←back to thread

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

(www.consumer.org.hk)
230 points mgh2 | 2 comments | 06 Sep 25 19:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.023s | source
Show context
matsemann ◴[06 Sep 25 21:44 UTC] No.45153154[source]▶
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.

replies(3): >>45153231 #>>45153390 #>>45156991 #
bboygravity ◴[06 Sep 25 22:16 UTC] No.45153390[source]▶
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.

replies(2): >>45153465 #>>45153531 #
flexagoon ◴[06 Sep 25 22:26 UTC] No.45153465[source]▶
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/

replies(2): >>45153984 #>>45156542 #
reducesuffering ◴[06 Sep 25 23:58 UTC] No.45153984[source]▶
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.

replies(2): >>45154613 #>>45156762 #
loeg ◴[07 Sep 25 01:44 UTC] No.45154613[source]▶
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.
replies(1): >>45162605 #
1. reducesuffering ◴[07 Sep 25 22:04 UTC] No.45162605[source]▶
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.

replies(1): >>45163150 #
2. loeg ◴[07 Sep 25 23:27 UTC] No.45163150[source]▶
You didn't mention obesity, a more likely culprit than sunscreen for a lot of these phenomena.