An action spectrum for ultraviolet radiation-induced immunosuppression in humans

Background The immune‐suppressive effects of sunlight play a central role in skin carcinogenesis. Ultraviolet (UV) B radiation is highly immunosuppressive even at suberythemal doses, and longwave UVA is now also recognized to cause immunosuppression in humans. The relative contributions of UVA and UVB to immunosuppression by incidental daily sun exposure are, however, unclear. Objectives We previously determined wavelength dependencies for immunosuppression by UVB and UVA wavebands in humans. We now aimed to calculate relative and solar immune‐suppressive effectiveness across the UVB and UVA spectra. Methods We used the nickel model of recall contact hypersensitivity to determine UV immunosuppression dose responses and minimum immune suppression doses (MISDs) at 11 narrowbands from 289 to 392 nm. The relative immune‐suppressive effectiveness of each narrowband was then determined as 1/MISD vs. wavelength. This curve was multiplied by the solar spectrum to show the relative immune‐suppressive effectiveness of each waveband in sunlight. Results We found peaks of immune‐suppressive effectiveness in the UVB waveband at 300 nm and in the UVA at 370 nm. Because of the far greater amount of longwave UVA in sunlight, the relative solar immune‐suppressive effectiveness of UVA was threefold higher than that of UVB at doses equivalent to sun exposure from normal daily activities. Conclusions Longwave UVA, which abuts the visible light spectrum and is less effectively filtered by sunscreens than UVB, is likely to be the largest contributor to immunosuppression resulting from incidental daily sun exposure.     

UVA tanning devices interact with solar-simulated UV radiation in skin tumor development in hairless mice

Summary The carcinogenic effect of three UVA tanning sources was studied in lightly pigmented hairless mice. The three tanning sources (Bellarium-S SA-1-12, Philips TL 09R and Philips TL 10R) have different emission spectra, and emit different amounts of UVB. Radiation from the tanning sources was administered for 20 min/day, 5 day/week in daily doses equivalent to those used in suntan salons. The radiation was given alone or after 12 weeks of exposure to solar-simulated UV radiation (SOLAR UV) (10min/day, 4 day/week; daily dose, 19.5 kJ/m² UVA and 3.9 kJ/m² UVB). Irradiation with Bellarium-S SA-1-12 for 47 weeks and Philips TL 09R for 74 weeks induced skin tumours in 20/20 and 13/20 of the animals, respectively. When irradiation with Bellarium-S SA-1-12 and Philips TL 09R was administered after 12 weeks of SOLAR-UV exposure, a strong enhancement of SOLAR-UV-induced photocarcinogenesis was observed (p<0.001). Irradiation with Philips TL 10R was only slightly carcinogenic, and during 85 weeks of irradiation only one skin tumor appeared in a group of 20 mice. However, when irradiation with Philips TL 10R was administered after 12 weeks of exposure to SOLAR UV, an enhancement of SOLAR-UV-induced carcinogenesis was observed (p<0.001). Our results suggest that the hazards of exposure to commercial tanning devices are increased when they are used after a period of natural sun exposure. Even tanning sources with a low carcinogenic potential are able to increase SOLAR-UV-induced carcinogenesis significantly.     

Tanning facility use: are we exceeding Food and Drug Administration limits?

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends exposure limits for tanning bed use. Tanning patrons may not be following these recommendations and may be overexposed to damaging ultraviolet radiation (UV). OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to assess tanning patrons' adherence to FDA-recommended exposure limits and to measure the amount of UVA and UVB radiation emitted by tanning beds. METHODS: A community-based survey was administered during routine state inspections of North Carolina tanning facilities (n = 50). At each facility, patron records were randomly selected (n = 483) for a survey of exposure records, and UVA and UVB outputs were measured for each tanning bed. RESULTS: The recommended limits were exceeded by 95% of patrons, and 33% of patrons began tanning at the maximum doses recommended for maintenance tanning. Average tanning bed output was 192.1 W/m(2) UVA and 0.35 W/m(2) erythemally weighted UVB. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions for tanning bed operators and patrons are needed to increase compliance with federally recommended exposure limits.     

Artificial and natural ultraviolet radiation exposure: beliefs and behaviour of 7200 French adults

Background Despite the increasing use of indoor tanning facilities, little is known regarding the behaviour of adults with respect to artificial and natural ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure and the relationship between the two forms of exposure. Objectives To describe the beliefs and behaviour of French middle‐aged volunteers regarding artificial and natural UV exposure. Methods Cross‐sectional study of a French national cohort using a self‐completed questionnaire. Results Participants were identified as ‘indoor UV tanners’ (n= 1076) and as ‘non‐users’ (n= 6124). Predictor factors associated with indoor tanning were gender, age, smoking, phototype, region of residence, sun exposure during hobbies, voluntary sun exposure in particular during the hottest hours of the day, nudism practice, facial sunscreen habits, sunglass use, importance for lying in the sun and the claim ‘ever heard of melanoma’. Limitations The quality of information may be limited by the data collection method. Conclusion Whereas indoor tanning should be discouraged, it seems that indoor tanners are also regular sunbathers unconcerned about the risk of photoageing and skin cancer occurrence. Moreover, indoor tanners seem to have more behavioural risk factors for cancer, such as smoking.     

Cumulative UV radiation dose and outcome in clinical practice: effectiveness of trioxsalen bath PUVA with minimal UVA exposure

BACKGROUND: The cumulative artificial ultraviolet (UV) exposure dose of dermatological patients was prospectively monitored in clinical conditions for a total of 2 years (August 1997 - July 1999). We focused on whole body UV treatments, i.e. the trioxsalen (TMP) bath PUVA, the broad-band UVB, and the UVA plus UVB phototherapy. METHODS: Irradiance of the UV devices was calibrated with a spectroradiometer. The cumulative UV doses received by the patients were recorded. A visual analog scale scoring system (VAS) was employed to assess the improvement of various skin conditions at the end of the treatment course. RESULTS: The analysis included 265 patients (141 females and 124 males) and a total of 311 UV treatment courses. Treatments consisted of 86 courses of TMP bath PUVA for psoriasis with a mean cumulative UVA dose of 3.54 J/cm2 and an improvement rate of 89%. For other conditions, 30 courses were needed, with a cumulative UVA dose of 1.47 J/cm2 and an improvement rate of 76%. Altogether, 47 UVB courses were undertaken for psoriasis, and the mean cumulative unweighted UV dose was 2.20 J/cm2, equivalent to 85 standard erythema doses (SED), and an improvement rate of 85%. A total of 25 UVB courses was used for other skin conditions with a mean UV dose of 1.05 J/ cm2, equivalent to 40 SED, and an improvement rate of 71%. A total of 123 courses of UVA plus UVB phototherapy were completed, resulting in a mean cumulative dose of 73.01 J/cm2 for UVA and 0.75 J/cm2 for the unweighted UVB, equivalent to 29 SED. The VAS improvement rate was 85%. CONCLUSION: The exceptionally low mean cumulative UVA dose in the TMP bath PUVA, taken together with the previous report showing no increase in the risk of squamous cell carcinoma or cutaneous malignant melanoma after TMP bath PUVA, suggests that TMP bath PUVA is an effective and safe therapeutic option.     

Contrasting effects of an ultraviolet B and an ultraviolet A tanning lamp on interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor-α and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated that a tanning lamp emitting predominantly ultraviolet (UV) A induces significant yields of the type of potentially mutagenic DNA damage that are associated with the onset of skin cancer (i.e. cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers). UV-induced immunosuppression is also an important event leading to skin cancer. OBJECTIVES: To the modulation of key immunological molecules following exposure to a broad-spectrum UVB lamp and a predominantly UVA-emitting tanning lamp using model in vitro systems. METHODS: We compared secretion and mRNA expression of interleukin (IL)-6 and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha in normal human epidermal keratinocytes, and interferon (IFN)-gamma-induced intracellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1 in normal human fibroblasts irradiated in vitro with a broad-spectrum UVB lamp or with a Philips 'Performance' tanning lamp. RESULTS: With broad-spectrum UVB irradiation, upregulation of IL-6 and TNF-alpha mRNA was detected 6 h after irradiation, and a dose-dependent increase of cytokines in the supernatants of irradiated cells was found 24 h after irradiation. In contrast, there was no cytokine secretion and little evidence for mRNA upregulation following exposure to a tanning lamp. When cells were exposed first to broad-spectrum UVB, then the tanning lamp, UVB-induced cytokine secretion was inhibited, although mRNA levels were upregulated to a level close to that observed with UVB alone. By using a Schott WG 320 nm filter to attenuate the level of UVB relative to UVA emitted by the tanning lamp, the inhibition of cytokine secretion was shown to be associated with UVA exposure. Both UV sources inhibited IFN-gamma-induced ICAM-1 mRNA expression in a dose-dependent fashion. By using a Schott WG 335 nm filter, inhibition of ICAM-1 mRNA expression by the tanning lamp was shown to be associated with UVB exposure. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that UV sources emitting different levels of UVA and UVB have differential effects on the modulation of different immunoregulatory molecules, and indicate that there are potential interactions between these wavelengths.     

Synergistic effects of long‐wavelength ultraviolet A1 and visible light on pigmentation and erythema

Ultraviolet (UV) radiations from sunlight that reach the surface of the earth are categorized as UVB (wavelength range 280–320 nm) and UVA (320–400 nm). The UVA is further divided into UVA2 (320–340 nm) and UVA1 (340–400 nm). In the United States and other nations, rules have been set outlining how products that are designed to protect against UVB and UVA should be tested, and there are also strict rules about how these products can be labeled. The SPF (sun protection factor) mainly shows the level of protection against UVB only, and SPF along with “Broad Spectrum” on a label shows protection against both UVB and UVA. The criteria that decide whether or not manufacturers can claim a product gives broad spectrum protection, in the US, primarily focus on protection offered below 370 nm. Visible light (VL), which ranges from 400 nm to 700 nm, is a spectrum of wavelengths that are visible to the human eye. To date, only the UV part of sunlight, which is not visible light, has been considered to cause photodamage (damage caused by sunlight) resulting in skin cancers and photoaging (skin ageing due to the sun). The visible part of the sunlight was considered relatively harmless. This study, from the US, investigated skin responses, in terms of sunburn and tanning, caused by visible light in combination with the tail end of long wavelength UVA1 (referred to as VL+UVA1, 370–700 nm) and compared them to those caused by pure visible light (400–700 nm). The findings of the study show that skin responses, in terms of pigmentation (colouring/tanning) and erythema (redness/sunburn), resulting from VL+UVA1 were stronger than those induced by pure visible light alone. This implies that wavelengths that current broad spectrum sunscreens do not cover can affect pigmentation and erythema. These wavelengths may have a role in conditions aggravated by sun exposure such as melasma and post‐inflammatory hyperpigmentation, especially in patients with skin of color. The development of prodcts that protect against visible light and long wavelength UVA1 will be helpful for these, as well as for the management of certain skin disorders triggered by UVA1 and VL.     

Sun protection and sunscreen labeling--an update

Sun exposure is today well recognized as having an adverse effect on human skin. Part of sun radiation, ultraviolet radiation A (UVA) and B (UVB), can modify skin structures and induce short-term skin changes (sunburn, tanning, hyperkeratinization, brown spots) and long-term skin damages (accelerated skin aging and skin cancers). Protection against both UVA and UVB is very important, therefore sun protection by clothes, avoiding sun exposure and correct use of sunscreens are important means to reduce short- and long-term solar radiation effects. The recommendation of appropriate sunscreen by doctors and cosmetic professionals (the function of skin type and sun radiation intensity) is today easier due to the recently implemented European uniform labeling system of sunscreens and detailed information for consumers.     

French teenagers and artificial tanning

Background  Exposure to solar and artificial ultraviolet (UV) radiations is a major risk factor for skin cancers. France has enacted one of the strictest laws that, notably, restrict tanning‐bed access to adults ≥18 years old. Objective  We evaluated artificial tanning behaviours of French teenagers (11–17 years old): sunless‐tanning products, sunlamps and artificial tanning beds. Methods  An anonymous questionnaire evaluating sunburn history, skin phototype, behaviours with sunless‐tanning products and indoor tanning, and parents’ behaviours was distributed to students enrolled in two middle and high schools in Antony, a typical city of the middle class French population, located in the Paris suburbs. Results  Among 713 teenagers (mean age: 13.5 years: male/female: 1.1) responding, more than half declared that it was important to be tanned during the summer, 1% reported having already used tanning pills, 9.9% tanning creams and 1.4% indoor tanning. Female teenagers significantly more frequently resorted to indoor tanning (P = 0.02), cited the importance of being tanned all year long (P < 0.0001), used tanning pills (P < 0.0001) or tanning creams (P < 0.006), and their parents relied on indoor tanning (P < 0.0001). Profiles of tanning‐pill and ‐cream users were similar. Mean ages for the two groups were comparable. Conclusion  French regulations for indoor tanning seem quite effective. Our analyses revealed a typical teenager profile with sun‐exposure risk behaviours, for example, indoor tanning, and use of tanning pills or creams. They could be a selective target for sun‐protection information campaigns.     

Comparison between seasons of the ultraviolet environment in the shade of trees in Australia

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This paper has considered the erythemal UV (UVery), UVA and visible irradiances in the shade of Australian trees for each season at a sub-tropical southern hemisphere site. METHODS: The irradiances in tree shade have been measured with radiometers as a percentage of the irradiances in the sun for each season of the year. RESULTS: Although the solar irradiances are lower in winter, the percentages of the UV in tree shade compared to the UV in full sun are marginally higher (by up to 7%) in the winter compared to summer. The range of percentages for UVery was up to double that of the percentages of the visible waveband. The percentages for UVery were also higher than for the UVA waveband. The percentages of the irradiances in the tree shade compared to full sun are 8-14% lower at noon compared to the morning and afternoon for the UVery waveband. The ratio of UVA to UVery is lower in the tree shade compared to the full sun. CONCLUSIONS: The UVA to UVery ratio is expected to be even lower in the tree shade as a result of ozone depletion. This, combined with the visible irradiances in the tree shade not being a reliable indication of the biologically damaging UV irradiances, has consequences for public health and skin cancer prevention.     

Cutaneous solar ultraviolet exposure and clinical aspects of photodamage

Solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation reaching the earth is a combination of UVB (290-320 nm) and UVA (320-400 nm) wavelengths. Since UVA is less energetic than UVB, UVB has long been thought to be the factor responsible for the damaging effects of solar radiation. But with modern tools such as in vitro models, it has been proven that UVA plays a major role. The objective of this review is to show how skin may be exposed to UV light and to highlight the clinical aspects of UV-induced skin damages with the respective contribution of UVB or UVA. Even if UVA is less energetic than UVB, it is more abundant and penetrates deeper into the skin, reaching as far as the dermis. Various factors also influence skin exposure to UV light: the latitude, season, and time of the day. Acute as well as chronic sun exposure induces short- and long-term clinical damages. Erythema and pigmentation are immediate responses of normal human skin exposed to UV radiation. The long-term effects are photoaging and photocarcinogenesis. In particular, UVA appears to play a major role in the deterioration of dermal structure leading to the photoaged appearance of the skin.     

Dosimetry of solar ultraviolet radiation. Daily and monthly changes in Paris

The intensity of ultraviolet A and B radiations was measured in Paris (48 degrees North) by means of silicon photoelectric cells (Osram Centra dosimeter) from December, 1984 till February, 1986. The results, which must be regarded as approximate, are expressed as physical units (mW/cm2) and biological units (minimal erythema dose/hour). For sunny days two curves are presented separately for UVB and UVA: daily variations in radiation (hourly measurements) and daily variations at 11 hours (solar time) during one year. Maximum irradiation was observed at noon in early July: UVB 0.15 mW/cm2, UVA 5.4 mW/cm2. Between December and July the amount of UVB radiation was multiplied by 14 and that of UVA radiation by 9. For subjects with clear photo-type and when the sun was at its zenith, an MED per hour was obtained from May 1 onwards. Within a day, 30 p. 100 (summer) and 50 p. 100 (winter) of erythema-producing UV intensity were delivered between 11 and 13 hours (solar time). This kind of study has numerous clinical applications: advice regarding exposure to sun rays, dosing of heliotherapy, epidemiological data concerning photodermatitis (circumstances of exposure, UV threshold dose) and photocarcinogenesis (determination of annual MED doses in relation to areas of uncovered skin and occupational exposure to sun rays). Other studies on the French territory will provide a map of UV irradiation.     

Ultraviolet light hardening in polymorphous light eruption--a controlled study comparing different emission spectra.

Polymorphous light eruption (PLE) is a common disorder characterized by a delayed, abnormal response to ultraviolet (UV) radiation, with a varied morphology of itching efflorescences on sun-exposed areas of the skin. Thirty-one PLE subjects were treated with either UVA (340-400 nm) or UVA and UVB (300-400 nm) phototherapy during spring 1987 (10 exposures to UV light). They were randomly allocated to these 2 groups. For subjects of the UVA group, the applied dose corresponded to their individual minimal tanning dose; for subjects of the UVA and UVB group it corresponded to approximately 3/4 of their individual minimal erythema dose. The sun protection effect was studied by a high dose of UVA (80-160 J/cm2; 340-440 nm) after the treatment period, by analysing the histidine content of the stratum corneum and the urocanic acid photoisomerization, and by evaluating the subjects' diaries. The patients were asked to expose their skin to sunlight at least 3 times after UV hardening in the following 2-10 weeks. The results of both the UVA provocation and of the natural sun exposure confirmed the success of UV hardening without the occurrence of severe side effects. The content of histidine and of its metabolite urocanic acid in stratum corneum was significantly increased during the treatment. These data are interpreted to be biochemical markers for improved sun protection.     

UVA-induced erythema, pigmentation, and skin surface temperature changes are irradiance dependent

Human cutaneous erythemogenic and melanogenic responses to long-wave (UVA) ultraviolet radiation were investigated using irradiances ranging from 5-50 mW/cm2. Skin surface temperature changes resulting from the different irradiances were also compared. In general, threshold doses for erythema and pigmentation were higher when UVA was administered at the lowest irradiance (5 mW/cm2) than at the highest (50 mW/cm2). Erythema was maximal immediately after exposure to UVA. The most intense responses (erythema with edema, or intense pigmentation) were induced more frequently by the highest irradiance. Components of both the erythema and the pigment response to UVA are therefore irradiance-dependent. The greatest increase in skin surface temperature was observed after exposure to the highest irradiance.     

Effects of UVA radiation on an established immune response in humans and sunscreen efficacy

Abstract: It is well established that ultraviolet radiation has immunomodulatory effects which may be involved in skin cancer. Recent studies have shown that UVA radiation (320–400 nm) as well as UVB (290–320 nm) is immunosuppressive. This means that sunscreens which mainly absorb UVB (protection against erythema) may be less effective in preventing UVR-induced immunosuppression than broad-spectrum products. We have studied the effects of UVA exposure on the human delayed-type hypersensitivity response (DTH) and compared the efficacy of sunscreens having different levels of UVA protection under both solar-simulated radiation (SSR) chronic exposures or acute exposure and outdoor real-life solar exposure conditions. DTH was assessed using recall antigens. Our studies clearly demonstrate the role of UVA in the induction of photoimmunosuppression together with the need for sunscreen products providing efficient photoprotection throughout the entire UV spectrum. These data suggest that sun protection factor may not be sufficient to predict the ability of sunscreens for protection from UV-induced immune suppression. Determining the level of UVA protection is particularly necessary, because UVA seems to have a relatively low contribution to erythema but is highly involved in immunosuppression.     

The Relationship among Minimal Erythema Dose,Minimal Delayed Tanning Dose,and Skin Color

The relationship among minimal erythema dose (MED), minimal delayed tanning dose (MDTD), and skin color was examined in 16 healthy volunteers using three different spectra. The subjects were exposed to UVB, UVA+B, and UV+Visible light (UV+Visible) with a xenon arc solar simulator as a light source. The MEDs for UVB and UVA+B were less than the MDTDs, whereas the MED for UV+Visible was higher than the MDTD. There was no significant correlation between the MED and the MDTD for UVB or UVA+B. The MED for UV+Visible was significantly correlated to the MDTD (p<0.01). Skin color significantly correlated with MEDs for UVB and UVA+B (p<0.01), but not for UV+Visible. There was no significant correlation between skin color and the MDTD for any spectra. From these results, it is suggested that the relationship between erythemal and melanogenic responses is dependent on spectral bands of the light source and that skin color is a predictor of UV-induced erythema.     

UVA1 impairs the repair of UVB‐induced DNA damage in normal human melanocytes

The exact correlation between melanoma and sun‐light is still a controversially debated issue. Although natural sunlight contains various ratios of UVA and UVB, most investigators so far focused on the effects of single solar wavebands and neglected possible interactions. Therefore, in this study primary human melanocytes of three donors were simultaneously exposed to physiologic doses of UVA1 and UVB. Effects on apoptosis were analysed using annexin V assays and cell death ELISAs, and effects on DNA damage were investigated using southwestern slot blots. While UVA1 did not influence UVB‐induced apoptosis, UVA1 impaired the repair of UVB‐induced cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPD) as the amount of CPD was 1.8 times higher in UVA1 + UVB than in UVB only exposed melanocytes six hours after irradiation. We conclude that UVA1 might contribute to melanomagenesis as it partially inhibits the repair of UVB‐induced CPD in human melanocytes while it does not affect UVB‐mediated apoptosis.     

Long-term evaluation of erythema and pigmentation induced by ultraviolet radiations of different wavelengths

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Although multiple studies have been reported about the biological effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiations, the comparative and long-term reactions of human skin by several different UV-wavebands were not reported. The aim of this study was to investigate a time course of erythema and pigmentation induced by UVA 1, broad-band UVA (BBUVA), narrow-band UVB (NBUVB) and broad-band UVB (BBUVB). METHODS: Ten volunteers participated in this study for 6 months. Four skin areas, from the back of each subject, were irradiated with two minimal erythema dose (MED) of four different UV wavelengths corresponding to UVA 1, BBUVA, NBUVB and BBUVB. Skin color changes were evaluated by visual scoring and values were converted into the L*a*b color system. RESULTS: For both UVA 1 and BBUVA, erythema and pigmentation were most pronounced immediately and 1 h after exposure. Thereafter, erythema rapidly diminished but pigmentation persisted throughout the study. For both NBUVB and BBUVB, test areas reacted with erythema of maximum intensity at 1 and 2 days, respectively. A maximum tanning was reached at 3-6 days for NBUVB and 4-7 days for BBUVB, and the return toward the original color point was at 1 and 3 months, respectively. No significant difference was found in visual and colorimetric evaluation for the time course of skin color changes. CONCLUSION: Two MED of UVA produced far prolonged erythema and pigmentation than UVB. For UVA, UVA 1 and BBUVA showed similar intensity and time course of skin reaction. For UVB, erythema and pigmentation produced by NBUVB were milder in intensity and shorter in time course than those by BBUVB. These results would provide standard data on time courses and intensity of skin color changes by different UV wavelengths.     

The solar ultraviolet B radiation protection provided by shading devices with regard to its diffuse component

Background: The composition of the incident solar global ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation with regard to its beam and diffuse radiation fractions is highly relevant with regard to outdoor sun protection. This is especially true with respect to sun protection during leisure‐time outdoor sun exposure at the shore and pools, where people tend to escape the sun under shade trees or different types of shading devices, e.g., umbrellas, overhangs, etc., believing they offer protection from the erythemal solar radiation. The degree of sun protection offered by such devices is directly related to the composition of the solar global UVB radiation, i.e., its beam and diffuse fractions. Methods: The composition of the incident solar global UVB radiation can be determined by measuring the global UVB (using Solar Light Co. Inc., Model 501A UV‐Biometer) and either of its components. The beam component of the UVB radiation was determined by measuring the normal incidence beam radiation using a prototype, tracking instrument consisting of a Solar Light Co. Inc. Model 501A UV‐Biometer mounted on an Eppley Solar Tracker Model St‐1. The horizontal beam component of the global UVB radiation was calculated from the measured normal incidence using a simple geometric correlation and the diffuse component is determined as the difference between global and horizontal beam radiations. Results: Horizontal and vertical surfaces positioned under a horizontal overhang/sunshade or an umbrella are not fully protected from exposure to solar global UVB radiation. They can receive a significant fraction of the UVB radiation, depending on their location beneath the shading device, the umbrella radius and the albedo (reflectance) of the surrounding ground surface in the case of a vertical surface. Conclusions: Shading devices such as an umbrella or horizontal overhang/shade provide relief from the solar global radiation and do block the solar global UVB radiation to some extent; nevertheless, a significant fraction of the solar global UVB radiation does penetrate this supposedly ‘protective or comfort zone’. As a result, it is imperative to either apply sunscreen or cover up the exposed body surfaces even when under such shading devices.