"going in the sun ages you"

[twilight]

jfl look at this dermatologsit with 1.1 million subs on youtube, ghoul pale skin, uncanny tret glow , boney appearance

she claims in multiple videos "muh don't ever go in the sun don't even sit outside in the shade because the UV rays bounce off objects and give you cell damage, the sun is terrible for aging"

unless you are burning yourself in the sun it's not gonna age you, it's actually beneficial for your skin in moderation @Arborist @AscendingHero @SteveRogers

chemical sunscreens are what give you skin cancer and shit

 

[Deleted member 23218]

View attachment 2181056

jfl look at this dermatologsit with 1.1 million subs on youtube, ghoul pale skin, uncanny tret glow , boney appearance

she claims in multiple videos "muh don't ever go in the sun don't even sit outside in the shade because the UV rays bounce off objects and give you cell damage, the sun is terrible for aging"

unless you are burning yourself in the sun it's not gonna age you, it's actually beneficial for your skin in moderation @Arborist @AscendingHero @SteveRogers

chemical sunscreens are what give you skin cancer and shit

Sunscreen is necascarrh when you use tret.

 

[Deleted member 8771]

She needs to beta carotene maxx for sure but you're delusional if you don't think she looks super good for someone who is 39-41, I bet she collagen and skin mog u despite being 20 years older

 

[Jerryterry129]

She needs to beta carotene maxx for sure but you're delusional if you don't think she looks super good for someone who is 39-41, I bet she collagen and skin mog u despite being 20 years older

Nah she Looks extremely bad for mid 30s

 

[twilight]

She needs to beta carotene maxx for sure but you're delusional if you don't think she looks super good for someone who is 39-41, I bet she collagen and skin mog u despite being 20 years older

she looks like shit, cry about it

 

[cancercell]

chemical sunscreens are what give you skin cancer and shit

what's the best sunscreen? i use somerandom cvs one its probably harmful

 

[Matthias of Hungary]

brutal ipd

 

[Willmogulater]

She needs to beta carotene maxx for sure but you're delusional if you don't think she looks super good for someone who is 39-41, I bet she collagen and skin mog u despite being 20 years older

She looks like Athlean X guy

 

[twilight]

what's the best sunscreen? i use somerandom cvs one its probably harmful

mineral based one without nanochemicals, type in arborist sunscreen in search bar and his recs will come up

 

[Deleted member 28731]

what's the best sunscreen? i use somerandom cvs one its probably harmful

La roche posay anthelios. Don't use it too often sun is important. I use it if i'm in the sun for over 2 hours in the late spring or summer

 

[Deleted member 21863]

Nah she Looks extremely bad for mid 30s

mostly because she's borderline anorexic

 

[zharupodrugu]

She needs to beta carotene maxx for sure but you're delusional if you don't think she looks super good for someone who is 39-41, I bet she collagen and skin mog u despite being 20 years older

shes 33-34

La roche posay anthelios. Don't use it too often sun is important. I use it if i'm in the sun for over 2 hours in the late spring or summer

it does contain alcohol. Shitty sunscreen

mostly because she's borderline anorexic

i bet shes vegan as well

 

[Deleted member 25743]

Malnourished anorexic vegan tranny

 

[Wallenberg]

Nordic girls age better than girls in Southern Europe because sun's UV rays aren't as strong in Nordic countries as in Southern Europe

 

[Deleted member 28414]

she still doesnt look good with a tan

 

[twilight]

View attachment 2181144
she still doesnt look good with a tan

improvement tbh

 

[autistic_tendencies]

You need some fat pads in the face or it’s over

 

[BongMog]

You need some fat pads in the face or it’s over

Jojoba oil and volufiline

 

[twilight]

Jojoba oil and volufiline

volufiline workin ?

 

[TsarTsar444]

She is an anorexic vegan with deficiency in over 15 animal nutrients, what do you expect

 

[Germania]

View attachment 2181056

jfl look at this dermatologsit with 1.1 million subs on youtube, ghoul pale skin, uncanny tret glow , boney appearance

she claims in multiple videos "muh don't ever go in the sun don't even sit outside in the shade because the UV rays bounce off objects and give you cell damage, the sun is terrible for aging"

unless you are burning yourself in the sun it's not gonna age you, it's actually beneficial for your skin in moderation @Arborist @AscendingHero @SteveRogers

chemical sunscreens are what give you skin cancer and shit

Every single dermatologist and every person dealing with the subject says UV = skin aging. But a few teens with no college degrees on the internet know better.

The best of both worlds is: Use sunscreen every day, take beta carotene/astaxanthin for tanish skin glow + go tanning without sunscreen on a small MT2 injection right before tanning every 2 months. You really only need a very small dose 10 minutes before tanning (you don't need a loading phase) and in a short time you will be more tanned than after 5+ tanning sessions without MT2. Aka more results for limited exposure to uv rays. The MT2 tan also feels like it lasts longer than a normal tan.

 

[Deleted member 27472]

Nah she Looks extremely bad for mid 30s

Are you joking? Apart from being pale her skin is good for 39-41 JFL

 

[twilight]

Are you joking? Apart from being pale her skin is good for 39-41 JFL

she’s 31 lol @Gioscottii

 

[Germania]

Are you joking? Apart from being pale her skin is good for 39-41 JFL

True, she just doesn't have stacy face. Transplant her skin onto the face of a 40yo woman with stacy bones and everyone would say the person looks extremely young for 40yo.

 

[twilight]

Every single dermatologist and every person dealing with the subject says UV = skin aging. But a few teens with no college degrees on the internet know better.

The best of both worlds is: Use sunscreen every day, take beta carotene/astaxanthin for tanish skin glow + go tanning without sunscreen on a small MT2 injection right before tanning every 2 months. You really only need a very small dose 10 minutes before tanning (you don't need a loading phase) and in a short time you will be more tanned than after 5+ tanning sessions without MT2. Aka more results for limited exposure to uv rays. The MT2 tan also feels like it lasts longer than a normal tan.

[Research] Debunking The Myth that 80-90% of Skin Ageing is Caused by UV

The claim that 80% of skin ageing is due to UV damage is pretty widespread.

You’ll find the claim repeated in online magazines, this sub, **the WHO**, and our favorite Youtube dermatologists. Sometimes it’s a lower 70%, and other times a higher 90%, but the core message is that **sunlight (UV) drives the majority of skin ageing**.

But I’ve always suspected that this is 100% BS — not only because this would be very, very difficult to prove experimentally, but also because the diligent sunscreen users I know (myself included) still look approximately the age that they are.

I was inspired to debunk this myth since there’s growing sun paranoia in subs like this, which I don’t think is healthy. It’s also trickling down to children & teenagers who are becoming terrified of the sun, ***under the utter delusion that if they block UV they won’t age.***

So I took a dive into the literature to see where this claim originated.

**TL;DR? It’s completely made-up. Pure fiction.**

\---

Upon searching for the claim in Pubmed and Google Scholar, you’ll first see that the claim is repeated in a **LOT** of dermatology & allied literature. These aren’t renegade journals – they’re **high-quality, reputable journals in the field**. Here are some of the most highly cited examples:

1. “… sun exposure is considered to be far and away the most significantly deleterious to the skin. Indeed, 80% of facial ageing is believed to be due to chronic sun exposure.” – [The Journal of Pathology](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/path.2098)

2. “It has been estimated that photodamage may account for more than 90% of the age associated cosmetic problems of the skin” – [British Journal of Dermatology](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb16118.x)

3. “Chronic UV exposure which is responsible for around 80% of the effects of facial skin ageing is termed photoageing." – [International Journal of Cosmetic Science](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-2494.2010.00574.x)

4. “Extrinsic skin ageing primarily arises from UV-light exposure. Approximately 80% of facial skin ageing is attributed to UV-exposure.- [Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venerology](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03963.x)

5. \[Discussing skin ageing\] "Several authors have estimated that this ratio could be very important, up to 80% of sun impact for a large part, and some publications have discussed a ratio closer to 90%." - [Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3790843/)

​

So let’s take a look at what evidence these highly cited papers use to justify these claims.

In **paper 1**, if you follow the citation for the claim you’ll end up at a [1997 letter in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372011). It says:

*“It has been suggested, at least anecdotally, that as much as 80 percent of facial aging is attributable to exposure to the sun, although other factors, such as cigarette smoking, can contribute to premature facial wrinkling.”*

Already, you can see that this was a poor citation by the original paper. Skin wrinkling is just one aspect of skin ageing, and so it is some sloppy scholarship. What’s more, this source paper even admits that this is anecdotal evidence, and bizarrely uses an irrelevant smoking study to justify this, [which doesn't even address this issue](https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/0003-4819-114-10-840).

For **paper 2**, if you follow the citation you end up at a 1[989 review written by Barbara Gilchrest, a US dermatologist](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2476468/). Once again, this review says **nowhere** that UV drives 90% of skin ageing. Instead, it says this: “*Photoaging is unquestionably responsible for the great majority of unwanted age-associated changes in the skin's appearance, including coarseness, wrinkling, sallow color, telangiectasia, irregular pigmentation, and a variety of benign, premalignant, and malignant neoplasms*”. Crucially, **no evidence is provided for this claim**; it seems to be an anecdote without quantification.

In **paper 3** and **paper 4**, their claim uses the NEJM letter that is also cited by paper 1, and so it encounters the exact same problem.

**Paper 5** makes the bold claim that it may be 90%, and includes a citation for a study that allegedly supports this. But does it? **No.** If you go to the citation, it’s ***a small study on soybean extracts***. It regurgitates the “UV drives 90% of skin ageing” in the introduction to justify the experiments, but includes **no citation**, and there is **no experimental evidence in the paper to support this**. It is only mentioned in passing.

In these 5 examples, it’s crystal clear that this claim has been propagated by poor and lazy scholarship. The idea that UV drives 80-90% of skin ageing seems to come from a few opinion pieces in the 1980s-1990s that did not use real data or experimental processes… just anecdotes. This is the **very opposite of evidence-based medicine**, and a real problem in academia.

\--

So the medical literature is sloppy. But is there any real science addressing the exact contribution of UV to skin ageing?

Yes – Paper 5 above, and ironically, it seems to be used as a resource to further the “UV causes 80% of skin ageing” claim, **despite showing the opposite**.

[In 2013, a study of almost 300 women in France was performed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3790843/). They sought women of similar age and ethnicity who were either “sun-seeking” (sunbathers, sun-bed users etc) or women who actively avoided the sun (“sun-phobic”). They then performed extensive analysis of things like wrinkles, redness, sagging, etc.

At the end of the study, the authors proudly declared “*With all the elements described in this study, we could calculate the importance of UV and sun exposure in the visible aging of a Caucasian woman’s face.* ***This effect is about 80%***.”

But if you look at the data, did they really?

**No.**

If you look at the wrinkle data in Figure 4, they found **NO statistically significant difference between the two groups for most ages**. They found that for women in their 50s and 60s, there was a ***small*** increase in wrinkles for the sun-seeking group (around 20% more in a higher wrinkle grade). But the data actually shows that increases in wrinkles *are driven by age*, and not UV, since there was a **much, much greater difference in wrinkle scores between age groups than sun behaviour groups**. The main thing that seemed to be aggravated by sun damage was pigmentation, but this was just one parameter.

So how did they arrive at the 80% figure? Well, here’s where you have to watch the hands closely to understand the magic trick.

If you look closely, they calculate this by taking **all of the categories if skin ageing, and then determining how many of those were affected by the sun.**

*"A sum was done of all signs most affected by UV exposure (the 18 parameters marked with an asterisk in Tables 2-5, which was then compared with the sum of all clinical signs established for facial aging (22 parameters). We are able to determine a new ratio, sun damage percentage (SDP), which represents the percentage between specific photoaging signs and clinical signs. By computing this SDP, we could assess the effect of sun exposure on the face. On average, the parameter is 80.3% ± 4.82%."*

So wrinkles, sagging, brown spots, redness, etc? All the things we associated with skin ageing? Well the sun can affect 80% of these **CATEGORIES to varying degrees**. ***NOT*** that UV drives 80% of the effect size, as you can see clear as day (no pun intended) in Figure 4. *I can only speculate* as to why they phrased this so poorly, although I note that some of the authors were employed by companies that sell anti-ageing & sun products...

​

So in summary, the idea that UV/sunlight drives 80-90% of skin ageing is garbage, a **claim that doesn't have a basis in the medical literature** if you dig deep enough. And the studies that we do have seem to suggest that in fact chronological (intrinsic) skin changes are responsible for most of the signs of ageing.

 

[Deleted member 27472]

she’s 31 lol @Gioscottii

JFL someone said she was 41 nvm

 

[Germania]

Like anything, it's probably genetics. My sister is now 30, but could easily larp as early 20s, my parents look much younger too, as do I.
Nevertheless, we should use all anti-aging products that halfway justify the price. Antioxidants, sunscreen, Botox, Tret and so on. Even if it only makes up 10% in the end.

 

[twilight]

Like anything, it's probably genetics. My sister is now 30, but could easily larp as early 20s, my parents look much younger too, as do I.
Nevertheless, we should use all anti-aging products that halfway justify the price. Antioxidants, sunscreen, Botox, Tret and so on. Even if it only makes up 10% in the end.

+ rep, what are your thoughts on the thread i pasted?

 

[Germania]

+ rep, what are your thoughts on the thread i pasted?

I'll read it through carefully during the lunch break.
I just think that this statement stands against thousands of others. So who do we end up trusting? None of us are skin researchers and we have to rely on these people and trust them. I'll still use sunscreen, better safe than sorry. But a certain tan is important for attractiveness, so I allow UV on my skin every now and then.

 

[PURE ARYAN GENETICS]

she's a vegan

 

[twilight]

she's a vegan

avoid sunscreen to prevent uv damage but limit your diet to grass and peasant food, mirin foid iq

 

[twilight]

I'll read it through carefully during the lunch break.
I just think that this statement stands against thousands of others. So who do we end up trusting? None of us are skin researchers and we have to rely on these people and trust them. I'll still use sunscreen, better safe than sorry. But a certain tan is important for attractiveness, so I allow UV on my skin every now and then.

i don’t even have a problem with sunscreen as long as it’s mineral based without nano chemicals which have been proven to cause cancer and enter the blood brain barrier

 

[BongMog]

volufiline workin ?

Im broke so can't afford it yet , jojoba oil improved my skin elasticity a bit i feel but im young so could be placebo, volufiline does work tho according to reports

 

[twilight]

Im broke so can't afford it yet , jojoba oil improved my skin elasticity a bit i feel but im young so could be placebo, volufiline does work tho according to reports

use beef tallow trust

 

[BongMog]

use beef tallow trust

Goat tallow works?

 

[BongMog]

Animal fat in general is a mogger supplement in anyone's stack

 

[twilight]

Goat tallow works?

yeah grass fed if you can cause it has mor vitamin k and e, the fat in the tallow mirrors our natural skin fat so it absorbs easily and heals + moisturisers skin

 

[Deleted member 23359]

Every single dermatologist and every person dealing with the subject says UV = skin aging. But a few teens with no college degrees on the internet know better.

The best of both worlds is: Use sunscreen every day, take beta carotene/astaxanthin for tanish skin glow + go tanning without sunscreen on a small MT2 injection right before tanning every 2 months. You really only need a very small dose 10 minutes before tanning (you don't need a loading phase) and in a short time you will be more tanned than after 5+ tanning sessions without MT2. Aka more results for limited exposure to uv rays. The MT2 tan also feels like it lasts longer than a normal tan.

Buddy have you seen those tribes in latin America
They're in the sun all day and still look good without those shit products

 

[twilight]

Buddy have you seen those tribes in latin America
They're in the sun all day and still look good without those shit products

miring you went through the entire thread fully agreeing with my post but not giving a single rep, over for me

 

[Loveland]

yeah grass fed if you can cause it has mor vitamin k and e, the fat in the tallow mirrors our natural skin fat so it absorbs easily and heals + moisturisers skin

I tried ghee yesterday, pretty similar no?

 

[twilight]

I tried ghee yesterday, pretty similar no?

on your face? no

you need to use tallow because it’s 0/5 on the comedogenic scale so won’t be greasy or clog pores

 

[Loveland]

on your face? no

you need to use tallow because it’s 0/5 on the comedogenic scale so won’t be greasy or clog pores

worked fine tbh, high quality tallow doesn't seem to be very accesible to me

 

[Loveland]

worked fine tbh, high quality tallow doesn't seem to be very accesible to me

but ill keep looking ig

 

[twilight]

worked fine tbh, high quality tallow doesn't seem to be very accesible to me

it didn’t feel greasy? ghee is just clarified butter so i can’t imagine how icky that would feel on my skin, and so you have a butcher near you? you can ask them if they are willing to give you their beef fat trimming and then there tutorials on yt on how to purify and render the tallow

 

[Loveland]

it didn’t feel greasy? ghee is just clarified butter so i can’t imagine how icky that would feel on my skin, and so you have a butcher near you? you can ask them if they are willing to give you their beef fat trimming and then there tutorials on yt on how to purify and render the tallow

Hmm good idea but I don't think his products are grass-fed.

 

[twilight]

Hmm good idea but I don't think his products are grass-fed.

just ask tbh even if it’s not grass fed it’s still good for skin just won’t have the extra vit K and E in them

 

[Loveland]

it didn’t feel greasy? ghee is just clarified butter so i can’t imagine how icky that would feel on my skin, and so you have a butcher near you? you can ask them if they are willing to give you their beef fat trimming and then there tutorials on yt on how to purify and render the tallow

Def greasy but not icky and eventually fully absorbed and made my skin very silky. Tallow prob better tho

 

[Loveland]

just ask tbh even if it’s not grass fed it’s still good for skin just won’t have the extra vit K and E in them

aight coach thanks for the tip

 

[Loveland]

Ghee also seems to be non-comedogenic. I'll just keep using it until it somehow fucks me up, then get real tallow.

Chatgpt:

Ghee is a type of clarified butter commonly used in South Asian cuisine. It is made by simmering butter and separating the milk solids from the fat.

In terms of comedogenicity, or the ability to cause acne, ghee is generally considered to be non-comedogenic. This means that it is unlikely to clog pores and contribute to the formation of pimples or other types of acne.

However, it's important to note that everyone's skin is different and may react differently to different products. If you have oily or acne-prone skin, it may be a good idea to patch test ghee on a small area of your skin first to see if it causes any adverse reactions before using it regularly on your face or body.

 

[twilight]

Ghee also seems to be non-comedogenic. I'll just keep using it until it somehow fucks me up, then get real tallow.

Chatgpt:

Ghee is a type of clarified butter commonly used in South Asian cuisine. It is made by simmering butter and separating the milk solids from the fat.

In terms of comedogenicity, or the ability to cause acne, ghee is generally considered to be non-comedogenic. This means that it is unlikely to clog pores and contribute to the formation of pimples or other types of acne.

However, it's important to note that everyone's skin is different and may react differently to different products. If you have oily or acne-prone skin, it may be a good idea to patch test ghee on a small area of your skin first to see if it causes any adverse reactions before using it regularly on your face or body.

yeah i didn't know this, mirin, i use ghee the least in my cooking because it smells funny thats prob why im biased