3 ms·
The UV damage from tanning beds has been well documented for decades, but what's novel here is the genetic methylation analysis showing accelerated aging at the
by yoan9224 10mo ago
The UV damage from tanning beds has been well documented for decades, but what's novel here is the genetic methylation analysis showing accelerated aging at the DNA level.
What's wild to me is the economics. Tanning salons charge $30-50/month to give you skin cancer. Meanwhile vitamin D supplements cost $10/year and achieve the same health benefit people claim to seek from tanning.
The only rational argument I've heard for controlled UV exposure is building a base tan before vacation to prevent burning. But even then, 1-2 minutes in a low-wattage bed would suffice - not the 20+ minute sessions people actually do.
- alistairSH 10mo agoWhere are you seeing vitamin D supplements for $10/year? That’s several orders of magnitude less than most OTC supplements.
- thwarted 10mo agoA Google search for vitamin d results in ads, ahem "sponsored results", for 180 servings for $27, which is about $55 for a full year assuming it's one serving per day, which is the same decimal order of magnitude as $10 (but, I suppose, since we are on HN, is three or four orders of magnitude in binary)
- ranger_danger 10mo ago> accelerated aging at the DNA level Wouldn't anything that moves/vibrates molecules faster, accelerate aging in general?