Sunlight through glass does not provide Vitamin D

Re:Sunlight through glass does not provide Vitamin D by rossdavidh on Monday February 25, 2019 @05:35PM (#19250147)

Certainly, many natural things are not good. However, the idea that a complete absence of natural light (which includes UV) is good, is suspect. It reminds one of the idea, in the early 20th century, that getting rid of all bacteria was good. It turns out that there are way more kinds of bacteria than we know, and an excess of antibiotics and disinfectants is almost certainly a big part of why we have ever-escalating rates of severe allergies and auto-immune disorders.

Not that we would wish to have a complete absence of antibiotics. But, the attitude of "you have a virus, so take this antibiotic just in case there's also a bacteria", sounds a lot like "block all UV light from hitting your skin, at all times". I am skeptical.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sunlight through glass does not provide Vitamin D by jeffdavis on Monday February 25, 2019 @06:39PM (#19250578)

I mostly agree. I'm just saying that you might want to stop using soap as well ;-)

Using soap has a big effect on how the UV light hits your skin, the damage it might cause, and the benefits that it might have. Of course this is all speculation on my part, but I am just warning of the idea of picking one natural thing at a time -- natural things go together.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Sunlight through glass does not provide Vitamin D by rossdavidh on Monday February 25, 2019 @08:28PM (#19251264)

Maybe instead of sunscreen, we should be using mudpacks. :) I think it might hurt my chances of getting employed, unless I worked only remotely. Also, my wife would have words.

However, anecdotally, the "mud beggars" at modern Renaissance Faires are said to have healthy skin. It could be a confusion of cause and effect, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]