[trappist]

47m. This time of year (in Texas) I lay out 30-60 minutes a day in a tiny speedo to maximize exposure, and walk shirtless in shorts another 30 minutes, no sunscreen. I'm pretty tan by now which affords significant protection as I understand it. My heuristic has been: we made it a really, really long time with more sun exposure than I can get if I try, before sunscreen was even invented. I might do it differently if I were fair-skinned, or lived at higher altitude or something. During the less sunny months I supplement D3.

[palijer]

>> My heuristic has been: we made it a really, really long time with more sun exposure than I can get if I try, before sunscreen was even invented

I think your heuristic needs to be updated a bit to account for some recent changes to the environment... Things today are not exactly as they were "a really, really long time" ago.

[brokenkebab2]

I don't think that effects of sun exposure significantly changed since long-long-long time ago as neighboring comment suggests. What certainly changed however is human life longevity. Your tanning strategy should work against burns, and likely has other benefits (e.g. vitamin D). But I suppose your skin still gets damaged, and it makes it age faster. Outdoor workers seem to look more wrinkled after 40 compared to office dwellers. Not sure how the sum of all factors plays here though. Does it worth to look older, but have more natural D (and possibly higher testosterone levels)? Dunno

[rasse]

A long time ago people used to die of other causes much earlier than they could develop skin cancer.

[callalex]

We also went a long time without washing anything. A lot more people used to die.