5 ms·

Are you familiar with Singaporean norms? There is/was a very strong aversion to being outdoors, especially during peak sunlight hours (lunchtime). This compoun

Are you familiar with Singaporean norms? There is/was a very strong aversion to being outdoors, especially during peak sunlight hours (lunchtime). This compounds with both study culture and digital culture (videogames + tv + phones) and less of a celebration of sports to mean many kids get less direct sunlight than you'd think. Especially now everyone is terrified of UV

wenc 4y ago
Yes I am. I don't think OP mentioned being in the direct sunlight, but being exposed to it (visually, as in a source of bright light). Unless you sequester yourself in a room without windows all day, to get anywhere you're likely to need to walk outside to a bus stop, an MRT station, or to get a Grab. And unless there's a tunnel connecting office buildings to hawker centers, folks probably need to walk outside to get lunch (exceptions are malls connected to food courts). Singaporeans probably get more sunlight than say Swedes over the course of a year.
- throwawaySG 4y ago
  This study on Singaporean children (https://bjo.bmj.com/content/bjophthalmol/early/2021/04/14/bjophthalmol-2021-318918.full.pdf?casa_token=ylYzmD10AQwAAAAA:oqWt4LWTsUU5LM1Lj4G_YUaMzav8HCa1BwxmX8hiPMTMUpRiKFsaovcdT2CqHmjKC-ijZbdCOBg https://bjo.bmj.com/content/bjophthalmol/early/2021/04/14/bj...) says that > Singaporean children had shorter reported time outdoors and lower light levels, relative to their counterparts overseas. In the current study, reported time outdoors was 1.7±1.6hours/day and average light levels were 458±228lux. In contrast, children of similar ages in Australia and the UK reported time outdoors of at least 2–3 hours/day.18 22 Likewise, higher average light levels of 1072 and 1627 lux were reported in Australian (age 10–15 years)16 and American (age 5–10 years) children,20 respectively. Differences in educational demands (homework load and afterschool enrichment classes),23 lifestyle and sociocultural factors may account for the lower reported time outdoors and light levels in Singaporean children I can't remember exactly how many hours of exposure to sunlight the studies mentioned, but I think it was something like 2-3 hours --- and it might have to be more than just, e.g., being near a window. I'm Singaporean too, and that excerpt from that paper accords with my experience. I highly doubt that I and most of the people I grew up with had that much sunlight exposure per day.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- djtango 4y ago
  Fair enough - not trying to condescend just establishing what your opinions may be based on. My own personal (and very anecdotal) observations are that people really go out of their way to avoid exposure to the outdoors. Depending on your lifestyle, it is really possible to spend the day having only been outside for minutes of a day. I think things are changing but I feel like the last 20-50 years have not really celebrated an outdoors lifestyle. Whereas my time in Europe is somewhat different in that plenty of people optimise to spend time outdoors - probably due to less oppressive weather and kids were encouraged to play outside a lot more
Rastonbury 4y ago
Not buying the sunlight argument, equatorial countries are hardly afflicted by vitamin D deficiencies or seasonal affective disorder you see in Europe. Solar intensity is stronger year round than summer in some Scandinavian countries. If it were sun, we'd see similar patterns in myopia to vit D deficiency as you get closer to the poles.
- djtango 4y ago
  This is def a decent counterpoint - on a previous HN thread on this topic I recall studies being done on agricultural vs urban mainland chinese people and how a refinement to the observation so sunlight/outdoors might be a proxy for some other factor. I've seen proposed "distant viewing". Although one possible nuance is that sunlight to the eyes != sunlight to the skin. In cold climates you wear thick clothes which will block out sunlight to the skin (vit D deficiency) but you may still get plenty of UV to the eyes. Throw in some mountains for distant gazing and suddenly nations that love skiing could be simultaneously vit D deficient but guarded against myopia. Pure conjecture of course - IANA(Biologist/Opthamologist/Doctor)

wenc 4y ago

Yes I am. I don't think OP mentioned being in the direct sunlight, but being exposed to it (visually, as in a source of bright light). Unless you sequester yourself in a room without windows all day, to get anywhere you're likely to need to walk outside to a bus stop, an MRT station, or to get a Grab. And unless there's a tunnel connecting office buildings to hawker centers, folks probably need to walk outside to get lunch (exceptions are malls connected to food courts). Singaporeans probably get more sunlight than say Swedes over the course of a year.

throwawaySG 4y ago
This study on Singaporean children (https://bjo.bmj.com/content/bjophthalmol/early/2021/04/14/bjophthalmol-2021-318918.full.pdf?casa_token=ylYzmD10AQwAAAAA:oqWt4LWTsUU5LM1Lj4G_YUaMzav8HCa1BwxmX8hiPMTMUpRiKFsaovcdT2CqHmjKC-ijZbdCOBg https://bjo.bmj.com/content/bjophthalmol/early/2021/04/14/bj...) says that > Singaporean children had shorter reported time outdoors and lower light levels, relative to their counterparts overseas. In the current study, reported time outdoors was 1.7±1.6hours/day and average light levels were 458±228lux. In contrast, children of similar ages in Australia and the UK reported time outdoors of at least 2–3 hours/day.18 22 Likewise, higher average light levels of 1072 and 1627 lux were reported in Australian (age 10–15 years)16 and American (age 5–10 years) children,20 respectively. Differences in educational demands (homework load and afterschool enrichment classes),23 lifestyle and sociocultural factors may account for the lower reported time outdoors and light levels in Singaporean children I can't remember exactly how many hours of exposure to sunlight the studies mentioned, but I think it was something like 2-3 hours --- and it might have to be more than just, e.g., being near a window. I'm Singaporean too, and that excerpt from that paper accords with my experience. I highly doubt that I and most of the people I grew up with had that much sunlight exposure per day.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
djtango 4y ago
Fair enough - not trying to condescend just establishing what your opinions may be based on. My own personal (and very anecdotal) observations are that people really go out of their way to avoid exposure to the outdoors. Depending on your lifestyle, it is really possible to spend the day having only been outside for minutes of a day. I think things are changing but I feel like the last 20-50 years have not really celebrated an outdoors lifestyle. Whereas my time in Europe is somewhat different in that plenty of people optimise to spend time outdoors - probably due to less oppressive weather and kids were encouraged to play outside a lot more

Rastonbury 4y ago

Not buying the sunlight argument, equatorial countries are hardly afflicted by vitamin D deficiencies or seasonal affective disorder you see in Europe. Solar intensity is stronger year round than summer in some Scandinavian countries. If it were sun, we'd see similar patterns in myopia to vit D deficiency as you get closer to the poles.

djtango 4y ago
This is def a decent counterpoint - on a previous HN thread on this topic I recall studies being done on agricultural vs urban mainland chinese people and how a refinement to the observation so sunlight/outdoors might be a proxy for some other factor. I've seen proposed "distant viewing". Although one possible nuance is that sunlight to the eyes != sunlight to the skin. In cold climates you wear thick clothes which will block out sunlight to the skin (vit D deficiency) but you may still get plenty of UV to the eyes. Throw in some mountains for distant gazing and suddenly nations that love skiing could be simultaneously vit D deficient but guarded against myopia. Pure conjecture of course - IANA(Biologist/Opthamologist/Doctor)