In fairness to the Eades', I think they make some very worthy points in their book.

Recalling their case from memory - so please check for yourselves as my memory ain't the best - the tanning and burning is done by the UVB while the long term damage is done by UVA. They further claim that even the best wide spectrum sunsreens only block about half of the UVA.

As a result, we slather on a bunch of sunscreen which allows us to avoid our body's primary warning sign - namely that we are getting too much UVA - by turning pink and starting to burn in response to the UVB. As a result, we continue to stay out and absorb tons of UVA.

Furthermore, while they argue for building up a tan in order to allow the skin pigment to block the UVA and recommend not using a sunscreen because of its ability to allow us to overdose on UVA, they also emphasize the importance of NOT letting yourself burn.

As fair-skinned as I am this is the policy that I had to follow growing up - I wore long sleeved shirts and long legged pants all summer long. I've had two really nasty (blistering) sunburns in my life - one when I was eight and one when I was twelve. The second put second degree burns over more than 50% of my body. Not a fun time.

I still follow this basic practice today. I use sunscreen if I'm going to be out in the sun for an extended period of time, but I also keep the amount of exposed skin to a minimum.

I haven't decided if I'm going to try to get anything resembling a tan this summer or not. I have noticed that my tolerance to the sun has significantly improved and I actually have a pale tan on my forearms. If I do try to tan, it will not be anything deep. Just a mild tan so that I can tolerate longer periods of exposure without sunscreen. I will still follow the "minimal skin" rule whenever I'm out in the sun for any length of time.