To not smother my DCs in suncream?

[CantankerousCamel]

I know there is a lot of information suggesting ‘there’s is no such thing as a healthy tan’ but AIBU to think it’s gone too far the other way?

I am very lax about suncream personally (choice partly and research mostly) but everywhere I look, people seem to be smothering children in factor 50 every second of the day!

This cannot be healthy surely? Some sort of happy medium is necessary? Obviously some skin needs heavy sun cream and some needs none (I have Spanish skin and my husband is South African, neither of us or the kids have burned when being careful with staying in the shade in midday sun and popping a thin layer on/hat if needed

Why the factor 50 in May?

AIBU to think NICE should be adjusting guidelines to ward off such thick use of creams on young children? It is important for skin to experience sunlight, especially in the Northern Hemisphere and especially this time of year when moderate exposure is easier, safer and will prevent burning later on in the summer.

As someone who has had 2 pre cancerous moles removed (at ages 9 and 29) I think this is bonkers. I'll put well tested chemicals on my dc to protect them as much as possible from ever suffering from skin cancer... actually when it's really hot I cover them in clothes.

air, I believe , is a mixture. Water is a chemical.

but yes, lots of thickos on mn. and they are so proud of it!

oh right thanks I stand corrected.
I remember back in the days of competitive baby mums, one woman spent ages telling me that 'the Body Shop is against animal testing' meant lots more than eg 'this product has not been tested on animals, by us, or our competitors since 1978' (Co-op label)
She was another one that didn't want 'chemicals' on her baby.

I am very lax about suncream personally (choice partly and research mostly)
I have two good friends who are PHd level chemists in medical research.They both will have read far more research on this subject yet they conclude very differently and use sun cream.

This cannot be healthy surely?

Yet the NHS and NICE disagree

neither of us or the kids have burned when being careful with staying in the shade in midday sun and popping a thin layer on/hat if needed

At school you have no control over how long your children are out in the sun.Yes hat and shade are preferable.but not always possible.

Why the factor 50 in May?

UV ratings are often very high in May. they are at their height in June.

AIBU to think NICE should be adjusting guidelines to ward off such thick use of creams on young children?

Yes

It is important for skin to experience sunlight ... especially this time of year when moderate exposure is easier, safer and will prevent burning later on in the year

there is no evidence that moderate exposure will prevent burning.

You have still not explained why Vit D supplements won't solve the problem and what harm you actually think the chemicals in sun cream are doing. Have you read all the posts about cancerr and the risks? Have you read about the ozone layer and why its damage is excerbating the problem?

honestly Fruitcorner if you mention the hole in the ozone layer over the UK, and the lack of protection, you might as well get people sticking their fingers in their ears and going LA LA LA

I really have answered all of this, many times over.

I don’t believe the sun is out to ‘get’ us and I don’t believe keeping children away from any exposure to it is beneficial.

I’m not sure how many more times
I can say ‘8/9am’ or all the other things I’ve already said, again.

I've read every post. You also said you don't send your children into school with cream on. I dont think anyone is debating the 8/9am thing.

They don’t spend enough time outside in the sun at school for suncream.

The playground is shaded mostly and they don’t have skin that’s prone to burning.

frankly what I do with my kids is of little concern to you, my only suggesting here is that people allow their kids a few mins a day to have some sun and air on their bodies before being covered in creams (or in the evening if morning isn’t possible.

Yeah I think we all need a bit of exposure but for some it's not that easy. I'm blonde hair blue eyes, Scandinavian looking. My kids on the other hand are ginger as fuck. As Irish as you get! They look at the sun and they burn.
I give them vit d supplements, but then I read somewhere that gingers produce their own vit d??

I’m afraid I am a strong believer in the world giving us what we need to survive where we are, hence people having different colours of skin around the world or eyes or whatever.
*
I don’t know that I agree with covering ourselves up so the natural aspect that offers us VIT D is unable to, and taking unnatural, man-made tablets to rectify the deficiet.*

You are entitled to what you believe and that's absolutely fine. But you said that the article pointed to research that stated that sun exposure was crucial for people in the northern hemisphere. Vitamin D is absolutely crucial. And people who live further away from the equator are more likely to have lower natural vitamin D levels - hence increased risk of diseases associated with low levels of vitamin D. They don't say that sun exposure is vital - just that vitamin D is. How you choose to get your levels is up to the individual. If you don't like supplementation that's absolutely fine. But the research doesn't seem to say what you're claiming it does. You can disagree! But it's disingenuous to point to research you say backs up your point about sun exposure versus supplementation when it doesn't.

Like I said, if you speak to any skin doctor they will tell you that getting burnt is the biggest risk, so getting a bit of a tan in the sunshine at 8/9am is not the big problem we all seem to think it is.

I do speak to a skin Dr. Every 3 months. I see a consultant dermatologist and she recommends spf 50 facial sunscreen every single day of the year!

Doesn't mean you ought to do this. Or anyone else. But seems a sweeping statement to make on behalf of all dermatologists, no?

BLUE

I believe the lighter your skin colour the more easily you produce vit D but you do need some exposure to work with!

BANANA

All I’m ‘claiming’ is that it’s good for skin to have some exposure to the world before being smothered in cream every day.

That’s it

My only point (which I’ve reiterated at least 30 times now) is that skin needs some exposure to sunlight without heavy creams and the current trend of slapping heavy creams on first thing in the morning and continuing to reapply throughout the day is not necessary for 99% of skin tones and causes more harm than good.

You're stating opinions as fact. You can believe that using suncream throughout the day causes more harm than good, but stating that it DOES cause more harm than good (without any evidence to support this claim) is disingenuous.

One is opinion. One is fact.

bananafish81
You are of course right, but you might as well go and bang your head against a wall.

Well, it's a fact that advice on sun exposure and vitamin D supplementation is both confusing and confused. Besides the fact even the "experts" clearly have insufficient understanding of the role of vitamin d and sunlight in human health, it is in any event so dependent on the individual, their skin tone and genetics generally, how obese they are, whether they have liver or kidney issues, etc, etc, that there can be no hard and fast rule for anyone. And that's before you even consider the varying intensity of the sun's rays on different days and at different latitudes, altitudes and pollution levels....

Even the NHS advice does seem to assume some degree of unprotected sun exposure between 11am and 3pm in the UK, though, for the purposes of vitamin D production. Even if that is just unprotected hands and forearms. See the advice on this link:
www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/how-to-get-vitamin-d-from-sunlight/

There is an equal amount of expert confusion on vitamin D supplementation, with differing recommended daily amounts around the world. For some reason best known to the UK, which has lower levels of strong enough sunlight to make vitamin D than most other countries in the world, it also has amongst the lowest levels of recommended daily amounts of supplementation, woefully poorly advertised advice on supplementation and high rates of people with vitamin D deficiency... Even though it has technically been official advice for a very long time for babies to be given vitamin D supplements and I breastfed my babies, not a single mention was made to me of vitamin D supplementation, either in hospital, from midwives or health visitors when my children were small. That situation may have improved marginally in recent years (and the advice extended to virtually everyone for the autumn and winter...), but not much! How many people are actually aware of the latest advice? Not many, I suspect. There is far more focus on ensuring your skin is protected from the sun.... This does not fill me with confidence in the "experts" to give me joined up advice I can easily and safely follow. I therefore just continue to do as I have always done - avoid getting burnt, don't bother to try and get a tan, and only put suncream on in the UK if I am out in direct sunlight with enough exposed skin for long enough to justify it, which frankly is not often. And take vitamin d supplements for at least half the year.

Can’t there be a compromise here? Surely long loose clothing and a bit of suncream on exposed bits? It doesn’t have to be slathering in cream or nothing.
I personally think sun cream gives a false sense of security- in that you stay outside longer than necessary and then risk sunstroke. In any case suncream isn’t going to block all UV anyway.

I agree about no to sun cream, I wear a hat, moan at DH to wear one (he does if reminded), the DD's are unfortunately past hat wearing & DD2 will wear sun glasses, incredibly important & overlooked.

I'm all about covering up rather than the sun cream, but more relaxed over arms/legs getting a good airing.

Faces, across the bridge of the nose, have a blob of sunscreen.

Little & often in the sun I'd say & no to burning.

frankly what I do with my kids is of little concern to you

That's ironic given that you started this thread to judge the parenting of those of us who use sun cream. Why don't you just let your "research" inform your own parenting and leave the rest of us to make our own decisions based on the scientific evidence.

Fruit

I’ve not started this thread to judge anyone

No to suncream as a blanket statement is about as stupid a parenting position as anti-vax.

My cousins mother thought sun cream was a daft new fad in the 1970s, she let them all burn so they would get a nice tan afterwards. Which is why one of them has skin cancer now
I burned plenty as a kid as well, and since only one blistering sun burn doubles your chances of melanoma, I'm not complacent, and you can be sure as shit I put suncream on my pale freckly children.

YANBU both my children as extremely pale and red headed so they get some organic suncream on when the sun starts to burn (in summer around 11, spring around 12 - we don't live in the uk) but I try to use as little as necessary and have them wear sun hats, long sleeve tops and trousers as protection with only the need for a small layer on their face, neck and hands. They've never been burnt.

They don’t spend enough time outside in the sun at school for suncream
Having worked in numerous schools, I have seen none where the playground is completely shaded, let alone the school fields. I have seen a few nurseries where there is a lot of shade.
My kids had at least 30 minutes outside at the peak time of day for high UV. We regularly have UV or 6-8 at this time of year.
They also did PE outside for an hour a couple of times a week.
That is more than enough time for damage to be done, even if the child doesn't burn.

OP I was advised by my Dr to spend 10-15 mins in the early morning sun and the same after 5pm because I have Vit D deficiency. Whilst sunscreen is essential for me between 11-3-4 I do follow my Drs advice. I will always have to take Vit D because my body does not retain it in the way it should, I have been on it for years and without it I do have bone pain. I u derstood your post as saying that we just need to careful about allowing the skin to just breathe in the early morning sun.....but to protect it at the hottest part of the day.

I have very sun intolerant skin and burn very easily, so I only ever use factor 50 on myself. I use the same on ds. I'd much prefer him be protected than burn.

i agree with the fear of ageing motivation to wear factor 50 everywhere. My teenage dd (15) told me she was wearing my factor 30 (that I'd bought for myself). She was annoyed I"d bought her a cheaper factor 15. She is 1/4 black. I think she's being OTT with the total sun block. Probably the school have her terrified to let a ray of sunshine touch her skin