Are current guidelines for sun protection optimal for health? Exploring the evidence

Exposure of the skin to ultraviolet (UV) radiation is the main risk factor for skin cancer, and a major source of vitamin D, in many regions of the world. Sun protection messages to minimize skin cancer risks but avoid vitamin D deficiency are challenging, partly because levels of UV radiation vary by location, season, time of day, and atmospheric conditions. The UV Index provides information on levels of UV radiation and is a cornerstone of sun protection guidelines. Current guidelines from the World Health Organization are that sun protection is required only when the UV Index is 3 or greater. This advice is pragmatic rather than evidence based. The UV Index is a continuous scale; more comprehensive sun protection is required as the UV Index increases. In addition, a wide range of UVA doses is possible with a UVI of 3, from which there may be health consequences, while full sun protection when the UVI is "moderate" (between 3 and 5) may limit vitamin D production. Finally, the duration of time spent in the sun is an essential component of a public health message, in addition to the intensity of ambient UV radiation as measured by the UV Index. Together these provide the dose of UV radiation that is relevant to both skin cancer genesis and vitamin D production. Further education is required to increase the understanding of the UV Index; messages framed using the UV Index need to incorporate the importance of duration of exposure and increasing sun protection with increasing dose of UV radiationProfs Lucas and Neale are funded by Senior Research Fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia

Correction: Are current guidelines for sun protection optimal for health? Exploring the evidence

Correction for ‘Are current guidelines for sun protection optimal for health? Exploring the evidence’ by Robyn M. Lucas et al., Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2018, DOI: 10.1039/c7pp00374a

Paleoclimate: Toward solving the UV puzzle

Decreases in stratospheric ozone caused by chlorofluorocarbons released into the atmosphere lead to an increase in harmful ultraviolet (UV) light received at Earths surface. But UV and ozone also vary naturally as a result of changes in solar activity. In their Perspective, Rozema et al. chart recent efforts to elucidate the relation among the solar UV spectrum, ozone concentrations, and harmful surface UV on decadal and longer time scales. Biological proxies (phenolic compounds in pollen and spores) can be used to reconstruct historical UV-B and total ozone

Ultraviolet radiation changes

A major consequence of ozone depletion is an increase in solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation received at the Earth's surface. This chapter discusses advances that were made since the previous assessment (World Meteorological Organization (WMO)) to our understanding of UV radiation. The impacts of these changes in UV on the biosphere are not included, because they are discussed in the effects assessment

Effect of sulfate aerosol on tropospheric NOx and ozone budgets: Model simulations and TOPSE evidence

The distributions of NOx and O3 are analyzed during TOPSE (Tropospheric Ozone Production about the Spring Equinox). In this study these data are compared with the calculations of a global chemical/transport model (Model for OZone And Related chemical Tracers (MOZART)). Specifically, the effect that hydrolysis of N2O5 on sulfate aerosols has on tropospheric NOx and O3 budgets is studied. The results show that without this heterogeneous reaction, the model significantly overestimates NOx concentrations at high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere (NH) in winter and spring in comparison to the observations during TOPSE; with this reaction, modeled NOx concentrations are close to the measured values. This comparison provides evidence that the hydrolysis of N2O5 on sulfate aerosol plays an important role in controlling the tropospheric NOx and O3 budgets. The calculated reduction of NOx attributed to this reaction is 80 to 90% in winter at high latitudes over North America. Because of the reduction of NOx, O3 concentrations are also decreased. The maximum O3reduction occurs in spring although the maximum NOx reduction occurs in winter when photochemical O3 production is relatively low. The uncertainties related to uptake coefficient and aerosol loading in the model is analyzed. The analysis indicates that the changes in NOxdue to these uncertainties are much smaller than the impact of hydrolysis of N2O5 on sulfate aerosol. The effect that hydrolysis of N2O5 on global NOx and O3 budgets are also assessed by the model. The results suggest that in the Northern Hemisphere, the average NOx budget decreases 50% due to this reaction in winter and 5% in summer. The average O3 budget is reduced by 8% in winter and 6% in summer. In the Southern Hemisphere (SH), the sulfate aerosol loading is significantly smaller than in the Northern Hemisphere. As a result, sulfate aerosol has little impact on NOx and O3 budgets of the Southern Hemisphere

Climate change-induced increases in precipitation are reducing the potential for solar ultraviolet radiation to inactivate pathogens in surface waters

Climate change is accelerating the release of dissolved organic matter (DOM) to inland and coastal waters through increases in precipitation, thawing of permafrost, and changes in vegetation. Our modeling approach suggests that the selective absorption of ultraviolet radiation (UV) by DOM decreases the valuable ecosystem service wherein sunlight inactivates waterborne pathogens. Here we highlight the sensitivity of waterborne pathogens of humans and wildlife to solar UV, and use the DNA action spectrum to model how differences in water transparency and incident sunlight alter the ability of UV to inactivate waterborne pathogens. A case study demonstrates how heavy precipitation events can reduce the solar inactivation potential in Lake Michigan, which provides drinking water to over 10 million people. These data suggest that widespread increases in DOM and consequent browning of surface waters reduce the potential for solar UV inactivation of pathogens, and increase exposure to infectious diseases in humans and wildlife.Tis work was supported in part by NSF DEB-1360066 to C.E.W. and S.G.S. We thank M. Molina, S. Corsi, and C. Fitzgerald for their assistance with analyzing the Manitowoc, WI sampl

The success of the Montreal Protocol in mitigating interactive effects of stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change on the environment

The Montreal Protocol and its Amendments have been highly effective in protecting the stratospheric ozone layer, preventing global increases in solar ultraviolet-B radiation (UV-B; 280-315 nm) at Earth's surface, and reducing global warming. While ongoing and projected changes in UV-B radiation and climate still pose a threat to human health, food security, air and water quality, terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, and construction materials and fabrics, the Montreal Protocol continues to play a critical role in protecting Earth's inhabitants and ecosystems by addressing many of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.Non peer reviewe

Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, Update 2020

This assessment by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) provides the latest scientific update since our most recent comprehensive assessment (Photochemical and Photobiological Sciences, 2019, 18, 595–828). The interactive effects between the stratospheric ozone layer, solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and climate change are presented within the framework of the Montreal Protocol and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. We address how these global environmental changes affect the atmosphere and air quality; human health; terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; biogeochemical cycles; and materials used in outdoor construction, solar energy technologies, and fabrics. In many cases, there is a growing influence from changes in seasonality and extreme events due to climate change. Additionally, we assess the transmission and environmental effects of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, in the context of linkages with solar UV radiation and the Montreal Protocol.PWB was supported by the J.H. Mullahy Endowment for Environmental Biology. TMR was partially supported by the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Biological & Environmental Sciences, and by the Academy of Finland (decision #324555). PJN was supported by the Smithsonian Institution. CEW was supported by NSF DEB 1754267, and NSF DEB 1950170. RGZ was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency—the views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ATB was supported by the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and thanks M. en C. Laura Celis for help with literature searches. SH was supported by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and Linnaeus University. MAKJ was supported by Science Foundation Ireland (16-IA-4418). JM-A was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities and European Regional Development Fund (project PGC2018-093824-B-C42). KM was supported by ETH Zurich. LER was supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. SAR was supported by the Australian Research Council and the University of Wollongong’s Global Challenges Program. KCR was supported by NSF grants 1754265 and 1761805. Q-WW gratefully acknowledges fnancial support from the CAS Young Talents Program and National Natural Science Foundation of China (41971148). SY was supported by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council CJ Martin Fellowship. We thank Emma Lesley (Global Challenges Program, University of Wollongong, for assistance with Fig. 1)

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Questions and Answers about the Effects of Ozone Depletion, UV Radiation, and Climate on Humans and the Environment. Supplement of the 2022 Assessment Report of the UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel

This collection of Questions & Answers (Q&As) was prepared by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the Montreal Protocol under the umbrella of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The document complements EEAP’s Quadrennial Assessment 2022 (https://ozone. unep.org/science/assessment/eeap) and provides interesting and useful information for policymakers, the general public, teachers, and scientists, written in an easy-to-understand language

Environmental Effects of Stratospheric Ozone Depletion, UV Radiation, and interactions with Climate Change: 2022 Assessment Report

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer was established 35 years ago following the 1985 Vienna Convention for protection of the environment and human health against excessive amounts of harmful ultraviolet-B (UV-B, 280-315 nm) radiation reaching the Earth’s surface due to a reduced UV-B-absorbing ozone layer. The Montreal Protocol, ratified globally by all 198 Parties (countries), controls ca 100 ozone-depleting substances (ODS). These substances have been used in many applications, such as in refrigerants, air conditioners, aerosol propellants, fumigants against pests, fire extinguishers, and foam materials. The Montreal Protocol has phased out nearly 99% of ODS, including ODS with high global warming potentials such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), thus serving a dual purpose. However, some of the replacements for ODS also have high global warming potentials, for example, the hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Several of these replacements have been added to the substances controlled by the Montreal Protocol. The HFCs are now being phased down under the Kigali Amendment. As of December 2022, 145 countries have signed the Kigali Amendment, exemplifying key additional outcomes of the Montreal Protocol, namely, that of also curbing climate warming and stimulating innovations to increase energy efficiency of cooling equipment used industrially as well as domestically. As the concentrations of ODS decline in the upper atmosphere, the stratospheric ozone layer is projected to recover to pre-1980 levels by the middle of the 21st century, assuming full compliance with the control measures of the Montreal Protocol. However, in the coming decades, the ozone layer will be increasingly influenced by emissions of greenhouse gases and ensuing global warming. These trends are highly likely to modify the amount of UV radiation reaching the Earth\u27s surface with implications for the effects on ecosystems and human health. Against this background, four Panels of experts were established in 1988 to support and advise the Parties to the Montreal Protocol with up-to-date information to facilitate decisions for protecting the stratospheric ozone layer. In 1990 the four Panels were consolidated into three, the Scientific Assessment Panel, the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, and the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel. Every four years, each of the Panels provides their Quadrennial Assessments as well as a Synthesis Report that summarises the key findings of all the Panels. In the in-between years leading up to the quadrennial, the Panels continue to inform the Parties to the Montreal Protocol of new scientific information