[fiter]

The mainstream view amongst whom and where?

There are quotes from organizations that advocate sun exposure which are not linked to Weller:

Cancer Council Australia’s official-position paper (endorsed by the Australasian College of Dermatologists) states, “Ultraviolet radiation from the sun has both beneficial and harmful effects on human health.... A balance is required between excessive sun exposure which increases the risk of skin cancer and enough sun exposure to maintain adequate vitamin D levels.... It should be noted that the benefits of sun exposure may extend beyond the production of vitamin D. Other possible beneficial effects of sun exposure… include reduction in blood pressure, suppression of autoimmune disease, and improvements in mood.”

Australia’s official advice? When the UV index is below 3 (which is true for most of the continental U.S. in the winter), “Sun protection is not recommended unless near snow or other reflective surfaces. To support vitamin D production, spend some time outdoors in the middle of the day with some skin uncovered.”

New Zealand signed on to similar recommendations, and the British Association of Dermatologists went even further in a statement, directly contradicting the position of its American counterpart: “Enjoying the sun safely, while taking care not to burn, can help to provide the benefits of vitamin D without unduly raising the risk of skin cancer.”

[scoggs]

Is it strange that I get some level of measurable joy out of reading something official that contains a rational and balanced take on a subject such as:

"... A balance is required between excessive sun exposure which increases the risk of skin cancer and enough sun exposure to maintain adequate vitamin D levels..." ?

I'm not used to seeing articles / stories / write-ups / or even paragraphs that seem to contain acknowledgement of both sides (or all sides, depending) of a situation. Everything seems like an advertisement or a paid / sponsored article these days so it's almost like a balanced write-up / an author projecting a rational and honest viewpoint is this rare and refreshing change-of-pace for me? Maybe it's not that weird but I've never really taken the time to consider it so I've definitely never asked any friends, family, or co-workers about it. Any thoughts?

[gerbilly]

> Is it strange that I get some level of measurable joy out of reading something official that contains a rational and balanced take on a subject

I got joy reading the article because it basically tells you not to worry about moderate sun exposure.

How many articles tell you not to worry? Now that's a really rare animal in the news media.

[skannamalai]

It should be noted, Australia and New Zealand also have the highest skin cancer rates in the world, at nearly 3x the incidence of the US

https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/cancer-trends/data-cancer...

[yesenadam]

Here's the page with the skin cancer stats:

https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/cancer-trends/skin-cancer...

Australia here, I didn't know that! Or that, for women, Denmark and Norway (and NZ) have higher rates than Australia. Scandinavia rates surprisingly highly all round. Wonder why that is.