←back to thread

Over 80% of sunscreen performed below their labelled efficacy (2020)

(www.consumer.org.hk)
230 points mgh2 | 1 comments | 06 Sep 25 19:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.382s | source
Show context
bee_rider ◴[06 Sep 25 22:44 UTC] No.45153594[source]▶
Sunscreen is probably better than nothing.

But, it seems very prone to inducing overconfidence… It has to be reapplied more than you expect. You need more of it than you expect. It is less waterproof than you expect.

I mean, to preemptively retreat to the obviously defensible position: I’m not saying it is negative, but it is better to just cover up and avoid staying in the sun for too long, right?

replies(1): >>45153660 #
1. mgh2 ◴[06 Sep 25 22:54 UTC] No.45153660[source]▶
Yeah better than none, balance outdoor benefits (exercise, myopia, vitamin C, overall health) which far outweight staying indoors (~80% of your time).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQJlGHVmdrA

Track UV levels < 2 (avoid 10am-4pm), wear at least 50 SPF sunscreen (to compensate for lower tested numbers as in this article), wear a watch to time reapplication every 1.5 hrs vs. recommended 2hrs (to be safe)