| ▲ | matsemann 5 days ago |
| Lots of sunscreen brands should be avoided as they don't meet the advertised SPF. Lots of sunscreen brands should also be avoided as they contain allergy inducing-, hormone altering- or environment damaging- ingredients. Not easy making a good choice. |
|
| ▲ | andrepd 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| The regulator should get rid of those + impose fines, not the user. It's unreasonable to hope the consumer deals with this themselves, that's what the regulator is there for. |
| |
| ▲ | cogman10 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Agreed. The free market solutions to this problem are completely ineffectual. Nobody is paying a 3rd party to test sunscreen and even if they were, the results wouldn't likely be public and/or would be buried under the giant weight of mommy influencer blogs telling you to use apple cider vinegar instead of sunscreen. The only way to solve the problem of bad actors in a consumer products market is government regulations, testing, and fines/dissolution of the bad actors. | | |
| ▲ | ekianjo 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Not the only way. There used to be 3rd parties defending consumers by testing products back in the days, and publishing their results, not sure if those still exist today. The problem with mass manufactured products is that you need to keep testing them. Changes in formulation are a thing so you need to continuously sample and test them. The problem with government being involved is that this opens the door for easy corruption (haven't we seen this before) | | |
| ▲ | cogman10 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > There used to be 3rd parties defending consumers by testing products back in the days And what happened to them? Why did they go away? It wasn't due to the government outlawing them. > The problem with government being involved is that this opens the door for easy corruption And 3rd party reviewers aren't easily corrupted? There are at least some mechanisms to address government corruption in a democracy (elections). What mechanism can be employed against a 3rd party reviewer that simply lies about a product it's reviewing? That's the reason this has to be government ran. Corruption happens regardless of who's doing it, government at very least faces some accountability. | |
| ▲ | cortesoft 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The question is always, where do those third parties get the money to do their research? If you are against the government funding them, where do you suggest they get their money? A company like Consumer Reports was funded by subscriptions to their reports, but they don't make enough from that anymore to test enough products. Another issue is the sheer number of companies producing products these days. It would be very expensive to test all the products sold. | | |
| ▲ | ekianjo 4 days ago | parent [-] | | > The question is always, where do those third parties get the money to do their research? in the 80s they were selling magazines. |
| |
| ▲ | FridgeSeal 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > There used to be 3rd parties defending consumers by testing products back in the days, and publishing their results, not sure if those still exist today. CHOICE in Australia does this, and was the group that did the efficacy tests on a bunch of sunscreens sold in Australia where they found that many were massively underperforming. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | bboygravity 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Got recommendations? Here in Europe the formulations seem to be almost all the same (which I'm assuming means that they're all very bad for you). Very hard to find any mineral sunscreens here. Decathlon has one in the most terrible packaging: a roller which means it's close to impossible to get the stuff out. |
| |
| ▲ | stuartd 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | https://altruistsun.com/ I have vitiligo and basically no skin pigment above my neck line - this product is excellent, reasonably priced, and ethical | | |
| ▲ | mrspuratic 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Seconded. Been using Altruist for a few years now. Hybrid mineral (TiO2)/chemical. Unscented, light fluid, slight white cast once dry (Caucasian/north European skin type).
Also I don't get eye irritation as with many other types after an hour or two. Available easily online if you can't find it locally. |
| |
| ▲ | flexagoon 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | There's no reason to avoid chemical sunscreens unless you have an individual allergy to some of the components. The concerns about them being "carcinogenic" or "disrupting hormones" or "killing the environment" is fearmongering and marketing bullshit pushed by "clean beauty" companies. This is a good summary of the topic: https://labmuffin.com/sunscreen-myth-directory/ https://labmuffin.com/factcheck-low-tox-sunscreen-swaps/ | | |
| ▲ | scrollop 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Points to consider with chemical sunscreens: Endocrine disruption: Oxybenzone (BP-3) and related benzophenone-type UV filters have demonstrated endocrine-disrupting properties in vitro and in animal studies, with some human data suggesting possible hormonal alterations and increased risk of uterine fibroids and endometriosis.[6-7] However, most human plasma concentrations are much lower than those producing effects in bioassays, and current evidence suggests low intrinsic biological activity and risk of toxicity for most organic UV filters except oxybenzone.[8-9] Contamination: Benzene, toluene, and styrene have been found in a large proportion of sunscreen products, likely due to manufacturing processes rather than the UV filters themselves. Benzene contamination is a particular concern due to its established carcinogenicity.[1] | | | |
| ▲ | reducesuffering 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | The FDA listed 12 typical sunscreen ingredients, such as avobenzone, octinoxate, and oxybenzone, as not currently having sufficient data to be recognized as safe and effective. They're absorbed into the bloodstream and studies have found them to persist for weeks Based on current data, the FDA categorized only two sunscreen ingredients as safe and effective, the mineral-based ones: zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, which don't permeate the skin much. | | |
| ▲ | thyristan 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The safety of titanium dioxide is somwhat in doubt and it is suspected to be carcinogenic (in Europe at least): https://www.bfr.bund.de/en/service/frequently-asked-question... | | |
| ▲ | reducesuffering 4 days ago | parent [-] | | That's about oral ingestion as a food additive. I would also not recommend eating chemical-based sunscreen lotions... From your link: "There are currently no indications that the use of titanium dioxide in cosmetic products is harmful to the health of consumers if the legal requirements are complied with. Titanium dioxide is not absorbed dermally, i.e. through the skin, and consequently not by application of skin care products containing titanium dioxide. In several opinions on titanium dioxide nanoparticles in sunscreens the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) has considered absorption via the skin of no concern according to the current state of knowledge when applied to both intact and sunburn-damaged skin." |
| |
| ▲ | loeg 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | We have millions and millions of people using these substances on their skin for dozens of years. If they were remotely harmful, it would be pretty obvious. | | |
| ▲ | reducesuffering 4 days ago | parent [-] | | There are a plethora of hormonal problems being observed with no clear answers what's causing them or why. We have generational testosterone decline and sperm counts falling. Puberty age has been dropping consistently. Could be a mix of the following: microplastics, pesticides, sunscreen chemicals, tap water pollutants, endocrine disrupting chemicals on receipts and cans, etc. Many times in history things weren't obvious until years of damage had passed. You could also say, if they were remotely safe, it would be pretty obvious, but the FDA hasn't been able to determine that. Right now the evidence is unknown, proceed at your own risk. And you have an alternative with minimum blood absorption right next to it in the aisle. | | |
| ▲ | loeg 3 days ago | parent [-] | | You didn't mention obesity, a more likely culprit than sunscreen for a lot of these phenomena. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | KolibriFly 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You basically need to do homework before going to the beach |
