# Sunscreen



## faerierose (Jul 9, 2006)

I don't get it








I grew up in southern California, I hardly ever wore sunscreen. I don't burn easily (my kids either). I don't understand what all the fuss is about. From what I understand sunscreen doesn't reduce the risk of melanoma. I can't bring myself to slather on god knows what kind of chemicals everyday. Can someone please explain why sunscreen is such a big deal?


----------



## Ironica (Sep 11, 2005)

My understanding is that sunburn increases the risk of melanoma. However... sunscreen use doesn't necessarily reduce the risk of sunburn, because it slows down the body's natural protection (in the form of melanin production and darkening) so if you forget it one day, you're more likely to burn.

Also, religious use of sunscreen decreases your vitamin D production, which isn't good.

We rarely use sunscreen in our family. I'm the only one who's really inclined to burn; DH is 1/4 Jewish and I guess gets sun-resistant skin from that part of his family ;-) DS inherited that property. They do use sunscreen at DS's school, and I sent some with him that's fragrance-free so he wouldn't come home smelling like fake flowers. For them I think it's a licensing requirement, so not using it isn't an option. I slather it on for summer trips to Disneyland and stuff like that, but don't usually wear it for day-to-day outings.


----------



## bandgeek (Sep 12, 2006)

Everyone is just now realizing that sunscreen doesn't protect as well as we thought it did. So now they are passing laws that the products have to state specifically what protection your are getting. I'm still not convinced it protects all that well.

I have redheads and I don't slather them up. I try to provide them with shady areas to play, put hats on them, and just overall limit their exposure to the sun. I don't isolate them, I just don't let DS run around in just shorts on a sunny day for 5 hours straight. I take them out earlier in the day and after about 4pm or so. DS has had two sunburns. Neither was bad and both could have been prevented, but I slacked off on the "limiting time outside" thing.







He's worn sunscreen about 4 times in his life.


----------



## faerierose (Jul 9, 2006)

Well, I feel better now, I'm not the only one


----------



## odenata (Feb 1, 2005)

I do sunscreen when we are going to be out for longer periods, but I don't ever just do sunscreen. We do hats and long sleeves as well.

Here's an interesting article on sunscreen. Personally, I don't have concern about the chemicals in sunscreen, but do have concerns about it's non-effectiveness.

Essentially, sunscreen has never been shown to be very effective against preventing melanoma, the most dangerous form of skin cancer (although there is evidence it reduces the other two types of skin cancer, that aren't as serious). And because people slather sunscreen on and then think it's okay to spend long amounts of time in direct sun, and don't get burned, they greatly increase their chances of melanoma through longer sun exposure. A better route is to spend shorter amounts of time in the sun and use hats and rashguards or long sleeve shirts.


----------



## WhaleinGaloshes (Oct 9, 2006)

Here's my issue with the Mother Jones article and it's message (and please notice, it's dated *1998*)

It says:

Quote:

"But most sunscreens do not offer protection against UV-A, the harmful, longer-wavelength UV light."
But the up-to-date afaik Skin Deep database says

Quote:

"Fully 13% of high SPF sunscreens (SPF of at least 30) protect only from sunburn (UVB radiation), and do not contain ingredients known to protect from UVA radiation, the sun rays linked to skin damage and aging, immune system problems, and potentially skin cancer."
13% is hardly 'most' and the conventional wisdom that sunscreens do not typically protect from UVA radiation is antiquated.

There are some very low-ingredient, mineral sunscreens that have been demonstrated effective and stable. I have no problems with people choosing not to use them and using other methods to mitigate sun exposure (or not, for that matter) but I think sometimes the anti-sunscreen message begins to cast unnecessary aspersions.


----------



## maplesugar (May 24, 2005)

I read somewhere that adding flax seed oil to one's diet can give a natural resistence to sunburn.

I really donn't trust the chemichal sunscreens. I think we all need sun to a certain extent, and I tend to reject putting chemicals on my skin everydat.

I am lucky to have a natural resistence to sun, though. Looks like my kids do as well. I guess if we went to Hawaii we might take measures to keep our skin protected, but for everyday northern living I don't find sunscreen neccesary.


----------



## Kessed (Nov 28, 2007)

I put a hat on DD pretty much every time we go outside during the heat of the day. So 10am to 4pm. But unless we're going to be out for more than an hour or so - I don't put on sunscreen.

If we're heading out for a full day of outside fun - then I put some on.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

I live in So Cal, and there is just no way we can go about our days without using sunscreen much of the time. Especially in the summer. We can spend a whole day at the beach, hours at the park, hike, swim, and so on, I guess you can avoid the sun but it means staying indoors a large part of the day which we just can't do. We use hats, long sleeve swim shirts, and longer shorts, we protect as much as we can, but sometimes it's just hot and we wear less clothing. Even with a hat my kid can get too much sun on his face. So we do sunscreens that protect against UVA and UVB, ones recommended by Skin Deep. The beach can be especially brutal where the sand and water reflects light up, and hats may help but not full protect. With the amount of lifetime exposure we have here, I just can't see not using protection. You see folks who never wore sunscreen and how they look now and it's not pretty. I can't exactly cover all my skin while swimming without looking pretty ridiculous! We get plenty of everyday exposure for Vit D purposes, but if we are out for more than a half hour, we wear sunscreen.

As a child when we first moved here I got several serious burns, and I can see the accumluation of all the sun I have had since living here. I have freckles and moles all over the areas that were exposed. My son has never had a burn, never, and I am very proud of that fact. Bottom line? A tan, even if it is somewhat protective, means skin DAMAGE.

I have known several people with melanoma. My partner's pal in college was a fellow sunbather with her, and they were quite tan. Then at the age of 26 she developed melanoma, and a huge section of skin was removed from her back. She was told to avoid the sun at all costs, which she did not take. She and my partner continued to sunbathe. And yes, the melanoma returned, and she actually died. My partner was tan when I met her, and she told me this story at some point, I asked her, why do you do it, if you know it killed your friend? She stopped.

Since we have tried hard to avoid the sun, and wear sunscreen the rest of the time, we both look much younger than our real ages. I stopped sunbathing as a senior in high school after noticing my mother and her sun damaged skin. I didn't want to look like that at her age, and thankfully I don't.

For our children, if we are indeed active and out in places where the sun can be brutal (like So Cal), I think as parents we should take as much precaution as possible, including wearing sunscreen where needed. There are good options on the skin deep pages.

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/bro...=1&haz=g&eff=g


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

you might also want to investigate the fact that all the countries in the world that PROMOTE sunscreen use (And have the highest rates of use like Aus and the USA) also the highest rates of melenoma. it is no coincidence.







if you look at how sunscreen works on the skin to block UV rays by basically "attracting them" then deflecting . it is alarming!

Another thing to look at that is the seriously SCARY loopholes in the FDA safety & testing standards pertaining to topical skincare products. (many in the skincare and dermatology fields can attest to the danger of sunscreen). 35% of any sunscreen applied to the skin is absorbed directly into the blood stream. The body has no way to detoxify these man made chemicals and they are stored in your fat supplies. (potential cancer risk in itself) so I guess you have to choose which is worse! 90% of sunscreens on the market contain carcinogenic ingredients. (even some of the so called natural ones!) but also because of our countries standards one will never know the true safety of these products unfortunately!

personally I won't use chemical sunscreens. and I live in southern az. neither me or my kids have had a sunburn that I can remember (while living here anyway I got lots of sunburns as a kid unfortunately!







) we are all are super fair skinned. I just basically stay out of the sun for the most part.

(I had a precancerous carcinoma removed at 19yo so I am pretty careful about sun exposure in general now)


----------



## abomgardner417 (Jun 19, 2007)

I also question the chemicals and effectiveness of sunscreen, but since we spend many full days in the sun on Lake Erie we're just not able to do w/o. I've been severly burned so many times even while wearing a long sleeved shirt, hat, and pants. If I don't put it on w/i an hour I will be burnt to a crisp. I also don't want to look like my dad who is clearly white in the winter, but who ends up looking like an overdone turkey by June. It's disgusting but him and his girlfriend think they look great. He's also having a ton of pre-cancerous spots removed next week. I just try to cover up and get in the shade as much as possible and use a sunscreen that has the least amount of chemicals possible.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abomgardner417* 
I also question the chemicals and effectiveness of sunscreen, but since we spend many full days in the sun on Lake Erie we're just not able to do w/o. I've been severly burned so many times even while wearing a long sleeved shirt, hat, and pants. If I don't put it on w/i an hour I will be burnt to a crisp. I also don't want to look like my dad who is clearly white in the winter, but who ends up looking like an overdone turkey by June. It's disgusting but him and his girlfriend think they look great. He's also having a ton of pre-cancerous spots removed next week. I just try to cover up and get in the shade as much as possible and use a sunscreen that has the least amount of chemicals possible.

yeah see I just tend to avoid the sun during the "peak" hours. when I am in the sun I usually have long sleeves, long skirt,hat on.

btw, you can make a natural sunscreen using various oils and butters!


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
btw, you can make a natural sunscreen using various oils and butters!

Do you have some documentation for this from a legitimate source? Because honestly that sounds pretty counter intuitive.

It's simple. One good sunburn in childhood DOUBLES your risk for skin cancer later on in life.

I burn very easily. When I wear sunscreen, and reapply it properly, I don't burn.


----------



## Kessed (Nov 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
btw, you can make a natural sunscreen using various oils and butters!

Since I seem to remember that things like 'coconut oil' were the main ingredient in the 'tanning lotions' my parents had - I highly doubt your claims. Oils are used to MAGNIFY the suns rays to increase the tan - not block them to protect the sun.


----------



## Ironica (Sep 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal* 
A tan, even if it is somewhat protective, means skin DAMAGE.

A tan means that your skin produced melanin, which was then exposed to sufficient UVA radiation to turn it brown. UVB radiation is what stimulates the melanocytes to produce more melanin, so a really dark tan is only achievable if you get both UVA and UVB exposure.

The production of melanin and the development from red to brown is a natural biological response to the sun. Yes, you can do damage without burning, and getting a really dark tan, for most people, does involve some cellular damage... but I wouldn't equate EVERY instance of tanning with damage.

I've lived in SoCal all my life, have really fair skin (translucent in places), and don't tan easily. I got several nasty sunburns as a kid. Now, I have more freckles on my arms than I used to... but the only moles I have are on parts of me that practically never see the sun.







I don't look my age, either. (Well, I'm starting to now that my hair is graying at the temples... but that's not sun-related as far as I can tell!)


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
Since I seem to remember that things like 'coconut oil' were the main ingredient in the 'tanning lotions' my parents had - I highly doubt your claims. Oils are used to MAGNIFY the suns rays to increase the tan - not block them to protect the sun.

there are plenty of natural ingredients that have natural SPF like qualities. google for info. it's out there! sesame oil and avacado butter are just a couple. (there's others too)

just because coconut scented oil was in your parents tanning lotion does not prove natural methods are not effective. it isn't the oil in itself that is magnifying the sun but the UV "attractors" (not sure of the exact name of the chemical ingredient, but if you research it the info is out there! and it's scary!) oh and natural sunscreens do not also provide "protection" like conventional. they need to be reapplied ALOT. and they are greasy. I am sure someone out there has tried it and can chime in. I prefer to not use sunscreen and just stay out of the sun. (yeah I live in AZ, go figure!)


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
Do you have some documentation for this from a legitimate source? Because honestly that sounds pretty counter intuitive.

It's simple. One good sunburn in childhood DOUBLES your risk for skin cancer later on in life.

I burn very easily. When I wear sunscreen, and reapply it properly, I don't burn.


google it. there's tons of documented info (And studies!) out there if you dig. why counterintuitive? if you understand how sunscreen and sun products work you will know it's not the oils themselves or natural ingredients that are the problem. It is the carcinogenic ingredients that are added to THAT and the chemical processs that ocurrs when applied to the skin and exposed to UV rays. creating free radicals on the skin to conteract free radical UV rays seems pretty counterproductive to me. (and this isn't even to mention the problem of absorption of ingredients and thosefree radicals and man made chemicals that are not proven safe or even studied all that much for that matter) Also I should add the natural sunscreen is just a barrier method. NOT a chemical process like what happens with conventional sunscreen. and it's not nearly as strong as manufactured sunscreens at all. some folks feel it's better than none. I know you can also use the juice of some cacti as sunscreen here in the desert (forget which one, I will look it up)


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

Avacado oil, seasame oil and shea butter do have some sunscreen properties but those are very low, I think around SPF 6 but I haven't looked through that information in awhile.

You can't just toss whatever together and have a natural sunscreen, only specific oils offer any protection and even then it is a minimal amount.


----------



## Kessed (Nov 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
google it. there's tons of documented info (And studies!) out there if you dig.

That's a cop out.

If you want to bring that info to the table - YOU google it.


----------



## cancat (Jun 15, 2004)

I worry that it is not effective, but I put sunscreen on me and my kids because a dear family member died of melanoma, and my dad has had many, many cancerous moles removed as well. I try to limit our exposure, but I also believe that kids need time to play outside...


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
google it. there's tons of documented info (And studies!) out there if you dig. why counterintuitive? if you understand how sunscreen and sun products work you will know it's no the oils or natural ingredients that are the problem. It is the carcinogenic ingredients that are added to THAT and the chemical processs that ocurrs when applied to the skin and exposed to UV rays. Also I should add the natural sunscreen is just a barrier method. NOT a chemical process like what happens with conventional sunscreen. and it's not nearly as strong as manufactured sunscreens at all. some folks feel it's better than none. I know you can also use the juice of some cacti as sunscreen here in the desert (forget which one, I will look it up)

You are mistaken, it is a specific property to certain oils and only a few offer that. It isn't a barrier only or more oils/butters would be effective. They are not.

Only seasame oil, avocado oil and shea butter are effective as far as I am aware, there might be more but not many and like I said, the spf is about 6.

I am NA and I don't bother with much sunscreen, dd has a bit less melatonin than I so I do have her wear some.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abimommy* 
You are mistaken, it is a specific property to certain oils and only a few offer that. It isn't a barrier only or more oils/butters would be effective. They are not.

Only seasame oil, avocado oil and shea butter are effective as far as I am aware, there might be more but not many and like I said, the spf is about 6.


hmm, I still think it is a barrier method because the chemicals don't change the skin composition/chemistry from what I understand. I am no scientist though. I understand it, just not how to explain it!









and I do agree certain ingredients have certain properties. no doubt about that.

yeah and the spf is SUPER low on natural methods. very low and it needs to be applied ALOT. I did try this once and it sucked. (too greasy!) I didn't burn though. I am pretty sure I used the recipe out of _Earthly Bodies Heavenly Hair_


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
no but it is a barrier method because the chemicals don't change the skin composition from what I understand. I am no scientist though. I understand it, just not how to explain it!









i agree the spf is SUPER low on natural methods. very low and it needs to be applied ALOT. I did try this once and it sucked. (too greasy!) I didn't burn though. I am pretty sure I used the recipe out of _Earthly Bodies Heavenly Hair_


meh I am not a chemist and can't explain it either, I just know only a few oils are effective. It isn't precisely a barrier.

I was making lotion that smells good when I read that info not worrying about sunscreen, I don't even burn.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abimommy* 
I don't even burn.









lucky you! I burn in minutes! (and my kids would too!) we just do things in the morning/evening rather than daytime. thankfully it is light until late here!


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
That's a cop out.

If you want to bring that info to the table - YOU google it.

um no, if YOU want the info do your own research.









ETA**

ok I came back to say that was mean. what kind of info do you want? tha oil attracts UV rays or not? or on the harmful ingredients? here's one short article. there are lotsof sources to it you can look up.
http://www.ewg.org/node/26212 (keep in mind this is only talking about 1 ingredient) there are many more loopholes and nasty chemicals and the way the FDA tests safety is a joke, so the truth is NO ONE KNOWS what it is doing to us! but skin cancer rates keep soaring! (yet sunscreen sales & use are up?)









seriously though, there is a ton of info out there and you just gotta wade through it and form your own opinion.

btw I used to put cooking oil on my skin (when I was young a stupid) I didn't burn or tan. funny,eh?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cancat* 
I worry that it is not effective, but I put sunscreen on me and my kids because a dear family member died of melanoma, and my dad has had many, many cancerous moles removed as well. I try to limit our exposure, but I also believe that kids need time to play outside...











I totally understand the dilemma. we each have to make our own choices for our families is what it comes down to. (and research)


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
lucky you! I burn in minutes! (and my kids would too!) we just do things in the morning/evening rather than daytime. thankfully it is light until late here!

Er..well my sisters and I have varying skin tones. We are NA and other stuff and the four of us make a perfect punnet square.

I guess it is a spin on the wheel of genetics, out of all of our kids only one is darker like my older sister and I, the rest get slathered with sunscreen.


----------



## lexbeach (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abimommy* 
I guess it is a spin on the wheel of genetics, out of all of our kids only one is darker like my older sister and I, the rest get slathered with sunscreen.

One of our kids lucked out genetically--their sperm donor and I are both very fair (Scottish and Irish mostly)--but he somehow managed to get my mom's much more olive complexion (which she somehow lucked out in getting herself). He's never gotten the least bit pink or red, even without sunblock on. He just gets beautifully brown. Lucky kid.

My other kids, however, have the fairest skin possible. They will *burn* in five minutes of direct sun without protection. Luckily they are naturally drawn to the shade (as am I), and welcome the relief of wide-brimmed hats (I love the Patagonia ones for the best coverage without being restrictive), and sun-protective clothing. I use as little sunscreen as I can with them, and I use the zinc-based, "better" kind (california baby unscented is our current fave).

I had many sunburns as a kid, and all four of my grandparents have had skin cancer (one has had melanoma). I'm pretty doomed. But so far, none of my kids has had a bad burn, and I'm really hoping to keep it that way!

Lex


----------



## Amydoula (Jun 20, 2004)

We use UV Naturals. It is as the name implies the only sunscreen that I have been able to find that truely has no chemicals. It is SPENDY but worth it. We only apply when we are out for long periods of time during the middle of the day.


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lexbeach* 
One of our kids lucked out genetically--their sperm donor and I are both very fair (Scottish and Irish mostly)--but he somehow managed to get my mom's much more olive complexion (which she somehow lucked out in getting herself). He's never gotten the least bit pink or red, even without sunblock on. He just gets beautifully brown. Lucky kid.


I am one of those types that NEEDS some sunlight or I look like serious hell. I start looking jaundiced and sallow when I haven't had enough.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amydoula* 
We use UV Naturals. It is as the name implies the only sunscreen that I have been able to find that truely has no chemicals. It is SPENDY but worth it. We only apply when we are out for long periods of time during the middle of the day.

I just looked up the ingredients at www.uvnatural.com pretty impressive.

Natural SPF 15 Sunscreen
broad spectrum

Perfect for everyday use.

· zinc oxide 12.6%
· grape seed oil
· silica
· safflower oil
· beeswax
· macadamia oil
· candellila wax
· sesame seed oil
· grape seed extract
· natural vitamin E
· green tea extract
· carnuba wax
· iron oxide


----------



## Kessed (Nov 28, 2007)

Zinc oxide isn't a chemical?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
Zinc oxide isn't a chemical?

I think zinc oxide hasn't shown carcinogenic/estrogenic properties. who knows though, as FDA standards suck. I think this company is based in AUs. but they are touting FDA approval or something..

nothing is 100% safe.

it's still a pretty impressive list of ingredients. (if it's effective)

I wonder about iron oxide though myself. what is it?


----------



## lexbeach (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
Zinc oxide isn't a chemical?

I think it's _not_ technically a chemical. It's a mineral, right?

(says she who nearly failed chemistry and really knows very little about this stuff).

Lex


----------



## WhaleinGaloshes (Oct 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
Zinc oxide isn't a chemical?

Is zinc oxide a chemical? Is sodium chloride? Is sodium bicarbonate? They are all chemical compounds, but that doesn't make them unsafe.

Is zinc oxide hazardous to one's health? In topical applications, my reading of the literature convinces me that it is not.


----------



## Kessed (Nov 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *easy_goer* 
Is zinc oxide a chemical? Is sodium chloride? Is sodium bicarbonate? They are all chemical compounds, but that doesn't make them unsafe.

Is zinc oxide hazardous to one's health? In topical applications, my reading of the literature convinces me that it is not.

Easy...

I was simply pointing out that it was indeed a chemical. The poster claimed it wasn't. And inaccuracies like that bug me.


----------



## WhaleinGaloshes (Oct 9, 2006)

I couldn't tell if you were being rhetorical.

Technically, it's the bond that's chemical. And we're swimming in chemical bonds.

That's a bit of what I meant by 'aspersions' at the beginning of the thread.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Earlier I put a link in that shows the 25 most effective and with the least amount of worrisome ingredients as listed by Skin Deep. It's a great list, and there are some great products on there including UV Naturals, which IS effective. As for what's safe, a sun burn is most definitely NOT safe, and if sunscreen, and other precautions keep me and my family from burning, I am thankful. I really don't see what the issue is?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal* 
Earlier I put a link in that shows the 25 most effective and with the least amount of worrisome ingredients as listed by Skin Deep. It's a great list, and there are some great products on there including UV Naturals, which IS effective. As for what's safe, a sun burn is most definitely NOT safe, and if sunscreen, and other precautions keep me and my family from burning, I am thankful. I really don't see what the issue is?


the issue is the FDA apoproves the use of chemicals and ingredients in skin care products that are NOT proven safe (or even studied much for that matter)..I am not speaking specificallyof the natural lines but I know some are iffy due to labeling standards. we all know "natural" on a label does not always mean no chemicals.


----------



## lexbeach (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal* 
Earlier I put a link in that shows the 25 most effective and with the least amount of worrisome ingredients as listed by Skin Deep. It's a great list, and there are some great products on there including UV Naturals, which IS effective. As for what's safe, a sun burn is most definitely NOT safe, and if sunscreen, and other precautions keep me and my family from burning, I am thankful. I really don't see what the issue is?

I think the issue is that even "safe" sunscreens should mostly be used as a last resort. Yes, they are a better choice than sunburn, but I think they should be used sparingly and only when truly necessary (when shade and protective clothing aren't enough to keep the skin from burning).

Lex


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

rainbowmoon, you are not listening. I am not saying "natural", I am saying Skin Deep has looked at all the sunscreen lines for their ingredients, and has rated which ones are most effective and the least worrisome as to their ingredients. Some of the ones listed don't even use the word natural on their labeling. Did you actually read the link?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

gotcha.


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kessed* 
Easy...

I was simply pointing out that it was indeed a chemical. The poster claimed it wasn't. And inaccuracies like that bug me.

Um, this annoys the budding chemist in me. EVERYTHING is a chemical.


----------



## sainteanne1 (Apr 10, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Amydoula* 
We use UV Naturals. It is as the name implies the only sunscreen that I have been able to find that truely has no chemicals. It is SPENDY but worth it. We only apply when we are out for long periods of time during the middle of the day.


That has micronized zinc oxide in it which means nanoparticles. There is no research showing that those things are not affecting us and getting in our bloodstreams and thus you have no way of knowing if it is safe or not. It has not been tested. Time will tell.

Plus that stuff is sooooo oily I hated it.

And it is full of chemicals. Every ingredient in it is a chemical. Just because they are derived from plants does not make them chemicals. Zinc is a metal.


----------



## sainteanne1 (Apr 10, 2008)

Just to make a point:

zinc oxide is an ingredient in the uv naturals. In many other sunscreens it is called OCTYL-METHOXYCINNAMATE or ETHYLHEXYL METHOXYCINNAMATE. Same thing.

Many things sound natural when natural sounding words are used to describe them. Vitamin E can go by all these names in ingredient lists.

3,4-DIHYDRO-2,5,7,8-TETRAMETHYL-2- (4,8,12-TRIMETHYLTRIDECYL-2H-BENZOPYRAN-6-OL, ACETATE; D-A-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; D-ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-A -TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; VITAMIN E ACETATE; ACETATE 3,4-DIHYDRO-2,5,7,8-TETRAMETHYL-2- (4,8,12-TRIMETHYLTRIDECYL-2H-BENZOPYRAN-6-OL; TOCOPHEROL ACETATE; TOCOPHERYL ACETATE, DL-ALPHA; ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-ALPHA TOCOPHERYL ACETATE

So, just reading an ingredient list and being able to pronounce the ingredients does not make it safe or healthy to use.

Personally, I have very sensitive skin and do not like to use things with essential oils in them. They irritate my skin.


----------



## WhaleinGaloshes (Oct 9, 2006)

Skin Deep has several pages on nanoparticles:

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/spe...s/nanotech.php

A discussion of research to date is included. An excerpt:

Quote:

"*The current weight of evidence suggests that nano zinc and titanium do not penetrate the skin*. These studies use mouse, pig or human skin samples as test materials. The outer layer of skin, the epidermis, is a made up of dead skin cells that protect the living cells below by serving as a barrier to absorption of chemicals. *At least 15 laboratory studies have tested nano-zinc and titanium penetration through intact skin, each finding that very few particles, if any, penetrate living skin* (Baroli 2007; Cross 2007; Gamer 2006; Lademann 1999) as well as reviews by (Australia TGA 2006; Borm 2006; Nohynek 2007; SCCNFP 2000). The most recent study offered by industry found no titanium particle penetration and 1.5 to 2.3 % penetration by nano zinc, though the study is difficult to interpret because of laboratory contamination (Gamer 2006)."
As a group, the EWG is pretty conservative and their summary is:

Quote:

"Although we expected to reach a different conclusion at the outset of our sunscreen investigation, when we balanced all factors important in sunscreen safety, we found many zinc and titanium-based sunscreens that our analysis shows are among the safest and most effective sunscreens on the market."
I am personally okay with using nanoparticle-containing sunblock.


----------



## sainteanne1 (Apr 10, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *easy_goer* 
Skin Deep has several pages on nanoparticles:

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/spe...s/nanotech.php

A discussion of research to date is included. An excerpt:

As a group, the EWG is pretty conservative and their summary is:

I am personally okay with using nanoparticle-containing sunblock.


good info

tx


----------



## lerlerler (Mar 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sainteanne1* 
Just to make a point:

zinc oxide is an ingredient in the uv naturals. In many other sunscreens it is called OCTYL-METHOXYCINNAMATE or ETHYLHEXYL METHOXYCINNAMATE. Same thing.

Many things sound natural when natural sounding words are used to describe them. Vitamin E can go by all these names in ingredient lists.

3,4-DIHYDRO-2,5,7,8-TETRAMETHYL-2- (4,8,12-TRIMETHYLTRIDECYL-2H-BENZOPYRAN-6-OL, ACETATE; D-A-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; D-ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-A -TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; VITAMIN E ACETATE; ACETATE 3,4-DIHYDRO-2,5,7,8-TETRAMETHYL-2- (4,8,12-TRIMETHYLTRIDECYL-2H-BENZOPYRAN-6-OL; TOCOPHEROL ACETATE; TOCOPHERYL ACETATE, DL-ALPHA; ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE; DL-ALPHA TOCOPHERYL ACETATE

So, just reading an ingredient list and being able to pronounce the ingredients does not make it safe or healthy to use.

Personally, I have very sensitive skin and do not like to use things with essential oils in them. They irritate my skin.


and on the flip side, many inncent things can sound menacing JUST by using their chemical name...

Dihydrous Oxide is the example I'd use!


----------



## BaBaBa (Jun 30, 2007)

this will be DD's first summer where she can actually play about outside so this topic is of interest to me.

I plan (in order of priority) to:

1. Stay out of the sun when possible

2. cover up when in the sun

3. find a sunscreen we can live with and apply when 1 & 2 aren't possible


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lerlerler* 
and on the flip side, many inncent things can sound menacing JUST by using their chemical name...

Dihydrous Oxide is the example I'd use!

I LOVE YOU


----------

