[xcambar]

I am not certain how much credibility this publication deserves.

It's not scientific by nature, it focuses on outdoor activities, which is only a tangent topic, the author has no bio, there is little to no bibliographic references.

[sooheon]

The quotation is from a well known paper in the field cited over 100 times according to google scholar: https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.12251

It was an observational study of 30k women over two decades, so very good statistical power.

> As compared to the highest sun exposure group, the mortality rate was doubled (2.0, 95% CI 1.6–2.5) amongst avoiders of sun exposure and increased by 40% (1.4, 95% CI 1.1– 1.7) in those with moderate exposure. We found that the assumption of proportional hazards seemed reasonable.

So at least among Swedish middle aged women, you are twice as likely to die if you avoid the sun, vs. if you are exposed more to the sun, controlling for factors like income, education, smoking, BMI, and exercise.

It was not a RCT, but then almost no studies of all cause mortality are.

A smaller case study of 500 melanoma patients (https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dji019) also found that "sun exposure is associated with increased survival from melanoma."

I think sudden and extreme sun exposure, i.e. "staying in an office all year and then going on the beach for 9h on vacation" definitely requires sunscreen, but consistent and moderate sun exposure at a rate that your body can tan and adjust to is probably a net positive for everything from circadian effects to mood and mortality, even accounting for skin cancer risk.

[arbol]

Perhaps I should've mentioned that this quote was taken from a research publication.

"In a 2016 study published in the Journal of Internal Medicine, Lindqvist’s team put it in perspective: “Avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor of a similar magnitude as smoking, in terms of life expectancy.”"