I Link It: 10 Best and Worst Cities for Your Skin Thursday 30 August, 2012
Guess what? Your city may be partially to blame for your skin woes and health. Check out DailyGlow.com’s top 10 best and worst cities for your delicate dermis.
You know how we’re always fighting free radicals—those crazy molecules that like to steal electrons from our stable ones, compromising cell health? This leads to premature aging and possibly, in worst-case scenarios, cancer. When it comes to skin, that’s where we tend to be fighting the hardest in terms of beauty. Skincare products purport to prevent further free-radical damage or reverse current and past damage; you’d be hard-pressed to find a modern skin item that didn’t utilize antioxidants, the natural thwart to free radicals. And pollution is one of the biggest churner-outers of free radicals—but how do you escape pollution if you live in the big city?
A good question, yes, and DailyGlow.com may have the answer: Move. The beauty site put together a list of the top 55 Best and Worst Cities for Your Skin (below) as well as a slide show about The 10 Best Cities for Skin, and let me say this: I’ve lived in three of the cities listed in the top 55 (Boston, NYC and Los Angeles). Not surprisingly, “low-air-quality” Los Angeles is on the 10 Worst List; commuters clog up the air with so much exhaust that it’s not surprising skin suffers there. But I’m a little shocked by NYC being a good skin host; there are so many smokers here! But I suppose the fact that skyscrapers abound and, therefore, block UV rays, causing Manhattan denizens to get very little sunlight in their lives, skin cancer rates are low—which is good news for skin.
Check out the list, which was compiled by pulling together data like dermatologists per capita, skin-cancer rates, climate statistics, healthy-lifestyle indicators, and more, to find out if you may want to pack your bags for the sake of your skin.
Do you live in a best or worst skin city? Would you move to better your skin health?