TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 asks: Should we stop wearing sunglasses? Speaker 1 responds: Yes. Except we should be wearing them indoors and at night, not outdoors during the day. When you wear sunglasses outdoors, they block the UV, and that's kind of what most people wear them for. Things are bright. Well, reason things are too bright for most people is because they don't get out at dawn to see the sunrise. And if they did, their eyes would adjust to the sun and they wouldn't need sunglasses. We've been told forever from optometrists and doctors that UV is bad for the eyes. And in fact, our eyes have receptors to read the ultraviolet light. And when we cover them with sunglasses, we cannot read how much UV is in the sun, and so we get sunburned. Speaker 0 asks: So you are an expert in all things circadian rhythm and light diet. So what time are you waking up, and what time are you going to bed? Speaker 1 answers: So this eight hours of sleep a night, I think is bull. I wake up with the sun. I actually need to sleep less in the summer and more in the winter, and that's how we're biologically designed. We are a light poisoned population. The light that we're exposed to is highly intense in the blue color of light. There's no infrared, almost zero red light, very little yellow, and a ton of blue light. Blue light in itself is not bad, but blue light becomes toxic when we're exposed to too much of it. It messes with our circadian rhythm. It is actually associated with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity if we see it after sunset, and macular degeneration during the day because we have so much of it hitting our eyes causing free radicals.

I spent time in Phuket and decided to sunbathe without sunscreen. I used my watch to time 15 minutes on my front and 15 minutes on my back before going under the umbrella. I realized I should have just used sunscreen instead. By the end of the week, I had a nice golden brown tan and could stay out for about half an hour to an hour.

The speaker discusses the misconception that sunlight causes skin cancer, emphasizing that lack of sun exposure can actually increase the risk. They explain that UVB is not the main culprit, but rather UVA. Sunscreens that only block UVB can lead to vitamin D deficiency, increasing cancer risk. Excessive use of sunscreen with harmful chemicals can harm the skin and potentially cause skin cancer. The speaker advises against washing off vitamin D-producing oils on the skin immediately after sun exposure. They also highlight the importance of maintaining healthy skin bacteria by avoiding excessive use of soap.

Speaker 0 recounts a severe sun poisoning incident at Bondi Beach after refusing sunscreen offered by a stranger. Speaker 1 describes a method for tanning without sunscreen used in Phuket: 15 minutes of sun exposure on the front, 15 minutes on the back, followed by time under an umbrella. Speaker 1 claims this approach allows for a gradual tan and extended sun exposure later in the week. Speaker 1 suggests using a watch to time sun exposure and implies that common sense is needed. Speaker 0 acknowledges lacking common sense.

I spent four hours in direct sunlight, from 11 AM to 4 PM, ensuring I prepared my body with antioxidants before exposure. I also applied coconut oil to keep my skin nourished. Astaxanthin, an internal antioxidant, acts like a sunscreen and supports vitamin D synthesis. Tanning is beneficial because it increases melanin production, which helps protect against stressors and inflammation. When traveling, especially by air, melanin can be depleted due to stress. Having a tan not only enhances appearance but also promotes overall health.

Speaker 0 recounts a severe sun poisoning incident at Bondi Beach after refusing sunscreen. Speaker 1 advises against sunscreen, instead recommending timed sun exposure: 15 minutes on the front, 15 minutes on the back, followed by shade. Speaker 1 claims this method, used in Phuket, resulted in a golden brown tan and increased sun tolerance over a week. Speaker 1 suggests using common sense regarding sun exposure, to which Speaker 0 jokingly admits a deficiency.

The speaker discusses the misconception that sunlight causes skin cancer. They explain that lack of sunshine actually leads to skin cancer and that UVB is not the main cause, but rather UVA. They mention that using sunscreens that only block UVB can lead to vitamin D deficiency, which increases the risk of cancer. The speaker emphasizes the importance of maintaining normal vitamin D levels, as 77% of all cancers can be avoided with adequate levels. They also mention that countries with high UV radiation have lower rates of skin cancer compared to countries with less sun exposure. The speaker warns against the harmful effects of sunscreens, which can contain carcinogens and lead to skin cancer. They advise against using soap immediately after sun exposure to allow the absorption of vitamin D and to preserve the beneficial bacteria on the skin.

- "Bodies make about one thousand IU of vitamin d every six to ten minutes in direct sunlight." - "That means if you can get outside for fifteen to thirty minutes every day, you have no need for a vitamin d supplement because your body will use the fat within your body to create more of the hormone vitamin d." - "One of the reasons I recommend people stay away from vitamin d supplements is because a lot of supplements use vitamin d two. And our bodies really would prefer to use vitamin d three." - "Another hormone that the sun will benefit is melatonin." - "When you give your body sunlight during the day, it helps teach your circadian rhythm when daytime is and when nighttime is and more importantly, when to produce melatonin for bed." - "If not, get outside and follow me for more."

We make energy from sunlight. People who are in the sun eat less food. Let your kids be outside in the sun. Take their shirts off. Let them run around barefoot on the grass. You know what you get from the ground? You get electrons. The same thing. It’s straight free energy. What runs through a mitochondria that makes all the ATP? The electron transfer chain. It’s not a fat acid train. It’s not a carbohydrate train protein. The sun is a nutrient. It is not out to kill you. The idea that the sun is giving you cancer is the most asinine, insane gaslighting, ridiculous statement on earth. It makes all life exist. It charges everything. We are alive because of the power of the sun yet you want to tell people to slather on carcinogenic chemicals, bake it into their skin with the suns and say, oh, that’s what’s aging you. I’m 51 years old. I’ve never used sunscreen. I don’t have anything done to my face. I eat a ton of meat. I drive a convertible. I want as much as I possibly can get. You know, because it makes me younger. They’re lying to you. They’ve lied about almost everything. Do the opposite of what the government says.

The speaker discusses chemical exposure and endocrine disruption, focusing on atrazine and common consumer products. Atrazine is described as a herbicide and the second most used herbicide in North America, after glyphosate. The speaker notes atrazine is illegal in Europe and claims that in Europe it’s not allowed at all. They state that “they’ll call it male feminization” when animals are exposed to atrazine, giving an example: a frog exposed to two hundred nanograms per deciliter of atrazine becomes female, turning a male frog female. The implication is that such exposures reflect effects seen in many Americans. Beyond atrazine, the speaker mentions plastic water bottles and the presence of fragrance and parabens that rub onto the skin, leading to skin absorption of these chemicals. The discussion then shifts to sunscreen chemicals, specifically oxybenzone, described as by far the most widely used chemical in sunscreen and an estrogen endocrine disruptor that acts like estrogen in the body. A study is cited: after publishing a book, a study on oxybenzone and one application of sunscreen found that seven days later, oxybenzone levels in people’s blood were above government safety limits. This observation is presented as applying to an adult who used oxybenzone once, with some people applying sunscreen five days a week to children or more, contributing to multiple daily applications. The speaker ties this to personal care products that claim to keep the face protected from the sun, implying frequent use leads to higher exposure. Key points emphasized include the prevalence of atrazine use in North America, its alleged legal status in Europe, the concept of “male feminization” in animals due to atrazine exposure, and the broader concern about everyday products—plastic bottles, fragrances, parabens, and sunscreen (notably oxybenzone)—as sources of estrogenic or endocrine-disrupting chemicals, with a cited study showing one application of sunscreen resulting in blood levels exceeding safety limits after seven days. The overall narrative links environmental chemical exposure to potential reproductive and hormonal effects, highlighting concerns about consumer products and regulations across regions.

People get energy from sunlight, and those in the sun eat less food. Children should be outside in the sun without shirts, running barefoot on the grass to get electrons, which is free energy. The electron transfer chain in mitochondria is powered by the sun. The idea that the sun causes cancer is false. The sun is a nutrient that makes all life exist and charges everything. Sunscreen contains carcinogenic chemicals. The speaker, age 51, has never used sunscreen, has had no work done, eats meat, and drives a convertible to maximize sun exposure because it makes them younger. The government is lying. Do the opposite of what the government says.

The speaker discusses the benefits of sunlight, including its positive effects on heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, blood sugar, lactic acid levels, energy, strength, endurance, stress tolerance, and the blood's ability to absorb and carry oxygen. They question the use of petroleum-based SPF products that block these benefits and emphasize the importance of sunlight for our overall health. The speaker also mentions the influence of marketing in promoting these products. They recommend a book called "Health and Light" for further information on the healing properties of light.

If any doctor ever tells you to stay out of the sun, you should fire that doctor immediately. 1,200 scientific research papers prove that the sun is crucial for our health, that you should never use sun protection products if you want to be healthy, And that you should go to the sun between eleven and one at the highest noon. Skin cancer is not an issue. There's only one important skin cancer. That's melanoma. And melanoma is protected thanks to the sun. The sun does not create melanoma, the sun protects us from melanoma according to science. That immediately should tell you that doctors have been lying to you. Because according to their logic, when they tell you to stay out of the sun because of melanoma, you should have melanomas on the face, shouldn't you?

Humans ask how long they can be in the sun because they've been brainwashed to fear it, unlike animals. The sun provides UVB, which has two main functions: manufacturing vitamin D, only one of thousands of photoproducts, and triggering warning signs when it's time to get out of the sun. The feeling of warmth indicates it's time for shade. Sunscreen prevents UVB from doing its job, causing people to stay in the sun too long and be exposed to damaging parts of the solar spectrum. Listening to your skin and avoiding sunscreen allows nature to guide sun exposure.

The speaker argues that tanning with a UV bulb has benefits and presents tanning as a solution while noting that government actions block out the sun. They claim that during Obama's administration tanning beds were targeted to be taxed to eliminate them, and that this tax “worked,” causing many people to stop tanning because they feared skin issues. The speaker contends the real factors were the lotions and what people are eating, and asserts that the government targets anything that could make people healthy, such as the sun or UV bulbs, especially in opposition to “big harma.” They recount a claim about Kellogg’s, stating Kellogg's was the creator of the first tanning bed in the 1890s, supposedly to find a solution to diabetes, and suggesting his cereal was causing diabetes while he actually wanted a solution. The speaker then references the early 1900s, noting that hospitals would put people out in the sun and that this was a natural method of healing, contrasting it with injections, radiation, chemotherapy, and pills, implying sun exposure was the preferred healing method.

A pilot program was run in Phuket with 53 guests and was very successful, so it will likely be repeated next year. The speaker shared a tanning strategy: 15 minutes on the front, 15 minutes on the back, then under an umbrella. This is done without sunscreen, using a watch to keep track of time. By the end of the week, the speaker had a golden-brown tan and could then spend up to an hour in the sun. The speaker advised using common sense when spending time outside.

Most skin cancers are caused by wearing sunglasses. People in London and Prague wear sunglasses even when there's no sun, which proves marketing is legalized lying. Women shouldn't use makeup with sunblock. Sunburn isn't as bad as dermatologists claim; it means you're not building a good solar callus. Trees don't wear clothes or sunscreen. Humans are the only animals that believe blocking the sun is smart. You should never block the sun. The key protection is upregulating melanin production in your skin and eyes. To do this, stop wearing sunglasses.

Most sunscreens block UVB rays, which prevents burning, but this doesn't mean UVA rays are blocked. UVA rays penetrate deeply, causing DNA damage, inflammation, and potentially cancer. Sunscreens with UVB-blocking chemicals create a false sense of security, leading to increased sun exposure and UVA penetration. To protect yourself, use broad spectrum sunscreens.

The speaker discusses the relationship between sunlight, sunscreen, and skin cancer. They argue that lack of sunshine, rather than sunlight itself, causes skin cancer. They mention a new study that suggests it is UVA, not UVB, that causes cancer. They explain that using sunscreens that only block UVB can lead to vitamin D deficiency, which increases the risk of cancer. They emphasize the importance of maintaining normal vitamin D levels to reduce the risk of cancer. The speaker also criticizes sunscreens for containing potentially harmful chemicals that can be absorbed into the bloodstream and cause liver and skin damage. They advise against washing off vitamin D from the skin with soap after sun exposure. Additionally, they mention the importance of maintaining healthy skin bacteria.

The speaker debunks the myth that the sun causes cancer, stating that it is actually sunscreen that can be harmful. They emphasize the importance of sunlight for overall health, as it provides vitamin D3 and keeps bones and skin healthy. The speaker advises against applying chemicals to the skin, but suggests using a little coconut oil for better sun exposure. They claim that sunlight is essential for the proper functioning of every cell in the body and that it can even help cure cancer. The speaker warns against using certain cosmetic products that contain harmful chemicals, which can lead to breast cancer. They conclude by stating that sunlight is the best preventive measure against disease.

Speaker 0 argues that it was not until the 1960s, with the SPF push, that people were told not to go out in the sun. The claim is that Big Pharma created SPF and told people to avoid sun exposure, promoting petroleum-based sunscreens with many chemicals perceived as linked to illnesses the sunscreen is meant to prevent. The speaker asserts that, once you look at lawsuits, there are many cases claiming sunscreen causes skin cancer because of the chemicals baked into the skin for hours. The speaker describes observing people at pools and beaches who spray sunscreen all over their bodies and then questions why they experience acne, hormonal issues, low energy, fatigue, and infertility, suggesting that these problems stem from absorbing chemicals through the skin, noting that the skin is the largest organ. The claim is made that sunscreen makes no sense and that the sun heals, while pointing to the government’s ongoing efforts to block sunlight. The speaker asks why the government spends so much time blocking the sun and offers a rationale: if there were lots of sunshine, people would have revolutions. According to the speaker, cold weather keeps people indoors, watching Netflix and cuddling up, reducing the likelihood of revolt, whereas abundant sunshine would incite revolts, which is presented as the reason behind extensive sun-blocking efforts. Throughout, the speaker ties sunscreen use to broader social and political manipulation, presenting a narrative where the sun’s healing properties are real, sunscreen chemicals are harmful, and public policy is driven by a desire to suppress dissent. The overarching theme is that the sun is beneficial and that the promotion of sunscreen by Big Pharma in the 1960s represents a deliberate attempt to control people and prevent revolutions.

The Wall Street Journal questioned why sunscreen is not used. The speaker promotes a tallow-based sun balm as a healthier alternative to chemical sunscreens. They were fact-checked by the Journal, revealing conflicts of interest with scientists funded by Johnson & Johnson. The speaker suspects financial motives behind sunscreen recommendations.

In a large longitudinal study, twenty-nine thousand five hundred and eighteen women were followed for twenty years to examine the health effects of sun exposure. The findings from this extensive cohort are presented as surprisingly provocative. First, the study concluded that avoiding sun exposure reduces life expectancy to the same extent as heavy smoking. This comparison underscores the potential importance of sun exposure for overall health and longevity, challenging common assumptions that minimizing sun would uniformly improve health outcomes. Second, the researchers initially hypothesized that greater sun exposure would lead to a higher risk of deadly skin cancer, specifically melanoma. However, the data did not show a strong link between sun exposure and melanoma. In other words, there was almost no correlation between the amount of sun exposure and the incidence of melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, in this study’s findings. From the study’s results, it appears that moderate and frequent sun exposure may be beneficial for health, contradicting the idea that more sun exposure is inherently dangerous. The identified risk factors were limited to sunburn and excessive sun exposure, which were singled out as problematic rather than ordinary or moderate sunlight exposure. The overarching takeaway presented is that getting outside and obtaining sunshine can be advantageous for health, whereas guarding against sunburn and avoiding excessive sun exposure are the critical boundaries to observe. The speaker emphasizes the practical implication by repeating a straightforward recommendation: this is a friendly reminder to get outside and get some sunshine. Overall, the message hinges on two main points: the potential longevity benefits associated with sun exposure and the unexpectedly weak association between sun exposure and melanoma risk within this large cohort, paired with a caution about sunburn and excessive exposure. The narrative invites readers to reconsider conventional wisdom about sun exposure, highlighting that moderate and frequent exposure may be among the positive influences on health, with the caveat that protection against sunburn remains important.

Speaker 0 recounts a negative experience with sunscreen at Bondi Beach, claiming it caused sudden poisoning and an emergency room visit. Speaker 1 describes a sunbathing strategy used in Phuket: 15 minutes on the front, 15 minutes on the back, then under an umbrella. By the end of the week, Speaker 1 was golden brown and could spend up to an hour in the sun. Speaker 1 advises to take a watch instead of sunscreen and suggests common sense is necessary. Speaker 0 acknowledges lacking common sense.

Speaker 0 says: We make energy from sunlight. People who are in the sun eat less food. Let your kids be outside in the sun. Take their shirts off. Let them run around barefoot on the grass. You know what you get from the ground? You get electrons. The same thing. It's straight free energy. What runs through a mitochondria that makes all the ATP the electron transfer chain it's not a fat acid train it's not a carbohydrate train protein if the sun is a nutrient it is not out to kill you The idea that the sun is giving you cancer is the most asinine, insane gaslighting, ridiculous statement on earth. It makes all life exist. It charges everything. We are alive because of the power of the sun yet you want to tell people to slather on carcinogenic chemicals, bake it into their skin with the suns and say, oh, that's what's aging you. I'm 51 years old. I've never used sunscreen. I don't have anything done to my face. I eat a ton of meat and I drive a convertible. I want as much as I possibly can get. You know, because it makes me younger. They're lying to you. They've lied about almost everything. Do the opposite of what the government says.