Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Leesbro63 »

Clark Howard recently mentioned that half of all sunscreens tested by Consumer's Reports didn't provide the SPF protection indicated on the label. Here is the link: http://www.clarkhoward.com/consumer-rep ... reen-money

I subscribe to the print version of CR but so far there has not been any article about this. I assume it's coming, but would like to know what the BAD sunscreens are NOW. There doesn't seem to be any links to this. Anyone know where I can find this info?
joebh
Posts: 1708
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 2:45 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by joebh »

Go to your local library.
Often they have a subscription and can help you find this information online, using their computers.
User avatar
William4u
Posts: 1445
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:02 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by William4u »

Even the poorly rates sunscreens protected okay. There were some that were rated SPF 30 that were more like SPF 15 in the tests, but that is still 15 times better than nothing!

Here is the link... http://www.consumerreports.org/sunscree ... rotection/

If you pay a few extra bucks a year for the online access (cheap if you get print), you can click on the ratings... http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/heal ... erview.htm
Last edited by William4u on Mon May 23, 2016 10:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Raybo
Posts: 2243
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 10:02 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Raybo »

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) reviews sunscreens for harmful additives and SPF. Here is the 2015 report: http://www.ewg.org/2015sunscreen/
No matter how long the hill, if you keep pedaling you'll eventually get up to the top.
Swansea
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Swansea »

SPF numbers are misleading. One would think that SPF 30 provides twice as much protection as SPF 15, but in reality it is much less than double.
chx
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:52 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by chx »

Swansea wrote:SPF numbers are misleading. One would think that SPF 30 provides twice as much protection as SPF 15, but in reality it is much less than double.
I'm not sure why one would think that the SPF scale is linear in some sense unless you read its specification. But in any case, it is roughly linear in two aspects here:

SPF 15 lets through about 7% of UVB rays; SPF 30 lets through about half that.

With regard to UVB rays, SPF 15 lets you stay in a particular outdoor setting without burning about 15 times as long as you would with no protection. SPF 30 allows twice that.

Of course, there are other questions: What about UVA? What about how well the sunscreen stays put in various conditions? What about mislabeling?
Swansea
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Swansea »


Dr. Wang is director of dermatologic surgery and dermatology at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center at Basking Ridge, NJ. Dr. Wang is a member of The Skin Cancer Foundation’s Photobiology Committee.

Published in the Spring 2010 Edition of Sun & Skin News

Q. Does a higher-SPF (sun protection factor) sunscreen always protect your skin better than a lower-SPF sunscreen? How high should I go?

A.Sunscreens with a higher SPF should offer more protection from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which is linked to the vast majority of skin cancers, as well as premature skin aging and eye damage. But the answer is not that simple.

UV radiation reaches the earth in the form of UVB and UVA rays. UVB radiation plays a key role in skin cancer, and SPF refers mainly to the amount of UVB protection a sunscreen offers. Thus, higher SPFs can help: [b]An SPF 15 sunscreen blocks 93 percent of UVB radiation, while an SPF 30 sunscreen blocks nearly 97 percent. [/b] Furthermore, higher SPF values offer some safety margin, since consumers generally do not apply enough sunscreen. To evaluate SPFs, testers apply two milligrams of sunscreen per square centimeter of skin. But in everyday life, most people apply from only 0.5 to one milligram per square centimeter of skin. Consequently, the actual SPF they achieve is approximately 1/3 of the labeled value.
User avatar
lthenderson
Posts: 8499
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:43 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by lthenderson »

Leesbro63 wrote:but would like to know what the BAD sunscreens are NOW.
I haven't seen the study but the news report that I read on the subject said that if you use a sunscreen that utilizes minerals or states that it is a natural sunblock, chances are they don't work. I think something like 75% of those failed. The chemical sunscreens had a much better success rate of meeting their stated protection.
EHEngineer
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 3:35 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by EHEngineer »

I listen to clark howard.

Here is a clark stinks post addressing your concerns. In summary, it says that the "bad" sunscreens are pretty good.
http://mb.clarkhoward.com/showthread.ph ... -Sunscreen
Or, you can ... decline to let me, a stranger on the Internet, egg you on to an exercise in time-wasting, and you could say "I'm probably OK and I don't care about it that much." -Nisiprius
daveatca
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:03 pm

Dangers to others

Post by daveatca »

If you are swimming in the ocean, then you should consider this: How Sunscreen May Be Destroying Coral Reefs
http://time.com/4080985/sunscreen-coral-reefs/
Rupert
Posts: 4122
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Rupert »

lthenderson wrote:
Leesbro63 wrote:but would like to know what the BAD sunscreens are NOW.
I haven't seen the study but the news report that I read on the subject said that if you use a sunscreen that utilizes minerals or states that it is a natural sunblock, chances are they don't work. I think something like 75% of those failed. The chemical sunscreens had a much better success rate of meeting their stated protection.
The Environmental Working Group website, ewg.com, is pretty good at telling you if a sunscreen actually works. Even if you disagree with them about the health/safety of chemical sunscreens, their website is useful for weeding out completely ineffective sunscreens.
amazonchic
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:58 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI
Contact:

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by amazonchic »

Also, along this same thought is that too much sunscreen may be harmful. It is hard to know who to trust with all the information available.

http://www.tanningtruth.com/
http://www.mercola.com/

If anyone knows of reputable peer-reviewed studies on balancing skin exposure to UV rays to create vitamin D with healthy doses of sunscreen please let me know.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Leesbro63 »

So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?
Rupert
Posts: 4122
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Rupert »

Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?
I look at the EWG ratings and pick a sunscreen off that list that works, isn't horribly toxic, i.e., isn't rated above a 5, isn't prohibitively expensive, and is available in my local drugstore. The one I've settled on for me and my kids is Coppertone Water Babies Pure & Simple. It's $8.99 a bottle at Target and is rated a 3 by EWG. We live in the Deep South; so lack of Vitamin D is never going to be an issue for us. YMMV on that.
User avatar
quantAndHold
Posts: 10141
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by quantAndHold »

amazonchic wrote:
If anyone knows of reputable peer-reviewed studies on balancing skin exposure to UV rays to create vitamin D with healthy doses of sunscreen please let me know.
No idea about peer reviewed studies, but my dermatologist told me that even in the middle of winter, I only need a few minutes of sun exposure a day to get an adequate supply of vitamin D. I live almost in Canada, so I took that to mean that vitamin D wasn't a problem unless I never went outside.
User avatar
Youngblood
Posts: 712
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:18 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Youngblood »

Check out Vanicream. I use the spf 30 version. It is available at Amazon and has a rating of 1 from EWG.

The SPF 50 version scares children and worried my wife (face was too white) hence the change.

Youngblood
"I made my money by selling too soon." | Bernard M. Baruch
magazinewriter
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by magazinewriter »

Be sure that your sunscreen is not out-of-date, also. Sunscreen is one product that loses its effectiveness. There was just a story on our local news (in Florida) a week ago.
Runner01
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:14 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Runner01 »

Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?

Take a vitamin d3 supplement and go outside unprotected for short periods. Use a mineral based sunscreen when you are outside for extended periods. Simple right? If only it were that simple :D

I am a fair skinned almost-ginger (hair is not super red) and I use Kiss My Face SPF-30.
simpsonlang
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 5:00 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by simpsonlang »

Living in Florida for a fairskinned person has never been fun. But I never liked wearing sunscreen as it made my skin feel clammy and I never trusted I got it everywhere. Always long sleeve shirts and pants even when swimming at the beach. If I wore shorts it would be towards the later hours when the sun was a good ways close to sunset. When I was in the Marines I joined Recon and didn't realize they were mostly shorts and tshirts on the beach. I caked up in 50 proof sunscreen multiple times a day. Carried a bottle in my pocket everywhere, especially when we wore these special swim trunks with pockets.
I get a lot of weird looks even when wearing pants, long sleeve shirt, and huge hat on a hot summer day but it beats missing a spot and getting roasted.
Casper
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Casper »

Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?
Find a sunscreen that provides a level of protection you're comfortable with, and move on with your life.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Leesbro63 »

Casper wrote:
Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?
Find a sunscreen that provides a level of protection you're comfortable with, and move on with your life.
I did that. Then starting hearing Clark Howard (who I trust big time) and reading more here.
Casper
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Casper »

Leesbro63 wrote:
Casper wrote:
Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?
Find a sunscreen that provides a level of protection you're comfortable with, and move on with your life.
I did that. Then starting hearing Clark Howard (who I trust big time) and reading more here.
Then buy one of the ones that Howard recommends, which he identifies right at the start of that article. I'm as pale as they come (hence my username), but I find sunscreen to be among the things that aren't worth spending a lot of time thinking about. There are a ton of good ones out there, and as people here have pointed out, even one doesn't totally meet the SPF claim on the label is going to provide ample protection. Find one that suits your needs and be done with it.
User avatar
quantAndHold
Posts: 10141
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by quantAndHold »

So I read the linked article. It says nothing at all about sunscreens being dangerous. It just says they may not have all of the SPF protection they say they do. There's a big difference between having something less than the bottle claims, and it being dangerous. A sunscreen labeled SPF 30 that is actually only SPF 15, properly applied, will still protect you just fine.

I found the article on the CR website. There are 3 that tested at less than SPF 15:
  • yesto cucumbers natural SPF 30
  • Banana Boat Kids Tear-Free Sting Free lotion SPF 50
  • CVS Kids Sun Lotion SPF 50
I just get whatever my dermatologist recommends. This year it was something something Zinc something. It seems to work fine.
dbr
Posts: 46137
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:50 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by dbr »

Leesbro63 wrote:So not only do We have to worry about whether sunscreens actually provide the stated protection, but now we have to worry about trading one risk for another.

What's the common sense Bogleheads non-medical but good-consumer answer here?

Avoid sunscreens and cover up instead. There is quite a variety of clothing specifically intended to block harmful sunlight. A good hat with a brim is one really helpful item. For biking I have some specialist clothing for exactly this purpose.

My dermatologist agrees with me and recommends cover up over sun screens far and away. One also avoids any nasty chemical reactions and mess. You can also be sure your protection is as intended and not washing off or too thin to start with.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by randomguy »

quantAndHold wrote:
amazonchic wrote:
If anyone knows of reputable peer-reviewed studies on balancing skin exposure to UV rays to create vitamin D with healthy doses of sunscreen please let me know.
No idea about peer reviewed studies, but my dermatologist told me that even in the middle of winter, I only need a few minutes of sun exposure a day to get an adequate supply of vitamin D. I live almost in Canada, so I took that to mean that vitamin D wasn't a problem unless I never went outside.
This is a disputed idea. Some doctors think we have a large percentage of people(30-40%) with vitamin D deficiencies and most of them are getting 2 mins of sun/day:) Some people think the test is just BS:) there is also a debate if low vitamin D is a cause or a symptom.
R2D2
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:37 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by R2D2 »

chx wrote:
Swansea wrote:SPF numbers are misleading. One would think that SPF 30 provides twice as much protection as SPF 15, but in reality it is much less than double.
I'm not sure why one would think that the SPF scale is linear in some sense unless you read its specification. But in any case, it is roughly linear in two aspects here:

SPF 15 lets through about 7% of UVB rays; SPF 30 lets through about half that.

With regard to UVB rays, SPF 15 lets you stay in a particular outdoor setting without burning about 15 times as long as you would with no protection. SPF 30 allows twice that.
+1

This is exactly right, and I'm glad you pointed it out. I'm not sure why people think that SPF is some sort of arithmetic conspiracy. It's really basic math, but I've seen various news stories claiming that since the move from SPF 50 to SPF 100 (for example) only moves the percentage of UVB blocked from 98% to 99%, there must be something wrong.
Of course, there are other questions: What about UVA? What about how well the sunscreen stays put in various conditions? What about mislabeling?
I agree with this too. Well said.
Rodc
Posts: 13601
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:46 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Rodc »

R2D2 wrote:
chx wrote:
Swansea wrote:SPF numbers are misleading. One would think that SPF 30 provides twice as much protection as SPF 15, but in reality it is much less than double.
I'm not sure why one would think that the SPF scale is linear in some sense unless you read its specification. But in any case, it is roughly linear in two aspects here:

SPF 15 lets through about 7% of UVB rays; SPF 30 lets through about half that.

With regard to UVB rays, SPF 15 lets you stay in a particular outdoor setting without burning about 15 times as long as you would with no protection. SPF 30 allows twice that.
+1

This is exactly right, and I'm glad you pointed it out. I'm not sure why people think that SPF is some sort of arithmetic conspiracy. It's really basic math, but I've seen various news stories claiming that since the move from SPF 50 to SPF 100 (for example) only moves the percentage of UVB blocked from 98% to 99%, there must be something wrong.
Of course, there are other questions: What about UVA? What about how well the sunscreen stays put in various conditions? What about mislabeling?
I agree with this too. Well said.
You have to remember the average American can't add fractions or tell you the difference between an atom and a molecule. :oops:
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Leesbro63 »

Rodc wrote: You have to remember the average American can't add fractions or tell you the difference between an atom and a molecule. :oops:
Actually, that's a very astute comment. Perhaps sunscreen units of measurement need to be revised. Most would assume that a sunscreen rated at 15 is only half as good as one at 30. And that a 70SPF would be more than 2x as effective as a 30.

Yes, for any consumer unit, it needs to be somewhat dumbed down.
tibbitts
Posts: 23589
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by tibbitts »

Of course you often need to apply both insect repellent and sunscreen when outside, so that creates another problem, which is the varied interactions between the two. My understanding that combination products aren't recommended, but that just complicates your sunscreen decision further.
nanoanalyzer
Posts: 454
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 4:14 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by nanoanalyzer »

Locked for review.
"If you think stocks are like physics, you believe there must be smart people who can measure exactly where the Dow Jones Industrial Average will be in five months." -Morgan Housel
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 95466
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by LadyGeek »

Upon further review, discussions of medical advice (health benefits of Vitamin D, etc.) is off-topic. Controversy surrounding SPF is somewhat derailing the discussion.

Please stay focused on the OP's question, which is:

Leesbro63 wrote:Clark Howard recently mentioned that half of all sunscreens tested by Consumer's Reports didn't provide the SPF protection indicated on the label. Here is the link: http://www.clarkhoward.com/consumer-rep ... reen-money

I subscribe to the print version of CR but so far there has not been any article about this. I assume it's coming, but would like to know what the BAD sunscreens are NOW. There doesn't seem to be any links to this. Anyone know where I can find this info?
This thread is now unlocked.
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
acanthurus
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 8:02 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by acanthurus »

Removed
Last edited by acanthurus on Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Shallowpockets
Posts: 2533
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:26 am

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by Shallowpockets »

To OP.
Why not just buy sunscreen and try it by putting it on one arm and nothing on the other and spend a day outside in the sun. Bad sunscreen would be apparent.
This is not rocket science. You seem to be over thinking this.
R2D2
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:37 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by R2D2 »

Shallowpockets wrote:To OP.
Why not just buy sunscreen and try it by putting it on one arm and nothing on the other and spend a day outside in the sun. Bad sunscreen would be apparent.
This is not rocket science. You seem to be over thinking this.
Hold on.... while this sounds reasonable, my concern is that he'll only be able to tell if it blocked UVB (which causing sunburn), not UVA (which causes premature ageing).

That's why Consumer Reports ratings and the like are useful (assuming they measure this).
ladders11
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:20 pm

Re: Ineffective/Dangerous Sunscreens

Post by ladders11 »

Personally I am not alarmed by the testing/rating of sunscreens; however, I am concerned that people do not use enough, or reapply often, in order to get the labeled SPF.

The whole "shot glass" of sunscreen thing is ridiculous. If I applied this much I would look like a fool who fell in a vat of Elmer's glue. I would smell like it, too, and feel noticeably sticky. My eyes would gradually become watery and irritated from the chemicals. And, acne.

I do not sunbathe or try to tan. I wear huge hats, sun sleeves, and avoid the sun at high noon. I put sunscreen on my face, if I will be outdoors a while. And, I expect my moderate use of sunscreen will help me, but not 97-100% prevent harmful effects of sun.
Post Reply