Hacker News Reader

Comment by JoshTko | Hacker News Reader

I've started to ignore studies these days that contradict how most humans would have lived, for most of humanity. Most humans would have had plenty of sun exposure and genetics would have adapted accordingly. I'll seek as much sun exposure I can on work days, but will never sun bathe for hours on end.

View on HN

> I've started to ignore studies these days that contradict how most humans would have lived, for most of humanity

This is probably one of the worse heuristics I've ever heard.

Humans throughout humanity have lived awful lives full of disease, death, and misery. It used to be common for a woman to have 10 kids and maybe 2-3 would make it to adulthood.

The only reason you even have the ability to take such an obviously wrong position is BECAUSE of the very things you "ignore".

It depends on your skin though. If you're of European ancestry and living in a sunny place, your genes haven't had enough time to adapt.

Exactly, a Northern European adapting to sun exposure doesn’t mean getting a tan, it would mean evolutionary pressure to adapt to, say, sunnier California via natural selection over a few thousand years where less sun fit portions die off earlier, while the surviving group slowly gets darker over many many generations or better at repairing damage.

If you’re fair skinned but find yourself outside the low UV region that your skin is adapted to, you are welcome to begin the new adaptation by avoiding sun protection and going outside without regard to the UV index.

I, however, will not join that genetic adaptation.

Yes, this is the nuance so many of these discussions miss.

Keep a close eye on your local UV forecast, avoid peak times, and you should be pretty good.

Genetics would have adapted if it affected reproductive fitness. But skin cancer tends to develop past reproductive age.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com