>>37447254
Short answer: No

If by stronger you mean mildly increased melanin production, yes.

If by stronger you mean massively increased risk of cancers due to all the damage, weakened immune system due to the stress from the damage, wasted resources repairing the damage and having extra fragile skin until it's fully repaired, yes.

Enjoy your new moles, faggot.

It wasn't THAT hot. I played footie all day at the park and didn't get burnt.

>getting sunburn
I spent all day kayaking in the sun and haven't burned

Why is getting sun burnt seen as so embarrassing and a sign of weakness?

Is it the Jews, /fit/?

No, UV radiation can literally destroy DNA, if you take more sun than required to produce vitamin D you're just risking cancer like an idiot.

>>37447379
> if you take more sun than required to produce vitamin D you're just risking cancer like an idiot.

How much sun do you need a day for vitamin D?

>>37447400
Depends on your skin tone and light intensity.

If you're dark skinned (South Italian tier and darker) in Northern Europe, you have a vitamin d deficiency. Some 80% of olive and darker skin toned people have it in the non Mediterranean European area.

>white people
enjoy your cancer

>>37447444
So. People should get more sun unless they're gingers?

>>37447400
Generally speaking, 20 minutes a day. This will change slightly as you get darker

There's a great podcast by Daniel vitalis on sunlight

>>37447538
Pretty much.

Sunlight exposure also increases folic acid in men which increases the health and number of sperm. The more sun the better.

Just wear sunscreen if you're white and thank the gods if you're black and in an area with strong sun.

sun cream is the biggest scam perpetrated on the public since 4 ply toilet paper.
i havent used sun creams my whole life and never get sun burnt