Below is a blog post inspired by the X thread by Zaid K. Dahhaj and the related web search results, focusing on the topic of sunscreen, sunlight exposure, and skin cancer prevention. The tone is informative, thought-provoking, and encourages readers to rethink conventional advice while grounding the discussion in scientific studies and natural health perspectives.
Published on June 6, 2025
For decades, we’ve been told to slather on sunscreen to protect ourselves from the sun’s harmful rays and reduce the risk of skin cancer. Public health campaigns have made sunscreen a cornerstone of skin cancer prevention, with dermatologists and health organizations urging us to never step outside without it. But what if this advice is built on shaky ground? What if the very tool we’ve been relying on doesn’t deliver the protection we’ve been promised—and might even be doing more harm than good?
A recent thread on X by Zaid K. Dahhaj (@zaidkdahhaj) caught my attention, diving deep into a 2018 systematic review and meta-analysis that challenges the centralized narrative around sunscreen. The study, published in the European Journal of Dermatology (PMID: 29620003), analyzed 29 studies involving over 300,000 participants and found no significant association between sunscreen use and skin cancer risk. Let’s unpack this and explore why it’s time to rethink our relationship with the sun.
The Meta-Analysis: No Proof Sunscreen Prevents Skin Cancer
The 2018 meta-analysis, conducted by Elizabete Sæs da Silva and colleagues, looked at 29 studies, including case-control, cohort, cross-sectional, and controlled trials, with a total of 313,717 participants (10,670 cases of skin cancer). The results were striking: the overall odds ratio (OR) for skin cancer with sunscreen use was 1.08 (95% CI: 0.91-1.28), meaning there was no statistically significant link—positive or negative—between sunscreen use and skin cancer risk, including both melanoma and non-melanoma types.
Breaking it down further:
- For melanoma (25 studies, 9,813 cases), the pooled OR was 1.10 (95% CI: 0.92-1.33).
- For non-melanoma skin cancer (five studies, 857 cases), the OR was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.62-1.57).
Interestingly, the study noted that earlier research from before the 1980s showed a stronger association between sunscreen use and melanoma (OR: 2.35, 95% CI: 1.66-3.33). However, this link weakened over time, becoming statistically insignificant by the 1990s. The authors concluded that the current evidence “does not confirm the expected protective benefits of sunscreen against skin cancer in the general population.”
This is a bombshell. If sunscreen doesn’t reduce skin cancer risk, why are we so obsessed with it?
The Flaws in the Sunscreen Narrative
Dahhaj’s thread goes further, arguing that the lack of benefit isn’t just a neutral finding—it’s a stain on modern dermatology’s approach to sunlight. He highlights several reasons why this meta-analysis should make us question the sunscreen dogma:
- The Industry Narrative Falls Apart
Sunscreen is marketed as a preventative medical intervention, with the primary justification being skin cancer prevention. If a meta-analysis of over 300,000 people shows no reduced risk, the foundation of this public health narrative collapses. As Dahhaj puts it, “When the best data doesn’t support a product’s main promise, despite its everyday global use, it’s time to seriously rethink it.” - Bias Should Have Skewed Results in Sunscreen’s Favor—But Didn’t
Dermatology has been pro-sunscreen for decades, with many trials funded by the industry and public pressure to confirm its benefits. Despite this, the meta-analysis found no significant protective effect. This suggests that the real effect of sunscreen on skin cancer prevention is either nonexistent or too small to matter. - Real Risks Are Being Ignored
If sunscreen doesn’t protect against skin cancer, we need to consider its potential downsides. Dahhaj points to mechanistic studies showing that some sunscreen ingredients, like oxybenzone and octocrylene, can increase reactive oxygen species (ROS) under UV exposure, potentially causing cellular damage. Additionally, sunscreens block circadian light wavelengths crucial for hormone regulation, melanin signaling, and anti-cancer defenses. This disruption could have far-reaching effects on our biology. - A False Sense of Security
Sunscreen may lead people to believe they’re fully protected, encouraging prolonged sun exposure without allowing the body to adapt naturally through mechanisms like melanin production. This could inadvertently increase risk by bypassing the body’s innate photoprotection systems.
Rethinking Sunlight: It’s Not Just About UV
The meta-analysis and Dahhaj’s thread point to a larger issue: we’ve misunderstood the relationship between sunlight, skin, and cancer. The conventional view focuses narrowly on UV exposure as the primary driver of skin cancer, but emerging research suggests a more complex picture involving circadian biology, spectral balance, and mitochondrial health.
For example, a study on the Activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR and MAP Kinase Signaling Pathways in Response to Acute Solar Simulated Light Exposure (PMC article) highlights how UV radiation acts as both a carcinogen (via DNA mutations) and a promoter (via signal transduction pathways). However, sunlight isn’t just UV—it’s a full spectrum of light that our bodies have evolved to interact with. Blocking certain wavelengths with sunscreen may disrupt natural processes, like the production of melanin (nature’s sunscreen) and the regulation of hormones like melatonin and cortisol, which are crucial for circadian rhythm and overall health.
The web article from Tom Nikkola on the benefits of not wearing sunglasses offers a parallel insight: sunlight exposure to the eyes can signal the skin to produce melanin, enhancing natural photoprotection. If our eyes and skin are interconnected in their response to sunlight, what happens when we block this signaling with chemical filters?
The Case for Natural Sun Protection
Dahhaj advocates for a return to nature’s original sunscreen: melanin. Our bodies are designed to adapt to sunlight through melanin production, which absorbs UV rays and protects the skin. He suggests using common sense—seek shade or wear clothing when you’ve had enough sun, just as animals in nature do cyclically. This approach respects the coupled system of sun exposure and biological adaptation, rather than relying on chemical interventions that may do more harm than good.
The Bigger Picture: Circadian Biology and Skin Cancer
The meta-analysis’s failure to show a benefit from sunscreen supports a growing body of evidence that skin cancer risk isn’t primarily about UV exposure—it’s about how our bodies interact with sunlight as a whole. Factors like circadian alignment, time of day, spectral balance, mitochondrial health, and the function of the melanin and POMC (pro-opiomelanocortin) systems play critical roles. Chronic circadian disruption, altered light spectrums (like those from artificial lighting), and sun avoidance may be bigger contributors to skin cancer than UV exposure alone.
This perspective aligns with research on the effects of solar radiation on signaling pathways. The Review of Fate, Exposure, and Effects of Sunscreens in Aquatic Environments (NCBI Bookshelf) also raises concerns about the environmental and biological impacts of sunscreen chemicals, noting that their varying properties complicate our understanding of their effects on both human health and ecosystems.
What Should We Do Instead?
The evidence challenges us to rethink our approach to sun exposure and skin cancer prevention. Here are some practical steps to consider:
- Embrace Gradual Sun Exposure
Build your skin’s natural tolerance to sunlight by starting with short exposures and allowing your body to produce melanin. Morning sunlight is particularly beneficial for regulating circadian rhythms and hormone production. - Use Physical Barriers
When you’ve had enough sun, seek shade or wear protective clothing. These methods block UV without disrupting the light spectrum your body needs. - Prioritize Circadian Health
Get regular sunlight exposure, especially in the morning, to support your body’s natural rhythms. Avoid artificial light at night to maintain healthy melatonin production, which may also play a role in cancer prevention. - Question Sunscreen Use
If you choose to use sunscreen, opt for mineral-based options (like zinc oxide) that reflect UV rather than chemical filters that absorb it and may produce ROS. But consider whether you need it at all for everyday exposure. - Stay Informed
The science of sunlight and skin cancer is evolving. Keep an eye on studies that explore circadian biology, photoprotection, and the long-term effects of sunscreen chemicals.
Final Thoughts: A Call to Reconnect with Nature
The 2018 meta-analysis is a wake-up call. It’s time to move beyond the oversimplified “UV causes cancer, sunscreen prevents it” narrative and embrace a more holistic understanding of our relationship with the sun. Our bodies are designed to interact with sunlight in ways we’re only beginning to understand—ways that chemical sunscreens may interfere with at our peril.
As Dahhaj puts it, “Animals in nature seek sun, then shade. They approach this game cyclically and understand that it’s a coupled system.” Perhaps it’s time we took a page from nature’s playbook and trusted our biology over a bottle of SPF.
If you’re interested in diving deeper into this topic, check out Zaid K. Dahhaj’s Circadian Classroom for more on sunlight exposure and health. And let me know in the comments—what’s your approach to sun protection? Have you rethought sunscreen after reading this?
References:
- Sæs da Silva, E., et al. (2018). Use of sunscreen and risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Dermatol. PMID: 29620003.
- Nikkola, T. (n.d.). The Surprising Health Benefits of Not Wearing Sunglasses. Tom Nikkola.
- National Center for Biotechnology Information. (n.d.). Review of Fate, Exposure, and Effects of Sunscreens in Aquatic Environments. NCBI Bookshelf.
- PMC Article. Activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR and MAP Kinase Signaling Pathways in Response to Acute Solar Simulated Light Exposure of Human Skin.
This blog post is designed to be engaging and informative, balancing scientific evidence with practical advice, while encouraging readers to think critically about conventional health narratives. Let me know if you’d like to adjust the tone or focus!
Leave a Reply