Study on effectiveness of various brands of Sun Screens
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skin Care and Makeup Forum

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:18 am

Dear EDS girls, I came across this article from CNN and The Environmental Working Group while researching on sun screens. Hope this proves useful to everyone Very Happy

Study: Some sunscreens overpromise on protection
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/01/sunscreen.study/?iref=mpstoryview

I'll like to highlight the following paragraphs from the CNN article

"The Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based nonprofit, has released an investigation of nearly 1,000 brand-name sunscreens that says four out of five don't adequately protect consumers and may contain harmful chemicals. The group says that some of the products of the nation's leading brands -- including Coppertone, Neutrogena and Banana Boat -- are the poorest performers"

""A good, effective sunscreen must prevent against a broad spectrum of rays," said Sonya Lunder, a senior researcher at the Environmental Working Group.Sunlight is composed of two types of ultraviolet light: UVB rays, which cause sunburns, and UVA rays, which tan. Although both may increase the risk of skin cancer, sun damage and wrinkles, the FDA doesn't require sunscreens to protect against both, just UVB.The FDA acknowledges that new rules mandating UVA testing and labeling requirements are being evaluated, but the Environmental Working Group wants tougher standards now"

The Study done by The Environmental Working Group
http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens2008/index.php?nothanks=1

Please note that you give your email address on cosmeticdatabase. Just click on the "No thanks, just take me to Skin Deep."

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:37 am

Not all information from EWG (Environmental Working Group) is accurate. They tend to be rather alarmist in their approach. You have to double check the facts yourself.

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:52 am

Thank you for pointing that EWG may not be entirely accurate. I do not know of EWG before reading this article but trust that CNN will only quote information from a reliable source.

I am shocked that some of the major companies had no comments after CNN contacted them.

I hope this article is useful as a source of reference and not a sun screen bible. As the title of the article states, some sun screen overpromises. They work, just not as well as promised. (according to EWG)

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:47 am

Well, some of their points are valid. For example, of the chemical sunscreen agents, I would be most cautious about oxybenzone (benzophenone-2). There is evidence that it is absorbed into the body in some quantity and since it has hormonal effects, it is best avoided particularly if you have a family history of breast cancer or if you have a history of breast lumps or breast cancer. Also it is better not to apply sunscreen with oxybenzone on children because they are even more likely to absorb it due to higher surface area to body weight ratio and the hormones will affect them more, especially pre-pubertal boys where it is not good at all to have any substance that may have estrogen-like effects (female hormone).

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:43 am

Some other group had a pretty large criticism of the EWG's findings....I will try to fid it

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:33 am

Thanks, Edenfield. I have been skeptical about the EWG since some of their other cosmetic reports (like the lipstick one) were wildly exaggerated. That being said, I was quite surprised to see that EWG surveyed the scientific literature on nanotechnology in sunscreens and found to their surprise that there is currently no credible evidence to suggest that nanotechnology in sunscreens is harmful. Given their alarmist track record, and their admitted bias towards finding that nano stuff would be a problem, I find it surprising and reassuring that even EWG thinks that its okay to use them.

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:11 am

In my opinion, the EWG can be both overly alarmist AND overly blasé. I distrust several ingredient that they deem OK (like nanotechnology), and yet I find them way too paranoid on other counts.

I think they have great goals, but their methodology is a bit off -- they only seem to rely upon the medical community for their info, which leaves a lot of holes (particularly in the natural market). It's a shame they cant just fund studies of their own.

I agree that it's always a good idea to use them in conjnction with other sources (regardless of what CNN chooses to quote).

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:20 am

Argh, my phone won't let me edit my post so I have to do two. Wanted to add that even though I have my doubts about their processes and conclusions, I still totally agree with their general thesis that the most common sunscreens are often the worst ones. In addition to the above-mentioned concerns about oxybenzone, there are loads of sketchy findings about most chemical sunscreen ingredients. Physical sunscreens aren't totally sketch-free, but they're certainly the lesser of two evils IMO, and I'm glad for anything that promotes such awareness.

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:54 am

Would like to know some feedbacks on the parabens that are used in ss? I heard that it also plays a role in the estrogenic activity in our body but seems like not much studies to prove that?

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:07 pm

flitcraft wrote:

Thanks, Edenfield. I have been skeptical about the EWG since some of their other cosmetic reports (like the lipstick one) were wildly exaggerated. That being said, I was quite surprised to see that EWG surveyed the scientific literature on nanotechnology in sunscreens and found to their surprise that there is currently no credible evidence to suggest that nanotechnology in sunscreens is harmful. Given their alarmist track record, and their admitted bias towards finding that nano stuff would be a problem, I find it surprising and reassuring that even EWG thinks that its okay to use them.

It's kinda embarrassing for them though hehe

free skin care · Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:09 pm

Stardustdy wrote:

Would like to know some feedbacks on the parabens that are used in ss? I heard that it also plays a role in the estrogenic activity in our body but seems like not much studies to prove that?

Parabens are used as preservatives, not just in sunscreen...

However some "organic" and "natural" products contain parabens as well. They are naturally occuring in tea and raspberries for example

The Personal Care Products Council (PCPC) was the one that critiqued the EWG's finding...can't find the article though

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.