I thought the argument was not that CFCs caused the hole, or it's seasonal fluctuation, over the Antarctic, but the extent of the fluctuation. And the seasonal maximum of the hole size (area of complete depletion) being much larger, indicated a general reduction of ozone overall, at high altitudes?
The hole itself wouldn't have many people directly under it.....even fewer sunbathing. But if it's an indicator of an overall reduction, then we'd all be subject to more exposure.
That said, I would think it would be fairly easy to measure the level of UV (A,B,C) reaching us everywhere else.
