While it is of academic interest as to the variations at similar latitude locations and resolving he differences in those variations surely the point of the exercise (apart from academic interest which is important) is to compare data on such things as the comparative incidence of uv damage such as skin cancer and other impacts of uv on people. I.e. plot the comparative % incidence of uv damage at a range of global locations and theorise if the differences would be explained by ‘Covering up’
The sort of study you advocate has been carried out a long time ago by epidemiologists, like my old colleague Mark Ellwood, who used to work at the University of Otago. I'll dig one out that I was involved with last century and may comment about it in a later post. Of course differences in skin type and behaviour (e.g., dress patterns) between regions are important too.
While it is of academic interest as to the variations at similar latitude locations and resolving he differences in those variations surely the point of the exercise (apart from academic interest which is important) is to compare data on such things as the comparative incidence of uv damage such as skin cancer and other impacts of uv on people. I.e. plot the comparative % incidence of uv damage at a range of global locations and theorise if the differences would be explained by ‘Covering up’
Hi Stan
The sort of study you advocate has been carried out a long time ago by epidemiologists, like my old colleague Mark Ellwood, who used to work at the University of Otago. I'll dig one out that I was involved with last century and may comment about it in a later post. Of course differences in skin type and behaviour (e.g., dress patterns) between regions are important too.
R