←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: 0.23s | source
Show context
xyzelement ◴[06 Sep 25 23:12 UTC] No.45153765[source]▶
I suspect that in X years we'll learn that sun is not bad for us while the chemicals we apply to our skin are problematic.

What I find personally works is to build up a base tan. I probably did a little sunscreen application back in May but just spend a lot of time outdoors so by the time it got really sunny I had enough tan that I didn't need sunblock to not get burnt.

Even my wife who is very light and "can't tan" - I saw a picture of her when she was a lifeguard in highschool - she's bronze and probably wouldn't need sunblock either.

Obviously people make money when you buy sunscreen so the message that you don't need it doesn't get a lot of amplification.

replies(4): >>45154637 #>>45154913 #>>45156261 #>>45158172 #
1. skeeter2020 ◴[07 Sep 25 13:55 UTC] No.45158172[source]▶
You're free to hold these "beliefs" but they are patently and completely incorrect. The "base tan" theory was debunked decades ago.

"What I find personally works..." is ridiculous when it comes to sun damage and skin cancer, unless you are a wild outlier of humanity or a mutant. The simple answer is it takes some (but not much!) time to see the damage and you're likely to encounter it sooner or later.

>> Obviously people make money when you buy sunscreen so the message that you don't need it doesn't get a lot of amplification.

Yes, a shadow-global-conspiracy promoted by the mega-national sunscreen cabal. That's the most likely answer.