Correction to: Estimation of exposure durations for vitamin D production and sunburn risk in Switzerland.

In the original article, the authorship list was given as "A. Religi1, C. Backes2,3, A. Chatelan2, J.-L. Bulliard2, L. Vuilleumier4, L. Moccozet1, M. Bochud2, D. Vernez3". This has been updated to "A. Religi*1, C. Backes*2,3, A. Chatelan2, J.-L. Bulliard2, L. Vuilleumier4, L. Moccozet1, M. Bochud 2, D. Vernez3".

Estimation of exposure durations for vitamin D production and sunburn risk in Switzerland.

Although overexposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is responsible for cutaneous melanoma and epithelial skin cancer and can cause negative health effects such as sunburn, a "little and often" exposure regime is often suggested to produce naturally recommended vitamin D levels, being essential for skeletal health. This study aimed to quantify solar UV doses needed to trigger 1000 International Units (IU) vitamin D doses and, at the same time, producing sunburn in Switzerland. Solar UV erythema irradiance (in mW/m2) measured at four meteorological stations in Switzerland for the period 2005-2017 were used to evaluate effective solar UV radiation producing 1000 IU vitamin D doses in skin phototype II and III individuals. Daily solar UV exposure durations (in minutes) needed to produce vitamin D with limited sunburn risk were estimated while considering mean vitamin D food intake of the Swiss population and seasonal skin coverage. In summer and spring, with 22% of uncovered skin, 1000 IU vitamin D doses are synthesized in 10-15 min of sun exposure for adults. Exposure durations between erythema risk and 1000 IU vitamin D production vary between 9 and 46 min. In winter and autumn, the recommended vitamin D production without sunburn risks often unachievable, since up to 6.5 h of sun exposure might be necessary considering 8-10% of uncovered skin surface. The vitamin D food intake only represented 10% of the recommended vitamin D production and remained unchanged throughout the year. These findings might clarify why vitamin D deficiency is common in Switzerland. Moreover, exposure durations between recommended vitamin D and increased sunburn risk might only differ by few minutes. Without additional oral vitamin D supplementation, daily doses of vitamin D (1000 IU) are not reachable in autumn and winter months in Switzerland.

Sun exposure to the eyes: predicted UV protection effectiveness of various sunglasses.

The aim of this study was to assess solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) doses received by the eyes in different exposure situations, and to predict the sun protection effectiveness provided by various styles of sunglasses at facial, periorbital, and ocular skin zones including the cornea and accounting for different head positions. A 3D numeric model was optimized to predict direct, diffuse and reflected erythemally weighted UVR doses received at various skin zones. Precisely defined facial, periorbital, and ocular skin zones, sunglasses (goggles, medium-, and large-sized sunglasses) and three head positions were modeled to simulate daily (08:00-17:00) and midday (12:00-14:00) UVR doses. The shading from sunglasses' frame and lenses' UVR transmission were used to calculate a predictive protection factor (PPF [%]). Highest ocular daily UVR doses were estimated at the uncovered cornea (1718.4 J/m2). Least sun protection was provided by middle-sized sunglasses with highest midday dose at the white lateral (290.8 J/m2) and lateral periorbital zones (390.9 J/m2). Goggles reached almost 100% protection at all skin zones. Large-sized sunglasses were highly effective in winter; however, their effectiveness depended on diffuse UVR doses received. In "looking-up" head positions highest midday UVR doses were received at the unprotected cornea (908.1 J/m2), totally protected when large-sized sunglasses are used. All tested sunglass lenses fully blocked UVR. Sunglasses' protection effectiveness is strongly influenced by geometry, wearing position, head positions, and exposure conditions. Sunglasses do not totally block UVR and should be combined with additional protection means. 3D modeling allows estimating UVR exposure of highly sensitive small skin zones, chronically exposed and rarely assessed.

Estimating the contribution of occupational solar ultraviolet exposure to skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation is the main causative factor for skin cancer. Outdoor workers are at particular risk because they spend long working hours outside, may have little shade available and are bound to take their lunch at their workplace. Despite epidemiological evidence of a doubling in risk of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in outdoor workers, the recognition of skin cancer as an occupational disease remains scarce. OBJECTIVES: To assess occupational solar UV doses and their contribution to skin cancer risk. METHODS: A numerical model (SimUVEx) was used to assess occupational and lunch break UV exposure, and to characterize exposure patterns and anatomical distribution. Risk of SCC was estimated from an existing epidemiological model. RESULTS: Horizontal body locations received 2.0-2.5 times more UV than vertical locations. The dose associated with having lunch outdoors every day was similar to that from doing outdoor work 1 day per week, but only half that of a seasonal worker. Outdoor work is associated with an increased risk of SCC and also with frequent acute episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational solar exposure contributes greatly to overall lifetime UV dose, resulting in an excess risk of SCC. The magnitude of the estimated excess in risk supports the recognition of SCC as an occupational disease.

Anatomical exposure patterns of skin to sunlight: relative contributions of direct, diffuse and reflected ultraviolet radiation.

BACKGROUND: The dose-response between ultraviolet (UV) exposure patterns and skin cancer occurrence is not fully understood. Sun-protection messages often focus on acute exposure, implicitly assuming that direct UV radiation is the key contributor to the overall UV exposure. However, little is known about the relative contribution of the direct, diffuse and reflected radiation components. OBJECTIVE: To investigate solar UV exposure patterns at different body sites with respect to the relative contribution of the direct, diffuse and reflected radiation. METHODS: A three-dimensional numerical model was used to assess exposure doses for various body parts and exposure scenarios of a standing individual (static and dynamic postures). The model was fed with erythemally weighted ground irradiance data for the year 2009 in Payerne, Switzerland. A year-round daily exposure (08:00-17:00 h) without protection was assumed. RESULTS: For most anatomical sites, mean daily doses were high (typically 6.2-14.6 standard erythemal doses) and exceeded the recommended exposure values. Direct exposure was important during specific periods (e.g. midday during summer), but contributed moderately to the annual dose, ranging from 15% to 24% for vertical and horizontal body parts, respectively. Diffuse irradiation explained about 80% of the cumulative annual exposure dose. Acute diffuse exposures were also observed during cloudy summer days. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of diffuse UV radiation should not be underestimated when advocating preventive measures. Messages focused on avoiding acute direct exposures may be of limited efficiency to prevent skin cancers associated with chronic exposure.