6 ms·

The problem is that vitamin D absorption is one of those things linked to ethnicity. It is very basic and undisputed science that lower melanin in skin = higher

The problem is that vitamin D absorption is one of those things linked to ethnicity. It is very basic and undisputed science that lower melanin in skin = higher vitamin D absorption. No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups indigenous to the northern hemisphere are more suited to the natural environment they are endemic too, and less likely to have vitamin D problems. Of course, the Vitamin D deficiency in people unsuited to non-indigenous European residents will naturally disadvantage them over time in nature. https://www.longdom.org/open-access/the-skin-melanin-an-inhibitor-of-vitamind3-biosynthesis-with-special-emphasis-with-structure-of-skin-a-mini-review.pdf https://www.longdom.org/open-access/the-skin-melanin-an-inhi... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4272394/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4272394/ To give balance to reinforce that i'm purely speaking from a scientific-rational viewpoint, in Australia the government is trying to discourage people from being in the sun at all due to Australia (primarily european ethnic) having one of the highest rates of skin cancer in the world, due to also not being suited to their natural environment. https://www.cancer.org.au/cancer-information/types-of-cancer/skin-cancer https://www.cancer.org.au/cancer-information/types-of-cancer... "the incidence of skin cancer is one of the highest in the world, two to three times the rates in Canada, the US and the UK." The USA approach is quite different though - pills for everyone! Buy your vitamin D plastic chips and watch the stock market go up!

Mountain_Skies 6y ago
Wonder if there is also a connection with the declining popularity of cow's milk, which is typically fortified with vitamins A & D. In primary school, cow's milk have become less common due to increased awareness that different ethnic groups have different tolerances for lactose. Unfortunately, it appears the groups that would benefit the most from more vitamin D are also the ones most likely to be lactose intolerant, and thus not drinking the milk fortified with vitamin D.
- opan 6y ago
  You can find plant milk and even orange juice with vitamin D added.
stordoff 6y ago
FWIW, I've seen the NHS mention it quite a few times. Example: > People with dark skin, such as those of African, African-Caribbean or south Asian origin, will need to spend longer in the sun to produce the same amount of vitamin D as someone with lighter skin. https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/how-to-get-vitamin-d-from-sunlight/ https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/how-to-get-vitamin...
- westwing 6y ago
  It can be mentioned as a footnote, because it is scientific fact. However, given the vastly higher death rates among people with darker skin, it should be shouted from the rooftops. Unfortunately, this would put into question the narrative that anything but systemic racism may be to blame. Furthermore, pointing out that people with darker skin are not adapted to live up north could easily be misconstrued as an anti-immigration stance. “Far-right quacks are pushing unproven treatment for COVID” makes for a juicy headline. So, who wants to be the first to put their reputation on the line?
  - outworlder 6y ago
    > Furthermore, pointing out that people with darker skin are not adapted to live up north could easily be misconstrued as an anti-immigration stance. True. That can easily happen. Reason enough to not push that angle, at least not directly. There are other ways of phrasing that. Besides, for humans, there's no longer such a thing as "being adapted" to the environment, at least not in that limited sense. This is not an Earth versus Mars thing, it's just a matter of latitude. If natural abilities were such a big factor, we wouldn't need clothes in Norway or Canada to survive in those places, in winter. But we do. Plus heating. Humans are not "adapted" to live in all environments on Earth, at least not without tools, which includes clothing. So, if your skin is light and you are in an area with high insolation, cover up more and try to spend less time in the sun. Add some sunscreen too. If the skin is darker, do the opposite. Add some supplements as needed. Done. Adapted to the environment.
    - westwing 6y ago
peteretep 6y ago
> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups etc This is just not true and sounds like some weird dog whistle: https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 From there is the following study which concludes “ Greater risk of severe COVID-19 in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic populations is not explained by cardiometabolic, socioeconomic or behavioural factors, or by 25(OH)-vitamin D status” — so part of the reason this viewpoint isn’t getting more traction is simply that it doesn’t seem to be true https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 In conclusion: “race realism” requires you to ignore the actual scientific data, as usual.
- 1234throwaway 6y ago
  The parent comment here said publicise, not publish. The studies will go ahead, but you won't see the mainstream media putting this on the front page. The reason is that it's too sensitive. Look at the massive argument and tension that was generated just from someone pointing out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments (melanin skin to north europe, non-melanin skin to australia) - nobody who values their political or academia career will want to touch this one, so the problem will get worse and worse, silently. It could even end up impacting educational and career outcomes in certain parts of the population that would appear to be racial characteristics because the science impacting those traits is a forbidden subject... which ironically makes people more racist.
  - peteretep 6y ago
    “How coronavirus tore through Britain's ethnic minorities” https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 “Socio-economic inequality means we're more likely to catch the virus, while our biology means we're more likely to die” Literally just the first link that 10s of Googling found. > from someone point internet out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments That’s because this is a crassly overloaded dog whistle statement. “Ethnic minorities should supplement Vitamin D in winter” and “pale people should wear sunscreen in Australia” are in no way controversial or sensitive statements in science or academia or in the media. Trying to morph those into an argument that black people “aren’t suited for” Northern Europe is the racist, non-scientific bullshit people lose their positions for.
lazyasciiart 6y ago
> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups indigenous to the northern hemisphere are more suited to the natural environment they are endemic too “The problem” is more likely to be the existence of studies finding low vitamin D in African people who live in African countries and American native people who live in America, making your theory that people should live where they came from pretty suspect as a solution. As a public health message, “black people need to be careful about sunburn” has presumably been considered more important than “black people have low vitamin D”, because of the widespread false belief that people with dark skin are immune to skin cancer.
totetsu 6y ago
it's not like most people live in a natural environment these days anyway.. saying a modern human is rationality unsuited to a place is skipping over the part where the built environment most people live in is created by and for us, and who it suits is independent of latitude.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
crazydaisy 6y ago
Bro, the exact website you quoted (not same page) has an entire section of information about melanin, ethnic groups, and vitamin D: What is my skin type? Skin types that are more sensitive to ultraviolet (UV) radiation burn more quickly and are at a greater risk of skin cancer. All skin types can be damaged by too much UV radiation. Skin types that are more sensitive to UV radiation burn more quickly and are at a greater risk of skin cancer. People with naturally very dark skin (usually skin type V or VI) still need to take care in the sun even though they may rarely, if ever, get sunburnt. The larger amount of melanin in very dark skin provides natural protection from UV radiation. This means the risk of skin cancer is lower. Eye damage can occur regardless of skin type. High levels of UV radiation have also been linked to harmful effects on the immune system. Vitamin D deficiency may be a greater health concern for people with naturally very dark skin, as it is more difficult for people with this skin type to make vitamin D.
crazydaisy 6y ago
Furthermore, this article by two Australian academics, published in an outlet considered leftist, is basically about why Australians have such high rates of skin cancer, and includes the quote: Why us? Most Australians (and Kiwis) have the wrong type of skin for their environment. Basically, through migration, our two countries have been populated by many people with fair skin whose ancestors come from much less sunny climates. Lack of protective pigmentation leaves skin cells especially vulnerable to the DNA-damaging rays from the sun. During human evolution, our early hominid ancestors in Africa lost their covering of body hair and developed pigmented skins, presumably as protection against the harsh tropical sun. With subsequent migration out of Africa into Europe, the protective benefits of dark skin became less important for survival and were likely a hindrance to effective vitamin D production. There was selective pressure for less pigmented skin with more distance from the equator. In contrast, those who migrated out of Africa to Asia, Australia and the islands of Melanesia were constantly exposed to sunlight. So they retained their protective pigmentation. This explains why the recent European migrants to the Americas and Oceania arrived in the “new worlds” with skin types poorly suited to their new environments. This was in stark contrast to the well-adapted skin of the indigenous inhabitants. https://theconversation.com/why-does-australia-have-so-much-skin-cancer-hint-its-not-because-of-an-ozone-hole-91850 https://theconversation.com/why-does-australia-have-so-much-...
- westwing 6y ago
  The difference is that it's a shift in perspective. It's acceptable to say that white people aren't suited to live in Australia. It's not acceptable to say that black people aren't suited to live in the UK, for example.
  - crazydaisy 6y ago
    The same website the OP links to, which is an Australian site, has a page that includes the text, "Vitamin D deficiency may be a greater health concern for people with naturally very dark skin, as it is more difficult for people with this skin type to make vitamin D.". It's unclear why an Australian site would be going into the question of who is "suited to" live in the UK.

Mountain_Skies 6y ago

Wonder if there is also a connection with the declining popularity of cow's milk, which is typically fortified with vitamins A & D. In primary school, cow's milk have become less common due to increased awareness that different ethnic groups have different tolerances for lactose. Unfortunately, it appears the groups that would benefit the most from more vitamin D are also the ones most likely to be lactose intolerant, and thus not drinking the milk fortified with vitamin D.

opan 6y ago
You can find plant milk and even orange juice with vitamin D added.

stordoff 6y ago

FWIW, I've seen the NHS mention it quite a few times. Example: > People with dark skin, such as those of African, African-Caribbean or south Asian origin, will need to spend longer in the sun to produce the same amount of vitamin D as someone with lighter skin. https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/how-to-get-vitamin-d-from-sunlight/ https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/how-to-get-vitamin...

westwing 6y ago
It can be mentioned as a footnote, because it is scientific fact. However, given the vastly higher death rates among people with darker skin, it should be shouted from the rooftops. Unfortunately, this would put into question the narrative that anything but systemic racism may be to blame. Furthermore, pointing out that people with darker skin are not adapted to live up north could easily be misconstrued as an anti-immigration stance. “Far-right quacks are pushing unproven treatment for COVID” makes for a juicy headline. So, who wants to be the first to put their reputation on the line?
- outworlder 6y ago
  > Furthermore, pointing out that people with darker skin are not adapted to live up north could easily be misconstrued as an anti-immigration stance. True. That can easily happen. Reason enough to not push that angle, at least not directly. There are other ways of phrasing that. Besides, for humans, there's no longer such a thing as "being adapted" to the environment, at least not in that limited sense. This is not an Earth versus Mars thing, it's just a matter of latitude. If natural abilities were such a big factor, we wouldn't need clothes in Norway or Canada to survive in those places, in winter. But we do. Plus heating. Humans are not "adapted" to live in all environments on Earth, at least not without tools, which includes clothing. So, if your skin is light and you are in an area with high insolation, cover up more and try to spend less time in the sun. Add some sunscreen too. If the skin is darker, do the opposite. Add some supplements as needed. Done. Adapted to the environment.
  - westwing 6y ago

peteretep 6y ago

> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups etc This is just not true and sounds like some weird dog whistle: https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 From there is the following study which concludes “ Greater risk of severe COVID-19 in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic populations is not explained by cardiometabolic, socioeconomic or behavioural factors, or by 25(OH)-vitamin D status” — so part of the reason this viewpoint isn’t getting more traction is simply that it doesn’t seem to be true https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 In conclusion: “race realism” requires you to ignore the actual scientific data, as usual.

1234throwaway 6y ago
The parent comment here said publicise, not publish. The studies will go ahead, but you won't see the mainstream media putting this on the front page. The reason is that it's too sensitive. Look at the massive argument and tension that was generated just from someone pointing out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments (melanin skin to north europe, non-melanin skin to australia) - nobody who values their political or academia career will want to touch this one, so the problem will get worse and worse, silently. It could even end up impacting educational and career outcomes in certain parts of the population that would appear to be racial characteristics because the science impacting those traits is a forbidden subject... which ironically makes people more racist.
- peteretep 6y ago
  “How coronavirus tore through Britain's ethnic minorities” https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 “Socio-economic inequality means we're more likely to catch the virus, while our biology means we're more likely to die” Literally just the first link that 10s of Googling found. > from someone point internet out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments That’s because this is a crassly overloaded dog whistle statement. “Ethnic minorities should supplement Vitamin D in winter” and “pale people should wear sunscreen in Australia” are in no way controversial or sensitive statements in science or academia or in the media. Trying to morph those into an argument that black people “aren’t suited for” Northern Europe is the racist, non-scientific bullshit people lose their positions for.

lazyasciiart 6y ago

> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups indigenous to the northern hemisphere are more suited to the natural environment they are endemic too “The problem” is more likely to be the existence of studies finding low vitamin D in African people who live in African countries and American native people who live in America, making your theory that people should live where they came from pretty suspect as a solution. As a public health message, “black people need to be careful about sunburn” has presumably been considered more important than “black people have low vitamin D”, because of the widespread false belief that people with dark skin are immune to skin cancer.

totetsu 6y ago

it's not like most people live in a natural environment these days anyway.. saying a modern human is rationality unsuited to a place is skipping over the part where the built environment most people live in is created by and for us, and who it suits is independent of latitude.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

crazydaisy 6y ago

Bro, the exact website you quoted (not same page) has an entire section of information about melanin, ethnic groups, and vitamin D: What is my skin type? Skin types that are more sensitive to ultraviolet (UV) radiation burn more quickly and are at a greater risk of skin cancer. All skin types can be damaged by too much UV radiation. Skin types that are more sensitive to UV radiation burn more quickly and are at a greater risk of skin cancer. People with naturally very dark skin (usually skin type V or VI) still need to take care in the sun even though they may rarely, if ever, get sunburnt. The larger amount of melanin in very dark skin provides natural protection from UV radiation. This means the risk of skin cancer is lower. Eye damage can occur regardless of skin type. High levels of UV radiation have also been linked to harmful effects on the immune system. Vitamin D deficiency may be a greater health concern for people with naturally very dark skin, as it is more difficult for people with this skin type to make vitamin D.

crazydaisy 6y ago

Furthermore, this article by two Australian academics, published in an outlet considered leftist, is basically about why Australians have such high rates of skin cancer, and includes the quote: Why us? Most Australians (and Kiwis) have the wrong type of skin for their environment. Basically, through migration, our two countries have been populated by many people with fair skin whose ancestors come from much less sunny climates. Lack of protective pigmentation leaves skin cells especially vulnerable to the DNA-damaging rays from the sun. During human evolution, our early hominid ancestors in Africa lost their covering of body hair and developed pigmented skins, presumably as protection against the harsh tropical sun. With subsequent migration out of Africa into Europe, the protective benefits of dark skin became less important for survival and were likely a hindrance to effective vitamin D production. There was selective pressure for less pigmented skin with more distance from the equator. In contrast, those who migrated out of Africa to Asia, Australia and the islands of Melanesia were constantly exposed to sunlight. So they retained their protective pigmentation. This explains why the recent European migrants to the Americas and Oceania arrived in the “new worlds” with skin types poorly suited to their new environments. This was in stark contrast to the well-adapted skin of the indigenous inhabitants. https://theconversation.com/why-does-australia-have-so-much-skin-cancer-hint-its-not-because-of-an-ozone-hole-91850 https://theconversation.com/why-does-australia-have-so-much-...

westwing 6y ago
The difference is that it's a shift in perspective. It's acceptable to say that white people aren't suited to live in Australia. It's not acceptable to say that black people aren't suited to live in the UK, for example.
- crazydaisy 6y ago
  The same website the OP links to, which is an Australian site, has a page that includes the text, "Vitamin D deficiency may be a greater health concern for people with naturally very dark skin, as it is more difficult for people with this skin type to make vitamin D.". It's unclear why an Australian site would be going into the question of who is "suited to" live in the UK.