses issue was redundant now as it's easy to produce UV protective lenses at low cost, possibly I'm misguided in that.

There is ALWAYS a cheaper way to make cheap sunglasses. And people will always buy them.

[Jaded]

Cloth doesn't block sun. Only partially.

[border-rider]

Cloth doesn't block sun. Only partially.

depends on the cloth and where you are.  Unless it's cheesecloth or a thin fabric, it's probably better than a  sunscreen.  Wear a trenchcoat anna Fedora on the beach and you'll likely be pretty unexposed

Even lycra's not bad.  I've got burned on the bike before now in this country, but never through a cycling shirt.  But yeah, if you are somewhere properly sunny, like Africa, you will burn through lightweight clothes.

[phil d]

Curiously enough, I was one of only three people I saw putting on sun block at Saturday's audax. You'd think audaxers would be well up on this game.

P20 has been mentioned before, upthread.  I've used this for about four years now, and have been very impressed by it.  It is applied FIRST THING and seems to be effective all day, and is waterproof / sweatproof.  So, Chris, you shouldn't expect to see any P20 users applying anything during the day.

A couple of years ago I did an extensive search of the literature (on the web, using where necessary my wife's password access to medical sites) and could find nothing reputable that really told me what works, what doesn't, what is good, what is not (except, of course, total non-exposure).  Which led me to the conclusion that it is one of those fields where nobody actually knows - it is full of opinion and conjecture.

I am convinced that there is a problem, but don't really know quite how severe it is.  Burning is obviously not good, but tanning seems to be a natural process, and it is difficult to accept that is automatically bad.

I find that P20 works for me - since I started using it I have never burnt.  I apply it liberally when I get up on any day that I am anticipating being outdoors in the sun - even if it is cloudy at the time.  It is a once-a-day application.

But I could be just fooling myself.

[FatBloke]

P20 works for me! Best thing sinced sliced bread. Apply in the morning and you're protected all day. 

Unfortunately, it brings my wife and daughter out in a very itchy rash, so it doesn't suit everybody. 

[simonp]

I use this stuff

Travelsafe - Assortment-group - Ts71

8 hours protection from one application.

[Wendy]

P20 works for me! Best thing sinced sliced bread. Apply in the morning and you're protected all day. 

Unfortunately, it brings my wife and daughter out in a very itchy rash, so it doesn't suit everybody. 

I just bought some a few weeks ago, I like it rather a lot given that I spend all day in the sun.

[teethgrinder]

Even lycra's not bad.  I've got burned on the bike before now in this country, but never through a cycling shirt.  But yeah, if you are somewhere properly sunny, like Africa, you will burn through lightweight clothes.

I never got burned through my cycling shorts or jersey when I cycled around Arizona and through Death Valley with the temperature usualy a few degrees over 100.
The sunblock was effectve too. My friend and I left Phoenix at around 3am because our bodyclocks were still on BST and we decided on getting a head start so we could get out of the city before the rush hour.
We decided to buy sunblock when we were almost out of the city, but we had been exposed to the sun for a couple of hours and were allready burned. About as bad as I would be from a whole day on a very hot English day, from just a couple of hours.
My forehead, nose and hands became scarred after a few days* where I was sweating off the sunblock, so  started wearing my cap all the time and kept re-applying sun block to my hands.



*It didn't half sting when we got caught out in hailstones. Not much shelter in the desert either.

different exposure patterns though - long-term vs short intense bursts with no build up of skin colour between

Yes, my arms are relatively well built up (for me) for sun protecton. But if I wear a sleeveless top, my shoulders will get very badly burned quite quickly because they haven't had the build up of exposure over the years. I try to get a bit of a tan to increase my resistance. But after last weekend, I think I'll be a bit more carefull this year. I think it will get ultra scorchio this year.
I've been warned about skin cancer. Even by old people who used to go for years spending a lot of time in the sun without sunblock.

I'm also wary about my bonce, which is loosing some of it's sun protection as I get older. Because I used to have more hair when I was younger, my head probably isn't so resistant. I don't fancy skin cancer at all, let alone on my head.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

"Slide on some sunglasses"

The resurgence of retro sunglasses, or even any cheap pair sold on market stalls, are also a growing problem as most don't have any UV protection.

Illegal to sell sunnies without UV filters in Oz.

[mattc]

I am convinced that there is a problem, but don't really know quite how severe it is.  Burning is obviously not good, but tanning seems to be a natural process, and it is difficult to accept that is automatically bad.

I've been puzzled by this question too.

I wonder if it's down to our increased lifespans - something like double that of neanderthals?

We've never evolved good protection from the sun because other stuff normally kills you long before skin cancer. So maybe expensive sun-cream is an unavoidable part of our 'modern' longevity.

[simonp]

I am convinced that there is a problem, but don't really know quite how severe it is.  Burning is obviously not good, but tanning seems to be a natural process, and it is difficult to accept that is automatically bad.

I've been puzzled by this question too.

I wonder if it's down to our increased lifespans - something like double that of neanderthals?

We've never evolved good protection from the sun because other stuff normally kills you long before skin cancer. So maybe expensive sun-cream is an unavoidable part of our 'modern' longevity.

It goes for all forms of cancer and various other diseases of old age. There is no selection pressure for living to 90. You can't reproduce at that age and are just going to compete with your offspring for resources.

[Wendy]

Those suggesting that lycra doesn't stop UV much should see my tanlines.  It's a pretty extreme demonstration of how much better it is at stopping UV than suncream.

[Greenbank]

Those suggesting that lycra doesn't stop UV much should see my tanlines.  It's a pretty extreme demonstration of how much better it is at stopping UV than suncream.

There's a classic shorts tan-line photo in Mark Beaumont's book that would agree with you. Such contrast.

I've got tan-lines on my arms from lycra jerseys (late July - Flattest Possible 300 - seems to be the time/event I do it each year, will have to watch out on LEL), but I've also been burned through a lycra jersey on one ride, so it's not impossible.

Never through lycra shorts though, but that may be due to the use of a thicker/denser material than in jerseys.

[simonp]

I tend to burn just below the bottom of my shorts because they can move after you apply suncream - so I always pull them up a bit and ensure there's a good overlap these days.

[Sergeant Pluck]

Another P20 user here. Easily the most effective thing I have used.

It's so good that I often wonder what the downside is - there has been mention on the forum of the possibility that some of these things produce a lot of potentially harmful free radicals in the skin.

[Treewheeler]

Well then...
 A visit to the doctor who prescribed a gel that will burn off these 'pre melanoma' spots in about 8 weeks.
 If this don't 'marche pa' then its freezing nitrogen treatment for me.
 Although my back became well freckled through my C.T.C jersey the moles are just fine for now.
 As for the post tour blues...
 I'll keep you posted if it all comes together...

[TimO]

On Sunday, since I knew the sun would be bright, and I'd be out in it all day, I slathered myself up with suncream, and as far as I know nothing significantly changed colour.

This morning, I had brown patches on the back of my hands (cyclists mit tan lines) from Monday's commute.  Ho hum.  I must remember to bung some on when it's a sunny morning.

[nuttycyclist]

Those suggesting that lycra doesn't stop UV much should see my tanlines.  It's a pretty extreme demonstration of how much better it is at stopping UV than suncream.

I've got a sneaky suspicion that "UV Protective Clothing" is a PR gimmick.



My worst experience to date, which seems to be permenant, was a silly day ride to Southend Seafront on a sunny May day.

Hadn't thought it was that hot or sunny, hadn't gone out with sunscreen.  Sat in the sun all day.  Went home.


I didn't "burn" (i.e. lobster pink)  I just went beetroot purple.

The tan line from that has lasted 4 years.

I was just in a very old (4 or 5 years) t-shirt that is faded and worn thin through wear and washing.

[border-rider]

We've never evolved good protection from the sun because other stuff normally kills you long before skin cancer.

We have actually.  That's why the original homo sapiens who came to Europe were black, and why most those of us who aren't, tan.  White people evolved because the benefits of not being vit D deficient outweighed the risk of skin cancer.

[border-rider]

I am convinced that there is a problem, but don't really know quite how severe it is.  Burning is obviously not good, but tanning seems to be a natural process, and it is difficult to accept that is automatically bad.

Skin colour (tanning, =evidence of damage) is protective against melanoma risk because it reduce UVB exposure, though you have to be exposed in the first place.  Melanoma risk is linked to periodic lobsterness, especially in the young, rather than cumulative exposure.  But the aetiology isn't that clear...

Long-term exposure (as opposed to short-duration high intensity) tends to lead to a more UVA -biased exposure spectrum, which makes your skin leathery and prone to things like squamous cell carcinomas, usually much less of a problem than melanoma

[Notsototalnewbie]

I burn really badly so always use suncream, my pale freckly skin never tans, just acquires redness and freckles. I recommend the proderm/bergaderm stuff which is like a mousse. It stays on all day and nothing sticks to it. Even towel-drying doesn't get rid of it. It is like P20 except it blocks both UVA and UVB and IIRC P20 only does one of those.

I missed a tiny bit on the racer back of my top on Sunday and it was really really sore for a few days, stupid stupid.

When I am going to be in water a lot, I wear a rash vest with short sleeves and a very high neck, because my chest and shoulders have blistered in the past while using a cream that was not as waterproof as it pretended to be.

I burned badly as a child;  I loved the water and my mum struggled to keep me reapplied with cream and was always chasing me down. If I had kids now I would make them wear one of those little wetsuit things for toddlers if they wanted to play on the beach. Cam should count herself lucky she has a thick covering of fur or she would find herself in one 

[TimO]

Talisker is likewise lucky that he's totally black.  People with cats whose ears are white should slap suncream on them, since cats do seem to suffer from cancer around there.  I can't see many cats being that comfortable with you doing this!

I suspect I won't have to worry too much about putting on Suncream for todays ride to Whitstable, unlike last Sunday.

[Bledlow]

I am convinced that there is a problem, but don't really know quite how severe it is.  Burning is obviously not good, but tanning seems to be a natural process, and it is difficult to accept that is automatically bad.

Skin colour (tanning, =evidence of damage) is protective against melanoma risk because it reduce UVB exposure, though you have to be exposed in the first place.  Melanoma risk is linked to periodic lobsterness, especially in the young, rather than cumulative exposure.  But the aetiology isn't that clear...

Long-term exposure (as opposed to short-duration high intensity) tends to lead to a more UVA -biased exposure spectrum, which makes your skin leathery and prone to things like squamous cell carcinomas, usually much less of a problem than melanoma

Funny thing is that vitamin D appears to have some protective effect, enough that  total sun avoidance increases overall cancer risk (& it's a Bad Thing for other reasons). Of course, total sun avoidance is quite difficult, unless you wear a burqa or never go outside, so it's probably not a problem for most people. And for those who it is, rickets is probably a more immediate concern.