Sunscreen - possibly worse than sunburn?

Kittamaru · May 9, 2015

Okay... normally I scoff at articles like this, but a few friends of mine who are doing quite well swearing by alternative medicines and homeopathy combined with limited use of traditional medicine have stated this to be true... so I'm curious:

http://wakeup-world.com/2014/05/10/burn-health-impacts-of-sunscreen-worse-than-uv-damage/

It has long been known that sunscreen products are detrimental to our health. But how bad? And what is worse: UV damage, chemical sunscreens or mineral sunscreens? Would there be any alternative ways to protect the skin against UV rays, without necessarily hiding behind an umbrella all day?

Safe sun protection seems like another topic overloaded with information, where nothing seems quite clear. This article makes sense of the whole issue by gathering independent scientific data from worldwide sources and linking it to how your body reacts to sunscreen ingredients and UV rays. While undertaking this research, we’ve even discovered alternative and natural ways to protect your skin against UV rays!

Over the past decade, dozens of studies from third-party scientific groups have examined the potential health hazards of sunscreen chemicals that permeate the skin. Sunscreen’s active ingredients are present in large concentrations in order to filter UVA and UVB rays, and their repeated application over large portions of the skin means that the body absorbs high concentrations of toxic chemicals. Sunscreen ingredients are well known to cause poisoning, hormone disruption, degenerative changes in cells of the skin, DNA damage, free-radical generation leading to premature ageing, a compromised immune system and increased risk of melanoma.

The Environmental Working Group writes:

“The ideal sunscreen would completely block UV rays that cause sunburn, immune suppression and damaging free radicals. It would remain effective on the skin for several hours. It would not form harmful ingredients when degraded by sunlight. It would smell and feel pleasant so that people would use more of it. No sunscreen meets these goals. Consumers must choose between “chemical” sunscreens, which have inferior stability, penetrate the skin and may disrupt the body’s hormone system, and “mineral” sunscreens, made with zinc and titanium, often “micronized” or containing nano-particles.”

Chemical Sunscreens
Chemical sunscreens deserve special awareness, as they are known to permeate the skin. Chemical sunscreens typically include a combination of three to six of these active ingredients: oxybenzone, avobenzone, octisalate, octocrylene, homosalate and octinoxate.

Laboratory studies indicate that these chemicals break down when exposed to sunlight, mimicking estrogen and disrupting the body’s hormone (endocrine) system.[1] Research suggests that oxybenzone, 4-MBC and octinoxate are also toxic to human reproductive systems and interfere with normal development.[2]

In North-America, oxybenzone is found in 80 percent of chemical sunscreens. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has detected oxybenzone in more than 96 percent of the U.S. population, with higher concentrations found during the summer months.[3] Other studies have detected common sunscreen chemicals in breast milk, which affects the normal development of fetuses and newborns.[4]

Furthermore, a United States FDA report entitled ‘Medications that Increase Sensitivity to Light’ indicates that many agents commonly used in chemical sunscreens – including benzophenones, PABA, cinnamates, salicylates, anthranilates, PSBA, mexenone, and oxybenzone – increase photosensitivity or have photo-reactive agents in them. This means that applying these chemicals to your body during periods of sun exposure actually heightens the body’s reactivity to UV radiation and increases the risk of skin cancer.

Mineral Sunscreens
In the mainstream media, mineral sunscreens are portrayed as the safe alternative to chemical sunscreens. In fact, once exposed to sunlight, mineral filters such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide have been found to undergo a chemical reaction that releases free radicals in the body, damaging surrounding cells. Free radicals cause cell and DNA damage, premature ageing and increase the risk of skin cancer.

According to the environmental working group, “mineral sunscreen could pose a risk of skin damage if manufacturers do not select forms that are coated with inert chemicals to reduce photoactivity”. In other words, they use chemicals to alter the hazardous effects of mineral filters breaking down in sunlight. This is a problem: there is absolutely no research on chemicals used to reduce the photoreactivity of mineral sunscreens.

Additionally, mineral filters release carcinogenic nanoparticles one-twentieth the thickness of a human hair. Nanoparticles are not properly regulated, allowing manufacturers to cheap out on quality and safety[5]. These particles are volatile; they can lodge in the lungs, reach the bloodstream and extensively damage living cells and internal organs.[6] On top of it all, nanoparticles also react to UV rays faster, increasing the amount of free radicals produced and drastically increasing UV damage in the body.

Additionally, sunscreen nano-ingredients have been shown to damage ecosystems as they accumulate in the food chain, disrupting hormones of animals and humans.[7] The environmental impact of nanoparticle pollution has not been sufficiently assessed, but experts suspect that nanoparticles are highly prone to bioaccumulation[8].

Beware of false claims. Mineral sunscreens are commonly advertised as the “safe” alternative to chemical sunscreens, but their chemical content is un-regulated and un-tested. Some other commonly misleading claims are products advertised as “non-nano” titanium dioxide and zinc oxide: all mineral sunscreens must be delivered in nanoparticle form to efficiently block UV rays.

Understanding the Health Effects of UV Rays
Wearing sunscreen and avoiding sunburns does not mean your skin is adequately protected.

UVA and UVB rays have very distinct properties when interacting with the skin. UVA rays damage skin cells called keratinocytes in the basal layer of the epidermis, where most skin cancers occur. They penetrate deeper into skin tissue where they release free radicals, damaging DNA and skin cells, promoting skin aging and causing skin cancer.

UVB rays stimulate the production of new melanin and a thicker epidermis, which are your body’s natural defense against UVA damage. They also cause sunburns, which are the body’s natural warning and protection system against UVA damage.

UVB rays are necessary to build the precursors to vitamin D in the skin[10]. Vitamin D is a hormone essential to calcium absorption, promoting bone health. It is also essential to a strong immune system and helps protect against breast, colon, kidney and ovarian cancer. About one-fourth of North-Americans have low levels of vitamin D[11], which has been associated with increased cardiovascular mortality, colon cancer mortality, breast cancer, skin cancer, metabolic disease, hypertension, obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis, upper respiratory tract infections and other microbe-caused infections[12].

Basically, for a sun protection lotion to be effective, it should block cancer-causing UVAs while allowing healing UVBs to interact with the skin.

Ironically, sunscreens create the opposite effect of what they are designed for. They block UVBs and allow harmful UVAs to penetrate deeper into the skin.

By focusing both their products and advertising campaigns on UVB protection, sunscreen companies are, at best, selling their consumers a false sense of safety. Remarkably, regulators like the FDA continue to allow these chemicals to be sold as ‘sun protection’, despite the known risks associated with both chemical and mineral sunscreens.

Blocking UVB absorption neutralizes the body’s natural UVA defense mechanisms and impedes vitamin D to naturally build in the body. Most sunscreens further enhance the damage produced by UVA rays by separating it from its ultraviolet particle UVB, allowing UVA rays to penetrate deeper into the skin, reaching connective tissues and blood vessels. It is also common for sunscreens to contain anti-inflammatory chemicals that can prevent the skin from burning, creating a false sense of security where users wrongly assume they are being adequately protected from the harmful effects of UV rays (which include free radical release and DNA damage).

“One study of three common sunscreen ingredients found that after one hour of UV-exposure, the number of free radicals on sunscreen-treated skin was actually higher than on untreated skin.”[13]

“Experts caution that the unintentional exposure to and toxicity of active ingredients erodes the benefits of sunscreens.”[14]

Quite simply, sunscreens inhibit the innate intelligence of our skin cells. On one hand, they neutralize UVB rays, which are the body’s natural defense system against UVA damage. On the other hand, they enable harmful UVA rays to penetrate deeper into the body. With so much misinformation in the public sphere, it is no wonder skin cancer rates are sky-rocketing!
Click to expand...

Now... some of it just sounds like bullshit... so I have to ask - how much of this is fact, and how much of it is just supposition?

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

sculptor · May 9, 2015

ChemicalEWG Hazard ScoreUse in U.S. sunscreensSkin PenetrationHormone disruptionSkin AllergyOther concernsReferences
UV filters with higher toxicity concerns
Oxybenzone8WidespreadDetected in nearly every American; found in mother’s milk; 1-to-9% skin penetration in lab studiesActs like estrogen in the body; alters sperm production in animals; associated with endometriosis in womenRelatively high rates of skin allergyJanjua 2004, Janjua 2008, Sarveiya 2004, Gonzalez 2006, Rodriguez 2006, Krause 2012
Octinoxate (Octylmethoxycinnamate)6WidespreadFound in mothers’ milk; less than 1% skin penetration in human and laboratory studiesHormone-like activity; reproductive system, thyroid and behavioral alterations in animal studiesModerate rates of skin allergyKrause 2012, Sarveiya 2004, Rodriguez, 2006, Klinubol 2008
UV filters with moderate toxicity concerns
Homosalate4WidespreadFound in mothers’ milk; skin penetration less than 1% in human and laboratory studiesDisrupts estrogen, androgen and progesteroneToxic breakdown productsKrause 2012, Sarveiya 2004, SCCNFP 2006
Octisalate3Widespread; stabilizes avobenzoneSkin penetration in lab studiesRarely reported skin allergyWalters 1997, Shaw 2006 Singh 2007
Octocrylene3WidespreadFound in mothers’ milk; skin penetration in lab studiesRelatively high rates of skin allergyKrause 2012, Bryden 2006, Hayden 2005
UV filters with lower toxicity concerns
Titanium Dioxide2 (topical use), 6 (powder or spray)WidespreadNo finding of skin penetrationNo evidence of hormone disruptionNoneInhalation concernsGamer 2006, Nohynek 2007, Wu 2009, Sadrieh 2010, Takeda 2009, Shimizu 2009, Park 2009, IARC 2006b
Zinc Oxide2 (topical use), 4 (powder or spray)Widespread; excellent UVA protectionLess than 0.01% skin penetration in human volunteersNo evidence of hormone disruptionNoneInhalation concernsGulson 2012, Sayes 2007, Nohynek 2007, SCCS 2012
Avobenzone2Widespread; best UVA protection of chemical filtersVery limited skin penetrationNo evidence of hormone disruptionRelatively high rates of skin allergyKlinubol 2008, Bryden 2006, Hayden 2005, Montenegro 2008
Mexoryl SX2Uncommon; pending FDA approval; offers good, stable UVA protectionLess than 0.16% penetrated the skin of human volunteersNo evidence of hormone disruptionSkin allergy is rareBenech-Kieffer 2003, Fourtanier2008
Click to expand...

from:
http://www.ewg.org/2014sunscreen/the-trouble-with-sunscreen-chemicals/

I burn easily, and rarely use sunscreen as I have sensitive skin and every one i tried in the past irritated my skin. Lately, I've tried one whose sole active ingredient is Titanium Dioxide.
I've a roof to replace this summer, so when mowing the lawn I've tried using sunscreen on only one side of my face---inconclusive so far---maybe I need to spend more'n an hour outside?

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

cosmictraveler · May 9, 2015

I do not use anything. What I do is limit my time in the sun and when I sit outside in the sun. I try to get the sun before 10:30 AM then retreat inside until 3:30 PM then return outside for another 30 minutes in the sun. 30 minutes is all I go out into the direct sunlight at a time. So far I've never burned with this strategy and have a decent browning.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Kittamaru · May 9, 2015

*nod* reason I ask is my wife has gotten Sun Poisoning before and, well, we're trying to avoid having any issues with skin cancer down the road.

cosmictraveler · May 9, 2015

Everyone's skin is different so the way I sunbathe might not be the way you should. Just try 15 minute in the sun at a time and no more than twice a day. That should avoid sun poisoning but again we are all different so beware.

Kittamaru · May 10, 2015

cosmictraveler said: ↑

Everyone's skin is different so the way I sunbathe might not be the way you should. Just try 15 minute in the sun at a time and no more than twice a day. That should avoid sun poisoning but again we are all different so beware.
Click to expand...

Yep yep - I tend to burn way too easily on my back, but the rest of my tans fairly normally... just shocked me reading that article is all. Then again, I'm also coming to find that, supposedly, antiperspirant is apparently super-duper bad for you as well because of the aluminium in it... which sucks because I sweat like a 500 pound man running a marathon without it!

origin · May 12, 2015

Kittamaru said: ↑

Okay... normally I scoff at articles like this, but a few friends of mine who are doing quite well swearing by alternative medicines and homeopathy combined with limited use of traditional medicine have stated this to be true... so I'm curious:
Click to expand...

There are many alternative medicines that work just fine. Homeopathy on the other hand is pure pseudoscience crap, it is essentially hand waving magical thinking.

Log in or Sign up

Sunscreen - possibly worse than sunburn?

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

sculptor Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Sunscreen - possibly worse than sunburn?

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

sculptor Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches