You are not logged in.
Hmmm...
turns out UV-A is at least as bad as UV-B in terms of risks of skin-cancer... How does this affect radiation-shielding of visors etc?
[http://www.news.com.au/common/story_pag … 02,00.html]news.com.au
BTW: baaaad news for the solar-bank (artificial-tanning) sellers and centers, they use UV-A tubes...
Offline
Like button can go here
Personally, I'd like to see someone confirm these results. Having longwave UV-A cause skin cancer is bizarre. There's nothing for the UV to interact with at those wavelengths. UV-A is defined as 320-400 nm. The primary absorption peaks for DNA are at 280 nm and proteins absorb at 260 and 300 nm.
Anyways, extending UV protection on a visor to go to 400 nm is trivial. $10 blue-blocker sunglasses will do the trick just fine.
Offline
Like button can go here