I've read in "Lies My Doctor Told Me" by the MD Ken Berry that there isn't a single paper that shows that sun exposure is bad.
In particular the current consensus is that Vitamin D is essential to health and so this is considering that sun is avoided but replaced by pills, as the protective role of vitamin D is well-proven. But there are many other health benefits that are triggered by sun exposure (the skin metabolism activates and it goes down to influence gene expression).
So I've looked a few articles (at least 7, including some reviewing existing research), and sure enough there wasn't a single paper that actually showing that sun exposure is bad. They all relied on showing on something related to sunlight, most of the time that suntanning with artificial UV beds is really bad. But there it lacks a convincing argument that this transfers to 'the real product', as this is the equivalent of saying that carrots are good/bad for people based on some people ingesting large quantities of carotene in pills. And we know from diet that these kinds of arguments do break down when extrapolating only part of one molecule to a whole, natural product (eggs are a famous example).
If somebody has done more research on this please elaborate, I haven't spent too much time because the research seemed in all cases fairly low quality (questionnaires?) and a lot contained confusing arguments (it's not always clear how dark-skinned the individuals are, or how removed from their natural habitat they are, like some Swedish in Australia or Kenyan in the UK, although some do make an effort in that regard).
In particular the current consensus is that Vitamin D is essential to health and so this is considering that sun is avoided but replaced by pills, as the protective role of vitamin D is well-proven. But there are many other health benefits that are triggered by sun exposure (the skin metabolism activates and it goes down to influence gene expression).
So I've looked a few articles (at least 7, including some reviewing existing research), and sure enough there wasn't a single paper that actually showing that sun exposure is bad. They all relied on showing on something related to sunlight, most of the time that suntanning with artificial UV beds is really bad. But there it lacks a convincing argument that this transfers to 'the real product', as this is the equivalent of saying that carrots are good/bad for people based on some people ingesting large quantities of carotene in pills. And we know from diet that these kinds of arguments do break down when extrapolating only part of one molecule to a whole, natural product (eggs are a famous example).
If somebody has done more research on this please elaborate, I haven't spent too much time because the research seemed in all cases fairly low quality (questionnaires?) and a lot contained confusing arguments (it's not always clear how dark-skinned the individuals are, or how removed from their natural habitat they are, like some Swedish in Australia or Kenyan in the UK, although some do make an effort in that regard).