Traditional Clothing and Vitamin D

[EasterJoy]

An interesting science article (I think):
pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1524743

This is one of several articles noting that wearing very concealing clothing can lead to a deficiency in Vitamin D, which the body photosynthesizes in the presence of sunlight. Other articles I have read noted an increase in vitamin D deficiency among the women and children in groups in which clothing covers the arms and legs completely.

It is difficult to get sufficient vitamin D from dietary sources alone (that is, without sunlight), and there is increasing evidence that the old daily requirement of 400 IU is too low. Sunlight has the advantage of being a source of vitamin D that does not cause toxicity, as the body only makes what it needs.

A few other notes that I have turned up elsewhere:

It only takes 15-30 minutes of daily sun exposure for the body to make sufficient Vitamin D; about 1/4 of the amount which will result in redness of the skin in absence of sunscreen. Dermatologists are anxious to point out that sunlight in excess of that needed to manufacture Vitamin D only increases the risk of skin cancers.

Sunscreen also blocks UVB rays, those needed to make Vitamin D; there are now sunlamps which provide UVB, but not UVA (which causes tanning).

People living north or south of the 40th parallels will not get sufficient UVB in the cooler months (September through May, roughly, although it gets worse as one gets closer to the poles) because of the angle of the sun. This may be responsible in part for the symptoms of seasonal depression.

Insufficient Vitamin D can cause osteoporosis, mood swings, symptoms of depression, and muscle fatigue, among other symptoms. Vitamin D levels are particularly a concern for postmenupausal women. It is not uncommon for Vitamin D insufficiency to go undiagnosed for some time. Vitamin D levels can be tested via a standard Western-medicine blood test.

I’m not a doctor, and this isn’t medical advice. If you are indoors a lot, though, and conceal yourself when you do go out, or live at the more extreme latitudes during their dark months, this is just something to keep in mind, particularly if you are having tiredness, aches, or mood problems. These problems should not be simply dismissed as the effects of old age, regardless of age. Such problems, if investigated, can often be addressed.

In other news, female Bagladeshi teens living in the UK who wore the traditional clothing of their ethnic group had better mental health than their female Bangladeshi peers who adopted “Western” clothing, regardless of whether they had a mix of friends of different cultures or only friends from their own cultural background.
thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/wearing-ethnic-clothes-keeps-teens-mentally-healthy_10038083.html

All very interesting, I think!

 

[juliamajor]

What’s considered 'Traditional clothing?". If it’s some of the potato sacks I’ve seen posted on websites- I can’t say they’re Traditional.In th1950’s my mother would have never worn that stuff. It’s more like Neo-fundamentalist or Proto Mormon!

 

[EasterJoy]

What’s considered 'Traditional clothing?". If it’s some of the potato sacks I’ve seen posted on websites- I can’t say they’re Traditional.In th1950’s my mother would have never worn that stuff. It’s more like Neo-fundamentalist or Proto Mormon!

In this case, it would have been the hajab and long garments that cover to the ankles and wrists. Still, there are those on this forum that favor necklines no lower than two finger widths below the throat, long sleeves, and long skirts.

Yes, that would include so-called neo-fundamentalists and fundamentalist Mormons, but the idea of the thread isn’t to discuss how much skin should be showing! That is not the point! The point is about physiology, not morality.

It also isn’t the cut that matters, just how much of the skin is shielded from the sun. And remember, if you are “good” about using sunscreen or just careful to keep your direct exposure to the sun’s rays low, that counts, too, even if your clothing choices are frankly shocking.

The idea of the thread is that whether you have a very low exposure to the sun because of the modesty of your clothing or because of the SPF of the sunscreen that you use religiously or because you choose to live in Montreal (or even Portland, OR!), you are wise to consider whether you are getting enough Vitamin D.

Just 15-30 minutes in the sun can allow your body to synthesize the equivalent of 10,000 IU in the summer, which would be a huge amount from dietary sources! You would generally* not *want to take that much in a supplement, for instance, unless you were under the direction of a physician who is monitoring your blood levels. This is because your body stops making Vitamin D when it gets what it needs. After that, incidentally, the sun is only causing damage…well, except to the psyche!! :tanning:

 

[I_Believe]

Actually, vitamin D is a good defense against the flu. I’ve been following a thread on another forum, and it’s recommended some sun and an intake of vitamin D, along with red wine from Oregon or New York wineries is recommended. Those wines are made from grapes that have high amounts of something that helps fight off this flu. I’ll post more tonight after I get home from work. running late now…