Theory number 3 on why fat/soft tissue in the upper face gets lots with age. Indoor lighting and uv/blue light burning fat

[Jerryterry129]

Recently I’ve made a couple theory’s to answer this question, one includes dht, and the other includes gravity pulling on the skin causing fat to be loss(unlikely)

After researching like crazy I’ve found out blue light and UV light burns and damages adipose tissue(fat)

if you want to see the studies just type in “uv adipose tissue study” on google

guess where light usually hits you in a room? That’s right, your upper cheeks and upper face. This can explain why fat loss occurs in the upper face with age, and im sure you guys know what happens when that happens.

Just for a recap for those who didn’t read my other post, there’s two fat pads in the upper face:

1. deep and superficial.

the upper face fat that gets lost with age causes the skin ligaments and deep fat pads to sag off of the superficial fat pad, hence sagging.

now back to my theory,

florence and indoor lighting/blue light from our phone is the same as uv lighting, just not as damaging. But the amount of time we spend under these lights accumulates over time which leads to fat in the upper face getting damaged

where do we hold our phones?

To the upper face

where does most light hit your face indoors?

to the upper face


Where does most light hit outdoors?

to the upper face

Also, 8 hours of phone exposure with brightness all the way up is about 20 mins of sun. So do the math. And most people are holding there phones to there upper face

all of this indoor lighting and our phones hitting the upper face explains why people who don’t go outside often still experience upper face fat loss

 

[Deleted member 5786]

Theory number 3 on why fat/soft tissue in the upper face gets lots with age. Indoor lighting and uv/blue light burning fat

Recently I’ve made a couple theory’s to answer this question, one includes dht, and the other includes gravity pulling on the skin causing fat to be loss(unlikely) After researching like crazy I’ve found out blue light and UV light burns and damages adipose tissue(fat) if you want to see the...

looksmax.org

@subhuman incel

 

[DrTony]

Are you dumb? You provide no evidence what are you 16? No peer reviewed study to back up any hypothesis ? You imagined some random shit hypothesis and you just thought it would be a good idea to post it with zero evidence? I would have fired you on the spot if you were working for me. I consider this kind of posts not only stupid but extremely disrespectful

 

[Jerryterry129]

Are you dumb? You provide no evidence what are you 16? No peer reviewed study to back up any hypothesis ? You imagined some random shit hypothesis and you just thought it would be a good idea to post it with zero evidence? I would have fired you on the spot if you were working for me. I consider this kind of posts not only stupid but extremely disrespectful

I told you guys what studies to look up but since you’re lazy asf il link them. Lmao retard.

UV modulation of subcutaneous fat metabolism - PubMed

Adipose tissue is not a homogeneous organ. Visceral fat accumulation is associated with atherosclerosis and metabolic syndrome, but peripheral subcutaneous (SC) fat accumulation may be protective. Human skin is continuously exposed to UV light. UV can penetrate the epidermis and into the...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Here’s one but I read another one today where they say uv damages adipose tissue and can actually burn fat. Will have to find it and I’ll post it when I do

 

[DrTony]

I told you guys what studies to look up but since you’re lazy asf il link them. Lmao retard

UV modulation of subcutaneous fat metabolism - PubMed

Adipose tissue is not a homogeneous organ. Visceral fat accumulation is associated with atherosclerosis and metabolic syndrome, but peripheral subcutaneous (SC) fat accumulation may be protective. Human skin is continuously exposed to UV light. UV can penetrate the epidermis and into the...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

this one but I read another one today where they say uv damages adipose tissue and can actually burn fat. Will have to find it and I’ll post it when I do

Now you are talking like an adult. I appreciate the study posted.

 

[DrTony]

What evidence do you have blue light wavelength damages SC fat?

 

[Lawton88]

I wonder if any study has been done to see if dermarolling can slow this process down some. I think I read it increases elastin in addition to collagen.

 

[Jerryterry129]

What evidence do you have blue light wavelength damages SC fat?

here:

Subcutaneous white adipocytes express a light sensitive signaling pathway mediated via a melanopsin/TRPC channel axis - PubMed

Subcutaneous white adipose tissue (scWAT) is the major fat depot in humans and is a central player in regulating whole body metabolism. Skin exposure to UV wavelengths from sunlight is required for Vitamin D synthesis and pigmentation, although it is plausible that longer visible wavelengths...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This study says fat lipid droplet size decreased:

“Daily exposure of differentiated adipocytes to blue light resulted in decreased lipid droplet size, increased basal lipolytic rate and...”

Now what does a decrease in lipid size mean?

"When the Sun's blue light wavelengths penetrate our skin and reach the fat cells just beneath, lipid droplets reduce in size and are released out of the cell," says Light.

"In other words, our cells don't store as much fat."

taken from this article:

Researchers Have Found a Surprising Link Between Winter Weight Gain And Sunlight

A study that has discovered fat cells beneath our skin shrink when exposed to blue light just might help explain why many of us find ourselves with more snug-fitting pants in spring.

www.sciencealert.com

 

[Jerryterry129]

I wonder if any study has been done to see if dermarolling can slow this process down some. I think I read it increases elastin in addition to collagen.

I’ve looked at this too. Apparently derma rolling will actually hurt the fat and burn more fat if it’s too deep(like 2mm or something)

so micro needling for fat restoration is a no go and if actually gets into the fat(when it’s too deep) then it can actually reduce the fat

but if you’re just using like 1.5 you shouldn’t have to worry because I don’t think it gets into the fat layer. But if a deeper needle did it would cause harm

I think this latest theory of mine in my post is the most plausible theory out of all my theory’s

the way to combat this is to always have your phone on low brightness and maybe even wear a mask(sounds dumb but I’d take that over losing my fat pads) and to limit indoor lighting

or just always wear sunscreen indoors and outdoors. One that also protects from blue light

How to lower the brightness on your iPhone even more than the usual setting, using the 'Low Light' Accessibility feature

You might want to lower the brightness on your iPhone even more if you're using it in the dark. Here's how to get an even dimmer setting than usual.

www.google.com

 

[0Ace0]

Not a new theory, news sites have discussed it multiple times on the Internet
Apparently isn't true however:

Page not Found

www.beiersdorf.com

 

[weallburninhell]

Recently I’ve made a couple theory’s to answer this question, one includes dht, and the other includes gravity pulling on the skin causing fat to be loss(unlikely)

After researching like crazy I’ve found out blue light and UV light burns and damages adipose tissue(fat)

if you want to see the studies just type in “uv adipose tissue study” on google

guess where light usually hits you in a room? That’s right, your upper cheeks and upper face. This can explain why fat loss occurs in the upper face with age, and im sure you guys know what happens when that happens.

Just for a recap for those who didn’t read my other post, there’s two fat pads in the upper face:

1. deep and superficial.

the upper face fat that gets lost with age causes the skin ligaments and deep fat pads to sag off of the superficial fat pad, hence sagging.

now back to my theory,

florence and indoor lighting/blue light from our phone is the same as uv lighting, just not as damaging. But the amount of time we spend under these lights accumulates over time which leads to fat in the upper face getting damaged

where do we hold our phones?

To the upper face

where does most light hit your face indoors?

to the upper face


Where does most light hit outdoors?

to the upper face

Also, 8 hours of phone exposure with brightness all the way up is about 20 mins of sun. So do the math. And most people are holding there phones to there upper face

all of this indoor lighting and our phones hitting the upper face explains why people who don’t go outside often still experience upper face fat loss

just fringe max kek

 

[Jerryterry129]

Not a new theory, news sites have discussed it multiple times on the Internet
Apparently isn't true however:

Page not Found

www.beiersdorf.com

Cellphones have always been known to damage skin.

It’s a new theory/not talked about theory that blue light and uv light causes facial fat loss and damages fat. And I linked studies above that show they do.

also lmao at not thinking blue light from cellphones doesn’t damage your skin let alone your fat

8 hours a day of straight blue light from your phone is equivalent to 20 mins of midday sun exposure

that’s 1.7 hours of midday sun exposure every week for years and years..and it’s right up on your face

sun exposure is accumulative. Just because the light from your phone is 50x weaker doesn’t mean shit when your phone is close to your face for 8 hours a day every day

this article says 5 days =25 mins of midday sun but still, that’s a shit load

Blue light from a digital device can age the skin like midday sun

Scientists working for Unilever examined the effects of 'blue light' emitted by electronic devices on the skin and found it can cause premature ageing.

www.google.com

that’s 27 hours of midday sun on your face a year, and that adds up

 

[0Ace0]

Cellphones have always been known to damage skin.

It’s a new theory/not talked about theory that blue light and uv light causes facial fat loss and damages fat. And I linked studies above that show they do.

also lmao at not thinking blue light from cellphones doesn’t damage your skin let alone your fat

8 hours a day of straight blue light from your phone is equivalent to 20 mins of midday sun exposure

that’s 1.7 hours of midday sun exposure every week for years and years..and it’s right up on your face

sun exposure is accumulative. Just because the light from your phone is 50x weaker doesn’t mean shit when your phone is close to your face for 8 hours a day every day

I have nightlight mode switched on all the time for my devices
Quote from the article:

“Compared to the emissions of the sun’s natural blue light, those of artificial blue light are virtually undetectable,” adds Kolbe. Even if you were to sit up close to the screen, this would have little impact on the results: while HEV intensity increases by a factor of 17, a ten-hour phone call on a smartphone, for example, would be the same as a minute in the sunlight on a sunny day in Hamburg. “

 

[Jerryterry129]

I have nightlight mode switched on all the time for my devices
Quote from the article:

“Compared to the emissions of the sun’s natural blue light, those of artificial blue light are virtually undetectable,” adds Kolbe. Even if you were to sit up close to the screen, this would have little impact on the results: while HEV intensity increases by a factor of 17, a ten-hour phone call on a smartphone, for example, would be the same as a minute in the sunlight on a sunny day in Hamburg. “

I can’t even see the study lmao. And there’s other articles saying 5 days a week = 25mins of sun. And others saying 8 hours =20 mins.

 

[0Ace0]

I can’t even see the study lmao. And there’s other articles saying 5 days a week = 25mins of sun. And others saying 8 hours =20 mins.

Guess it wouldnt really matter if you turn on nightlight mode for everything lol

 

[Osteogenesis]

 

[Jerryterry129]

“200 times less damaging than the mid day sun”

it doesn’t matter if it’s 200 times less damaging than the mid day sun. Sun damage is accumulative..

If you have your phone in front your face for 8 hours a day for weeks months and years that will add up.

And she even says blue light from smart phones is more damaging than the suns blue light lol

also florence lights/indoor lighting like I mentioned in the post is worse than phones

 

[oldcelloser]

jokes on you imma get buccal fat removal

 

[damnit]

i leave my laptop screen on 80 percent blue light filter almost all the time.

 

[Eduardo DOV]

“200 times less damaging than the mid day sun”

it doesn’t matter if it’s 200 times less damaging than the mid day sun. Sun damage is accumulative..

If you have your phone in front your face for 8 hours a day for weeks months and years that will add up.

And she even says blue light from smart phones is more damaging than the suns blue light lol

also florence lights/indoor lighting like I mentioned in the post is worse than phones

hm, if 200 time less damaging is true
lets say you watch a screen for 8hours a day, let's call "F" the injury factor it makes to your skin.
If you stayed this same hours under the midday sun, it would make 200F injury.

In a year, if you stay 8 hours a day watching a screen, that is 365F injury
In sun exposure the conversion is 1daySun/200F injury, so (365F)*(1daySun/200F) =
1.825 daySun ~ 2daySun

Is that much? 16hours under the midday sun, but only the blue light from it.

 

[Eduardo DOV]

Also, to my knowledge sunscreens does not protect against the bluelight. So what someone is supposed to do about the bluelight from the sun(which is stronger than the one from screens) ?