When I were a lad, we would occasionally get dismissed from school, particularly in early spring, usually at noon.
These were known as "Sun"-days, and were those rare days on which the sun shone in a clear blue sky and the temperatures reached a balmy 10-15 C (50-60F you heathens).
This is because, as everyone knows, 8-12 year olds should be out soaking up the sunshine in free outdoor play whenever they can, synthesizing themselves some vitamine D, not stuck behind school desks all afternoon.
Of course, when I were a lad, I also ventured to southern latitudes (Morocco, if you must know) and promptly spent the whole day in the pool.
That night I had second degree burns over my shoulders and upper back.
So, everything in moderation, eh?
More like this
I just left the National Hurricane Conference in Orlando, Florida; I'm currently sitting in the happily wired Orlando airport. Anyway, I noticed something at the conference that I can't resist mentioning--and no, this has nothing to do with hurricanes.
The origins and history of the Yule Lads with bonus Christmas Cat...
Even I did not know that peak Yule Lads was 82!
Criminy!
Askasleikir - askar are the wooden all purpose bowls - of course after dinner, you put them down for the cats and dogs to lick them clean.
Very energy efficient.
In which Michael Lewis learns what a "ruddi" is.
Quite fascinating Vanity Fair article on Iceland's Finanicial Whiz Kids and the general mood.
Thanks for the pointer Bob.
Growing up in a tropical port, we never got days off for sunshine.
Sometimes, however, after-school sports were cancelled due to the
danger of heatstroke (according to some calculation based on temperature and relative humidity).
"Sun" days sound like a fantastic idea - they would likely help in preventing osteoporosis later in life.
As far as sunlight goes, it's just like most health related factors - there is an individual susceptibility and a "golden mean" of exposure.
Too little sun, and you run the risk of chronic Vit D deficiency (and osteoporosis etc)Too much sun, and you run the risk of skin cancer.
The type of exposure matters as well. Chronic sun exposure, with careful accumulation with tanning, rather than burning, puts you at risk of basal cell and squamous cell carcinoma, which requires minor surgery, ofter repeated, as well as premature aging of the skin. These carcinomas rarely kill, unless neglected.
Repeated burns, especially at a young age, increase the risk of malignant melanoma, which has a much higher mortality rate,and requires more extreme intervention (surgery with wide margins, lymph node dissection etc). Burns don't particularly help the Vit D levels either.
Skin pigmentation makes a difference, obviously. Those of us with a fair complexion (blonde, light brown, redhead) will burn easily. We will also synthesize more VitD per unit of sunlight.
Simple take-home message: don't get sunburned! And don't let your kids get sunburned!
I live in New Zealand. We're pretty conscious of the sun and sunburn - somehow the rays seem pretty harsh down here (just comparing time to burn here to slathering self with sunblock on Greek beach much to amusement of surrounding people and laying in sun to not get burned at any point, even without further applications of sunblock).
That said, there must be some difference between time spent in direct sunlight, and time spent sitting in office staring out at a sunny day (without being in direct sunlight)? I remember reading somewhere that to get your daily VitD needs you only need a minute or two in the sun - surely indirect sunlight would count and would be safer in terms of UV exposure? It seems to be the way us Kiwis scoot around on a spectacularly sunny day, conscious of the thin ozone not far south from us.