You're joking but window tint helps with harmful UV rays. It may not protect you entirely but it still helps! Get your car windows tinted people! If it's legal in your state.
@@rockstar100ify makes it really hard to see at night though. Not worth the increased risk of an accident in exchange for a little percent less UV. Just apply the cream mate.
There are types of tint that are less dark than typical tint while being just as effective. Only issue is that it's more expensive. Look up ceramic tint.
Danny M. Roque Carbon and Ceramic window film work differently than the cheapest film (dyed film) that obstruct your vision at night, and if you want to be extra cautious you can always get a lighter film (50% light & 35% medium) while still blocking a good amount of VLTR, UV & IR rays. Source: I am a residential and automobile window film installer.
Actually screens produce some small amount of UV light, CFL backlight even causes quite a bit. Also the blue light from screens is bad for the eyes and endocrine system either way
Dr.hayley's voice is awesome. *I love voices like that* . . . Btw he was just saying exactly whatever dr.hayley was saying with mild explanations, not fair man
Hue isn't the same thing as intensity. Wavelengths can basically only get you hue unless we consider a wavelength of 0nm to be lacking any signal and thus is black. For intensity you'd need to mention the amplitude or frequency (not sure which one? not a physicist) of the light you're referring to.
Color is a lot more complicated than that. Not all light is monochromatic, for instance try to find the wavelength of pink. Beskamir you are talking about amplitude, since wavelength is pretty much determined by frequency.
@@beskamir5977 hmmm... since black means non of the wavelenghts in the visble light spectrum gets reflected to our eyes, u can probably define black as "except wavelength of XXX nm (red) to YYY nm (indigo/violet) ...
Apparently cosmetics that have petroleum oil in them will also age your skin faster as it prevents your natural oils from functioning properly & the hydrocarbons can slowly destroy collagen in the skin (smoking also accelerates this aging process), so choosing a good sunscreen that doesn't damage your skin at the same time is also equally important! While my younger brother covers what's exposed as he runs a landscaping business working outside daily, he also is a redhead & fair-skinned like my sister (who fortunately moved to Estonia as hubby's family originated from there), & my older brother was blonde (now 61 & quite white), I look more like my father's side of the family! Even though I turn 60 in 15mths, I spent 18yrs after leaving high-school working long hours inside with little time off as my health was deteriorating, until eventually unable to work even part-time. Was finally diagnosed with ME/CFS over 20yrs ago with a back-injury & arthritis complicating things in the last 10yrs, but the strange thing is that despite feeling a lot older at times, people often mistakenly think I'm about 40ish as my skin isn't very sun-damaged & my thick hair has only a little grey (Prof. Brian Cox is greyer than me)! Also don't consume caffeine nor much alcohol (due to medications), so not sure whether they're contributing factors along with my genetic make-up! However, quality of life is still far more important than how we think others perceive us by the way we look!
As someone that suffers from a condition exacerbated by UV I'd like to make one point. The windshield is a sandwich with plastic in the middle that better blocks uv than the single plate glass used on all the other windows. I'd always feel better in the car when driving northbound and that tidbit helped me manage my disorder.
Many day creams and similar cosmetic products contain UV protection, just like sunscreen, but it isn't mentioned on the label. It would be quite interesting to look at different products with that UV-camera. ;)
Sunscreen before going outside (ideally even indoor if you're behind a window) + a retinoid before bed is the best anti-aging combo for your skin. Ask any dermatologist and I don't think they will disagree
@Democracy/anarchy is minority gang/scum rule educate yourself with different sources. And try to spend an hour without sunscream in the Sahara. Let's see if your skin is more or less damaged by the sun than if it would have had sunscream on.
@Democracy/anarchy is minority gang/scum rule literally in just a google search you can find trustworthy information as such: "You may have heard rumors that instead of protecting against melanoma, sunscreen actually causes the disease. However, comprehensive review of all studies from 1966 to 2003 found no evidence that sunscreen increases melanoma risk.5,6" With different and recent studies that back it up. Smh, there's always that someone who's against of anything regardless of the stupidity of their position.
I haven't been this satisfied with a Veritasium video for a long time. Lately I felt some parts are overexplained, other areas I'm interested in unexplored. This one had good pacing and was not too obvious.
I love this! It'll be great for introducing what sun does on a cellular to my daughter, who has XP, to people who can't quite wrap their head around it.
As someone that spent most of his childhood inside with his primary exposure to the sun being when in a car traveling across country, I eventually learned that you can, in fact, get a sunburn and tan in a car; though obviously nowhere near the level from direct exposure.
Windshield is triplex, which contains polymer layer inside, so it does absorb UV light including UVA. Side glass doesn’t absorb UVA thus you are susceptible to UV light and your left arm aging with greater rate.
Avoiding sunlight completely however causes depression, sleep disturbances and causes certain types of skin cancer (lack of UVB exposure coupled with certain mutagenic chemicals in sunscreens). So avoiding the sun is also bad, find the golden middle expose moderately, not go out for 5 hours and cake yourself in sunscreen.
As someone who was severely vit D deficient. My readings was 5 ( < 20 is severe deficency) The benifits of sunlight is a miracle! I had depression, severe memory loss, i couldnt even stand straight because of my stabbing backpain, muscle pain. I was put on very high dosage of vitD. In a month I felt alive and i feel a 100 times better than before.
3:10 that’s Anatoli Bugorski, he was the scientist who accidentally got his head inside a particle accelerator while it was active and survived the incident. The picture was the result of that accident.
NitaRay Yeaaa ironically, the young-looking side is the one that was stuck in the particle accelerator 😂 Shame on you, Veritasium Derek, for not doing your research. There is a picture of an old woman which is what you're looking for.
i couldnt find any reliable source (or any source) that correlates this picture to anatoli bugorski. howver i found multiple sites referring to the pic as a trucker with sun exposure
Everybody on the internet says that that is a trucker not a physicist. He even had a case study written about him. Also, Bugorski didn't get wrinkles on the left side of his face; opposite to this guy. www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMicm1104059
I think that your channel is more seen then NG. The way you set out things is very simple and nice. You make them look so easy to understand. Thank you
There was a great HumanOS podcast episode (#66), that talks about the complexities of UVA/B, and could explain why Vit-D supplementation trials have not been very promising, as it may be due to UV , Ntric Oxide , Interleukin-33, cytokine, etc. For example, UVB and UVA tends to activate regulatory B cells that *dampen the adaptive* anti-tumor/immune system.. which could be the reason why autoimmune diseases tend to increase as you go further from the equator. However, this immune system suppression may also lead to more cancers. Interestingly, UV tends to *increase the innate* immune system, useful for bacterial infections. And while long term UVA exposure is associated with Accelerated Aging/skin cancer, even low doses of UV are associated with keratinocyte/non-melanoma skin cancers. But on the flip side, UVA appears to lower blood pressure and reduce the risk of CVD. Most surprisingly, however, is that while short high exposure of UVB can lead to menaloma skin cancers, it may help with weight loss.. DESPITE the fact that UVB prevents the HFHSD-induced Uncoupling-Protein-1 in Brown-Adipose-Tissue from activating.. so the weight loss must be due to something else (UV-induced cytokines like IL-33, NitricOxide, Hydrocarbon signaling in the Liver, etc). BTW, Chris Masterjohn mentions how ultraviolet destroys riboflavin (as does losing weight/exercise)! See 23127244 for how microbes can also lead to autoimmune diseases.
One of the things I've always wondered is if the same rays that cause skin damage are the ones that tan our skin. Is it possible to separate the two and come up with some form of safe tanning or are they literally two effects of the same thing?
They are kinda the same thing. Both are caused by exposure to UV radiation, however the damage is a direct result of it and tanning is a defense mechanism of your body against UV. That's why people with dark skin sometimes have to take vitamin D supplements when they live further away from the equator, their skin blocks out too much UV.
The face of the guy at 3:05 is not a trucker and he didnt got like that because of UV. The guy on the pic is a scientist who stuck his head on a particle accelerator and survived. His right face doesnt age, he should look like his left side cause at that time he was really old, but the right part as i said, it didnt age. His name is Anatoli Bugorski so you guys can check out his story
What about vitamin D tough? Since I live in northern Scandinavia I have always heard we need to make use of what little sun we get to get enough vitamin D.
An increased focus on protecting the skin from sun damage and a change from an outdoor lifestyle to an indoor lifestyle in recent generations has led to a serious problem with vitamin D deficiency in many developed parts of the world. Too little vitamin D means the bones will not be able to grow strong, leading to problems like rickets for children or osteoporosis for adults. Due to the weakening of bones, individuals with low vitamin D levels are more prone to falling. Low vitamin D levels can also cause a poorly functioning immune system, cardiovascular disease, depression, development of diabetes, and multiple sclerosis. It has also been linked to certain types of cancer.
You are correct. The only thing stupider than the advice on this video are the half witted commenters who are too stupid to understand that nature is not bad for us...I'm quite surprised we can even have a functioning society with the low IQ's of these brain dead commenters...
@ Veritasium This video has me wishing for more detailed investigation into other forms of non-ionizing radiation e.g. WiFi and 4G or 5G.. some researchers say it isn't as safe as the consensus has been presuming. Any chance for a vid on that?
@aud_io worried? no. curious about where the frequency range for health impacts from non- ionizing radiation begins? yes. As far as I can tell, no once has approached a determination specifically.
@@steveoh9025 If wifi, 3g, 4g, etc. are damaging then visible light is far more damaging just as UV is far more damaging than visible and x-rays are far more damaging than UV and gamma rays are far more damaging than x-rays, but thankfully the atmosphere blocks UVC rays, x-rays and gamma rays from the sun, which is why we only worry about UVB and UVA. There is some evidence to suggest that blue visible light can cause photoaging the way UVA can, which is what you would expect since it's a spectrum; the cut off between UVA and visible blue is an arbitrarily defined number, so low UVA and high visible blue are essentially the same. However, the radio waves that are used for wifi and 4g and nowhere near powerful enough to harm us.
Thymine dimers don't form a hydrogen bond as you suggested in the image at 1:30, the dimers are dangerous because the two aromatic circles of thymines bond stacking on top of each other, it's an addition reaction that forms strong C-C bonds. That is why it's hard to fix for reparation mechanisms (nucleases have to cut out a whole region of tens of bases around the place and resynthethise the whole cut out part of the dna strand, otherwise the strand can't be transcribed - that's the problem with resynthesis errors causing mutations, because not just the thymine region gets repaired), weak H-bonds are not so much of a problem if formed in the wrong place, they don't hold too tight.
You didn't mention the one good thing you get from sun exposure to your skin that is vital to your health: vitamin D! The most bio-available form is from what is produced in your skin. You must get at least 10-30 minutes of unprotected sun exposure at least 3 times a week to make sufficient vitamin D in your skin to properly absorb calcium and phosphorus and make denser bones. I'd rather risk a few skin lesions from some unprotected sun exposure than a broken hip from severe bone loss. Since the sunscreen craze many more people have depleted their blood levels of vitamin D and are showing osteopenia and osteoporosis in hips, pelvises, femurs, and spines around age 55 on bone density scans. Get a little unprotected sun! It's good for your bones!
I was about to the picture at 3:08 but did some digging (which everyone should do before writing) and found out I was wrong, I was about to tell you that the picture was not an illustration of sun aging, but of Anatoli Bugorski. I couldn't find evidences that the picture is related to Bugorski, but now I just think an episode on Anatoli Bugorski would be cool.
This is an interesting video. I would also like to a video about the benefits of sunlight. unfiltered sunlight is the best and only source of vitamin D production for our bodies. Doctors have suggested that we do need to be exposed to a range of unfiltered sunlight to promote vitamin D production depending on a persons geographic location.
Imagine that. All my summer jobs this past 5 years have been nothing but intense sun exposure (construction and sidewalk survey) with little to non protection but a baseball cap and sunglasses.
Does testosterone in high natural levels or exogeously added beyond therapeutic levels, age the body faster. People who use this as a drug for sports seem to look older than their true age. I'm curious to the science behind it.
Even then, those people inject way too much T into their systems. You'd never reach those levels naturally. So I don't think it's possible for testosterone to age you.
There might be confounders in your observation: high T can cause male pattern baldness (which looks older but isn't necessarily a sign of bad health), and at least in bodybuilding there's this weird "super tanned, super dehydrated skin" ideal for competitions (which will cause skin aging unrelated to T)? Idk... I think I remember studies correlating (!) higher T with slightly longer age in men. But from what I've heard, the medical consensus (not to be confused with the T supplement industry...) seems to be "don't mess with your hormones unless they cause you severe issues".
I don’t know if it actually ages you , I think testosterone has certain properties that can give that effect though. For example, fat deposits on the face are associated with two things, youth and femininity. High levels of testosterone, eliminate fat in the face (unless you’re a bigger guy, or due to genetics). On high levels of t, fat in the body melts much easier , and hardly distributes to the face. This can make your skin paper thin, and your face gaunt. Thin skin is also prone to wrinkles. High levels of testosterone causes hair to thin, receding hairline and balding. And lastly, facial bone structure is altered, with high levels of testosterone. Bigger chins, bigger brow bones, bigger jaws, all these things combined will make guys (and even some female body builders) look much more masculine, but also much more older than they normally would be.
Vitamins are vitamins.. molecules are the same, but I suppose synthetically made vitamins could have molecular 'mistakes', which could be bad. Either way, too many vitamines is bad too, he has a video on that.
Sorry, the name of the doctor is misspelled in the description; just wanted to point it out, since she really added so much to the video. Great work, love your videos they significantly science up my RU-vid feed 👍👍👍
No for any wave be it sound or photons the shorter ones penetrate less. That's why you can hear bass through a wall and not the highs, they bounce off.
A long enough wavelenght can easily pass trough objects that are smaller or the same lenght, like radio waves or wifi trough walls. A short enough wavelenght can pass trough the space between your molecules or even atoms, for example gamma rays.
I'm assuiming you ask this question because you're either planning to or do have a dungeon in your basement. Trust me, I know from experience, add some dragons to it, it helps with the atmosphere.
I just got a massive dose of uv this last week when I forgot to button the top collar on my welding jacket. I received an intense sun burn followed by some major chest and sinus congestion. While anecdotal, I think it supports the claim of uv lowering your immune system.
While it's widely known that UV can cause skin and DNA damage, the veracity of the way you spin this is at best questionable. For one, you do need *some* exposure to UVB to produce vitamin D₃, deficiency of which is linked to various chronic illnesses (PMID: 29124697, PMID: 16005208). For two, overreliance on sunscreen can cause more damage than lack of sunscreen. Studies show most people don't understand sunscreen labels, don't apply it correctly (recommended amount according to some sources is 2mg/cm², while most people use at best half as much), and increase their sunlight exposure assuming that they have nothing to worry about since they use sunscreen (which is obviously not true if you think about it for a second).
With the "bottom line" most in mind in the formulation of the "average" (topical) sunscreen that includes "inactive" ingredients that are of detriment to the "application site" and which "consumers" operate on the assumption that the uni-dimensional marketed "purpose" of the product would be inclusive of a much grander negative benefit encompassing general skin (and body) health than the rather reductionistic designated/labeled "purpose" ("To prevent sunburn"). The non-macronutrient (to which they're assumed to be "irrelevant" to ""normal", i.e. baseline mediocrity, or "proper" functionality of the human body from the nutritional facet of health) phytonutrients, carotenoids, provide innumerable "benefits" (with the supplementary, or the generic non-essential, connotation of that term exuding from it) as photoprotective properties (from light absorption) conjunctive with their antioxidant qualities that supply whole-body coverage from the inside (since of course, "Beauty is on the inside" while the interplaying ouside is "on" that inside), with even lowly processed tomato paste demonstrating such. Manifold, holistic solutions sour convenient Mammon-seeking models, their extensions, and instilled consumer "lifestyles". www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23053552 academic.oup.com/jn/article/132/3/399/4687282 academic.oup.com/jn/article/131/5/1449/4686953
True, but most people need very little sun exposure for the vitamin. If you're fair skinned, a few minutes in the sun is more than enough. It's hard to avoid at least a few minutes of sun exposure daily. Plus vitamin D is stores in the body, so on days when you have less sun exposure, you still have your reserves. In the winter, it's virtually impossible to produce vitamin D from the sun if you live 37 degrees above the equator (or north of Atlanta), because the sun never gets high enough in the sky for its ultraviolet B rays to penetrate the atmosphere. Exposure to sunlight for the vitamin D is a pointless exercise in winter, and you're just opening yourself up to further damage without any of the benefits. There's also the issue that "healthy" levels of vitamin D are not clearly understood. By the current metric for vitamin D in blood, much of the world's healthy population is deficient, even in tropical countries. It's perhaps more likely that the initial levels for vitamin D were poorly understood, established from blood samples of young white surfers, who would have unreasonably high levels of vitamin D from sun exposure.
@Rohan Misra, I'm not entirely sure why you argue this point? I mean, great addition, sure. I'm not entirely sure about "a few minutes" being enough, but seeing as I'm not an expert on the subject, I can't really argue otherwise. But the way you structured it grammatically indicates you're disagreeing with something I said? I did *not* argue people need to ditch sunscreen and all go sunbathe for hours daily, did I? My point was (and is): the way the narrative in the video is structured ("spun"), it would seem that UVB (and UV in general) is "the silent enemy that will kill you with cancer" and that sunscreen is great and will save you from the Sun's "UV deathrays" -- both of these inferred statements can be considered true only if you squint *really* hard, from where I'm standing, and so I challenged those. First, reminding that humans (and most mammals actually) need some UV exposure to produce an essential vitamin, and total lack of sunlight exposure won't make anyone particularly healthy, long-lived or cancer-free (as some comments here seem to suggest jokingly). And second, asserting that sunscreen isn't the silver bullet, as the video seems to present it, and that believing it to be can and likely will cause harm.
@@lierdakil you're arguing from points of extreme here. From the numbers, deliberately seeking out sun exposure simply for vitamin D isn't advisable for most people. I didn't suggest that your point is to ditch sunscreen altogether and sunbathe, and I don't see how you get that from my comment. I appreciate your point that some sun is beneficial, and perhaps Derek should have mentioned it in his video. The fact that people might overestimate the safety of their sunscreen is something I think he covered in his previous video. As to the point that some sunlight is beneficial for health, sure, but it's also a lot less than most people end up getting, even accidentally. For most people, beyond a few minutes, the damage from sun exposure quickly outweighs the health benefits. In winter, no amount of sun exposure is going to give them the required amount of vitamin D anyway, so they have to get it from dietary sources. Even with sunscreen, the protection isn't perfect, and nobody is going to develop a vitamin D deficiency from too much sunscreen.
@Rohan Misra, I deliberated answering you point-by-point but will resist doing so for the sake of brevity. I can agree with most of what you say here. I do indeed tend to exaggerate a bit in these Internet discussions, at times employing hyperbole even, for the sake of making a point more clearly, especially when arguing counterpoints. Sorry if it's a bit misleading. Never argued for deliberately seeking out sun exposure, sorry if it seemed that way. Still a bit doubtful about the "few minutes" thing -- a few minutes feels like an absurdly small amount of time. "A few dozen minutes" I could probably accept. Could you perhaps point me to some studies (articles) discussing the subject? To clarify further, my problem with this video is it's a bit too one-sided, which can and will beget misconceptions, as evidenced by the comment section (although hard to judge conclusively with all the postmodern irony present) This seems kinda counter-productive, so I felt compelled to provide some counterpoints. Counterpoints that I might have overstated in my quest for simultaneous brevity and clarity.
My mom has just recently started getting a couple wrinkles, she turned 71 last December. She puts on sunscreen basically every day. Has been for most of her life.
Pretty sure listening to people gives you ear cancer and the best way to prevent ear cancer is to wear ear plugs when someone is trying to talk to you.
Thanks for another great and informative video. Can you please also tell how do we get the Vitamin D then? Because what we generally hear is that sun is the best source of Vitamin D.
UV light causes the body to produce vitamin D (specifically, UVB), which is essential for life. The human body needs some UV radiation in order for one to maintain adequate vitamin D levels; however, excess exposure produces harmful effects that typically outweigh the benefits. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet
