| |
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 4:10 am  |
Sunscreen manufacturers had a deadline of 6/1/2012 to reveal the exact nature of their sunscreen ingredients in providing UV protection.
The US Govt has just granted them a 6 month deadline on that requirement.
How convenient, they got a reprieve until their major selling season has passed.
This is a travesty. The data is there, they don't want to disclose it. This country lags many others in this regard.
I think a letter to my reps is in order.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 5:22 am |
What do you mean when you say "to reveal the exact nature of their sunscreen ingredients in providing UV protection."
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 6:34 am |
| Thanks for the link. Well that's a disappointment! |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 9:17 am |
| Barefootgirl wrote: |
Sunscreen manufacturers had a deadline of 6/1/2012 to reveal the exact nature of their sunscreen ingredients in providing UV protection.
The US Govt has just granted them a 6 month deadline on that requirement.
How convenient, they got a reprieve until their major selling season has passed.
This is a travesty. The data is there, they don't want to disclose it. This country lags many others in this regard.
I think a letter to my reps is in order.
BFG |
I don't understand why you think this is a travesty. The new rules are being delayed because of manufacturing problems (new labels) not because of formulating changes. The actual ingredients inside the bottle may not change, and the old legislation states that ingredients must be listed on the label. Everything is being disclosed under both old and new laws.
Ahmed, who chairs the council's sunscreen task force, said sunscreens aren't having to be reformulated as a result of new testing requirements from the FDA's pending rules. The real problem was the time it takes to revise package labeling, especially on smaller packages that now will have to fit extra information about just what protection is offered, she said. |
_________________
Born 1953; Blonde-Blue; Normal skin |
|
havana8
Moderator
 
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3451
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 9:39 am |
Seems the implementation period for compliance is shorter than usual:
While the Personal Care Products Council was elated that the FDA published its Final Rule, it expressed concern regarding the compliance deadline.The compliance date for all sunscreen manufacturers is June 18, 2012, with the exception of manufacturers with annual sales less of than $25,000, who must comply by June 17, 2013.
“We are evaluating FDA’s specified implementation period, but we are concerned about manufacturers’ ability to make the required testing and labeling changes in only 12 months given the thousands of products on the market, the limited number of testing facilities, and the time needed to redesign product labeling," noted Farah Ahmed, the chair for the sunscreen task force of the PCPC, in a press release by the organization. "It is unusual for FDA to require such a short implementation period for a rule making of this scope. Manufacturers typically require at least two years to design and implement broad-scale, product-wide labeling changes."
http://www.cosmeticsandtoiletries.com/regulatory/uvfilters/123995634.html?page=2
I believe these are the new regulations: http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm258416.htm
It's got to be a time-consuming and costly change for companies and not all sunscreen products are affected equally. For example, I think I read that sunscreen powders will not be eligible for review under the final OTC monograph process and so will no longer be able to be marketed/labelled with broad spectrum protection claims or carry an SPF rating. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 11:15 am |
The FDA began to work on changing the regulations: Dec 17, 2011 – FDA is enacting new regulations for testing and labeling of sunscreens.
On the following site which shows what a new labeling will look like Page Last Updated: 04/16/2012
It takes time and red tape just to have them all agree on what those regulations need to be so it is not at all surprising this is taking time, along with reasons posted above.
Here is a consumer page which has the PDF for download, but explains what the bill enacted:
http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm258416.htm |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 11:34 am |
Given what I know about the FDA and its history with the industry that makes sunscreens, going back to oh about the 1970s, it's all a travesty to me and I stick by my opinion.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 11:54 am |
| Barefootgirl wrote: |
Given what I know about the FDA and its history with the industry that makes sunscreens, going back to oh about the 1970s, it's all a travesty to me and I stick by my opinion.
BFG |
Not to mention their history with artifical sweeteners (aspartame, anyone?), and who knows what else! 
At least they are possibly trying to improve things in this case, so I can personally live with a short term delay. But the proof is in the final outcome, which remains to be seen. |
_________________
No longer answering PM's due to numerous weird messages. |
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 11:59 am |
| bethany wrote: |
| Barefootgirl wrote: |
Given what I know about the FDA and its history with the industry that makes sunscreens, going back to oh about the 1970s, it's all a travesty to me and I stick by my opinion.
BFG |
Not to mention their history with artifical sweeteners (aspartame, anyone?), and who knows what else!
At least they are possibly trying to improve things in this case, so I can personally live with a short term delay. But the proof is in the final outcome, which remains to be seen. |
That was my only point, our government moves slowly on way too many things, but if consumers don't make a stink nothing happens usually?
Pink Slime or Chlorine Soaked Chicken? Glad I buy organic grass fed when I buy those meats! |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 12:02 pm |
Let's summarize,
(1) It's widely known that suncreen regulations in the U.S. have not been updated since the 1970s, in spite of the massive amount of updated research available since that time.
(2) There's been a public outcry for *years* that the U.S. is behind other countries with respect to the availability of effective sunscreens.
(3) The draft regulations were released in 2005...oh what, about 7 years ago.
(4) The final regulations were released in June 2011.
They've had a year to produce new labels. Again, how convenient that 2012 summer sales of sunscreen will not be impacted by this important and overdue information.
Sorry, history speaks for itself here.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat May 12, 2012 1:38 pm |
Pink Slime has been added to meats for *years*. People have been consuming it for all this time, in products from grocery stores and restaurant meals without even knowing it or giving it the slightest thought, but once it became a big media story, suddenly people were outraged.
I will never tell anyone else how to think or act, but I try to have a detailed awareness of what goes in my mouth or on my skin.
There's a great cartoon going around on the Internet. It's a movie threatre with two ticket booths. Above one booth it says "Convenient Lie". Under the other booth it says "Inconvenient Truth"
I probably don't have to tell you which booth has the longest line.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 4:46 am |
As a result of these new regulations, I am curious to see which, if any, manufacturers decide to opt out entirely of making sunscreens.
Not coincedentally, this latest reprieve also takes them beyond the November election.
No citizen should ever doubt the massive power and control of the industry.
BFG - no sheep |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 11:39 am |
It's almost like the word "organic". It means different things state to state.
So, we can however, make some deductions for ourselves.
UVA = Cancer Causing, and premature aging
UVB = Burn causing
WaterProof and Sweatproof no longer means that. If you see it, IGNORE the statement. KNOW they are NOT telling the truth, or don't seem to have time to fix their label.
LET'S FACE IT, however, a NEW LABEL does NOT require 6 months of prep. A graphic designer can fix that faster than the thighs, teeth, abs, etc. as shown on any monthly fashion mag. Printing new labels, although a bit costly, also, not a valid issue. Slapping them on a bottle? I'm sure we've all seen "how it's made"? Every bottle has a stamp, in case they need to recall. They can inform the public ON THEIR WEB SITE, which bottles are printed pre and post rule changes. That would take a web master what, about 10 minutes? Perhaps the verbiage would take a bit longer to craft, how about a week to figure that out? Ok, maybe they have TONS of preprinted bottles. I'm thinking a sticker is in order. Perhaps that's just me. I mean, we are talking about HEALTH issues. I get stickers slapped all over my RX's. I'm ok with it. You?
SO, IMO, if you see a label with it, it means, they are BUYING TIME. They are looking to sell to the uneducated. Pink slime? They do it BECAUSE THEY CAN! And they won't be able to do it when the public understands they are purposely being duped. And they will complain, like the pink slime mfg, they can't sell their slop, and now have to close 3 out of 4 plants. OH, BOO HOO!
OK, FURTHER, to determine if there is UVA protection according to the article you should see the following within the list: zinc, titanium, avobenzone or ecamsule
If you don't see those, then you KNOW you likely do not hold a product with UVA protection in your hand. Regardless of what the label currently sells.
So for example, as much as I HATE this product, it's a common cheapy... Let's see:
http://www.bananaboat.com/products/sport_performance.aspx
Their label says SPF 30, Broad spectrum UVA/UVB, Water resistant to 80 minutes. So IN THEORY. That should be fine.
Their active ingredient list: Avobenzone (1%), Homosalate (10%), Octisalate 5, Octocrylene (0.8%), Oxybenzone (4%).
The above list determining any sort of UVA does NOT indicate necessary percentages. Is 1% of one of the products enough? I kind of doubt it. But that is a GUESS!
Could that be a trick??? I don't know. Active ingredients are listed separate than the rest of the ingredients. So Hard to say if there's MORE active then NOT active??? Granted everyone does that.
I can tell you my girlfriend offered me some of the "Aloe" product made by banana boat, a few weeks ago when I managed to burn myself. I was quite impressed, NOT, that Aloe was about the 17th out of 20 ingredients. THAT is a big label lie. This is what she handed me: http://www.bananaboat.com/products/10008.aspx?cat=6&curBrowseBy=SPF
Aloe After Sun Lotion
Intense Moisture for Intensely Beautiful Skin
Preserve your skin and extend your tan with Aloe After Sun Lotion. Ultra moisturizing and soothing, it helps prevent peeling and dryness. Apply after a day in the sun to keep your tan looking rich.
• Formulated with Aloe Vera and Vitamin E
• Non-greasy
• Moisturizes dry, rough or chapped skin
• Soothes minor skin irritation and minor burns
• 16 fl. oz. bottle
You have to check another site to find their ingredients. I found it here:
http://www.shoprite.com/pd/Banana-Boat/After-Sun-Lotion-Aloe-Moisturizing/16-fl-oz/079656000085/
Water, Glyceryl Stearate SE, Mineral Oil, Stearic Acid, Cocos Nucifera (Coconut) Oil, Cetyl Alcohol, Sorbitol, Triethanolamine, PEG-75 Lanolin, Methylparaben, Imidazolidinyl Urea, Fragrance, Tocopheryl Acetate, Theobroma Cacao (Cocoa) Seed Butter, Propylparaben, Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice, Hydrolyzed Collagen, Yellow 5, Red 40.
Maybe is should be called After Sun MINERAL OIL, with more Alcohol, FRAGRANCE (which has GOT to be good for a burn right???? NOT!)and cocoa seed butter than aloe. But more Aloe than Yellow #5, and Red #40. So, hey, maybe they waved the aloe over it, since it's nearly a white a product. Requiring some color (Aloe is generally CLEAR which really makes me wonder about the GREEN gel they sell. Or is the Bottle green? I don't know, I don't buy it.)
Ok, So this is a current favorite: BURNOUT (thanks to the Ladies here!!!)
My bottle says SPF 32, WATER-RESISTANT (in capital letters bolded on the bottom) No time frame listed for re-application. Directions state typical: re-apply after watersports, perspiration or prolonged sun exposure. (room for improvement?)
http://www.burnoutsun.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=2
Well, will you look at that? 18.6% Zinc. That SEEMS like a good amt. Jury is out until I have some numbers to tell me what is useful or not. I have not had a burn with this product, however, while spending multiple days on the lake all last summer. So, I weigh my personal experience heavily too.
And WOW! They do not hide their ingredient list. Well fancy that!
And this is the first time I've hit their website since last summer, and it now looks like they have some new products that look fun and interesting. Will have to check them out!
(FWIW, I wore banana boat 50 during my honeymoon some 16ish years ago to Maui. Ingredients easily could have been more toxic back then. Lots has changed. Fried like a potato! Embarrassed to admit I "pre tanned" in sun bed for that trip, and it did not help at all! Can't recall how good I was with re-application. But I've used many other sunscreens since IN Maui with no issue.I think it was more of a chemical burn, than a sun burn. But that's all hind site, and guessing!) |
_________________
Claudia of FlexEffect... 43, fair skin, occasional breakout, Using ECO FROG (my own=disclaimer), and TrueScience (I also sell this)... Happy with that...Come visit on FB! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 12:02 pm |
Yeah, I saw that. Thanks... That freaked me out too!
WHAT are we supposed to do?
Ok, so we do wear hats, and I wear long sleeve when I can tolerate it.
And when we're at the lake we all have the spf shirts. I need a new one, in case anyone has a web suggestion! |
_________________
Claudia of FlexEffect... 43, fair skin, occasional breakout, Using ECO FROG (my own=disclaimer), and TrueScience (I also sell this)... Happy with that...Come visit on FB! |
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 12:14 pm |
| ClaudiaFE wrote: |
Yeah, I saw that. Thanks... That freaked me out too!
WHAT are we supposed to do?
Ok, so we do wear hats, and I wear long sleeve when I can tolerate it.
And when we're at the lake we all have the spf shirts. I need a new one, in case anyone has a web suggestion! |
I wish I knew because my eyes get very irritated by every chemical sunscreen I ever tried!
There is a site Coolibar that has clothing and hats ect.
http://www.coolibar.com/ |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
 |
Sun May 13, 2012 4:31 pm |
Thanks... have been to the coolibar website. I guess I want something more fun. Doesn't exactly exist.
I did find a site I haven't been to before
http://www.sungrubbies.com/product_departments_html/UV-Protection-Women-Dept.htm
They have some nice, more creative stuff... |
_________________
Claudia of FlexEffect... 43, fair skin, occasional breakout, Using ECO FROG (my own=disclaimer), and TrueScience (I also sell this)... Happy with that...Come visit on FB! |
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 5:32 pm |
They had some great hats! (my others are Coolibar, and I was looking for a little more variety) I signed up for their newsletter too. |
_________________
No longer answering PM's due to numerous weird messages. |
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 5:57 pm |
I think I'd like the Bora Bora hat for the lake while IN the lake...
The Bella Sun hat is calling my name!
And well, just to freak out my husband I really feel I MUST order... The solar face shield. I'm trying to figure out when you need that? LOL! |
_________________
Claudia of FlexEffect... 43, fair skin, occasional breakout, Using ECO FROG (my own=disclaimer), and TrueScience (I also sell this)... Happy with that...Come visit on FB! |
|
|
|
|
Sun May 13, 2012 6:00 pm |
| ClaudiaFE wrote: |
I think I'd like the Bora Bora hat for the lake while IN the lake...
The Bella Sun hat is calling my name!
And well, just to freak out my husband I really feel I MUST order... The solar face shield. I'm trying to figure out when you need that? LOL! |
Thanks for posting the site Claudia, nice to have some other options!
LOL At freaking hubby out!  |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
|
Tue May 15, 2012 7:18 pm |
This one is even more dramatic! 
Is Sunscreen Blocking Cancer… or Your Health?
A bit of the article:
But that’s a fallacy. Plenty of research shows otherwise. Sunlight is actually a cancer-preventer.
You just have to know which ultraviolet rays are good for you… and which ones aren’t.
The sun gives off both Ultraviolet A (UVA) and Ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation. By stimulating your body’s production of vitamin D, UVB rays help your body stave off breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers.
UVA gets deeper into your skin. It can lead to sunburn and cell damage. That produces free radicals… and those are harmful to your health.
http://davidbozek.net/2011/05/18/is-sunscreen-blocking-cancer-or-your-health/ |
_________________
I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
Blackberry
New Member
Joined: 13 May 2012
Posts: 5
|
|
|
Tue May 15, 2012 9:38 pm |
| The FDA are inextricably linked with private industries nowadays so there's a conflict of interest. |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Nov 22, 2024 4:07 am |
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. |
|
 |
|
|
