 |
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:12 pm  |
It's about time the FDA finally did something about this. I just happened to get an email from EWG on their 5th Annual Sunscreen report and noticed some comments on this from them on their front page. (See below)
EWG has been harping on the FDA for YEARS to make changes in the SS industry about the ratings and safety of SS. They don't seem to enthralled about this news, however.
FDA Sunscreen Rules Too Little and VERY Late
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 14, 2011
Washington, D.C. –The federal Food and Drug Administration’s first sunscreen rules, released today after nearly 33 years of deliberations, fall short.
“FDA's action offers some noticeable improvements for consumers, such limiting misleading claims” said David Andrews, Ph.D, a senior scientist with Environmental Working Group. “However, it is clear that FDA caved to industry and weakened its safety standards. Its earlier draft proposed stronger health protections.”
According to Andrews, the agency’s final rule for UVA protection has been substantially watered down from a draft circulated in 2007.
“The agency's weak standard for UVA protection will not allow consumers to differentiate between superior and mediocre products,” Andrews said. “FDA’s rule will allow most products on the U.S. market to use the label ‘broad spectrum sunscreen,’ even though some will not offer enough protection to assure Americans they can stay in the sun without suffering skin damage from invisible UVA radiation. For that reason, about 20 percent of products that meet the new FDA standards could not be sold in Europe, where UVA standards are strict.”
The FDA continues to allow oxybenzone, retinyl palmitate and several other ingredients in sunscreens despite scientists' concerns about their toxicity.
One bit of good news is the agency's bar on the misleading terms “waterproof” “sweatproof” and “sunblock.” But it is seeking further comments about SPF values above 50.
“FDA’s new standards don’t go far enough to protect you from the sun,” Andrews said. “Consumers will have to turn elsewhere, like EWG’s online guide, to find the safest, most effective sunscreens. After 33 years of delay, it is evident people just can’t trust FDA on this issue.”
NOTE: To speak with EWG’s research staff, please call Alex Formuzis at 202.667.6982 or email: alex@ewg.org
# # #
EWG is a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, DC that uses the power of information to protect human health and the environment. http://www.ewg.org
While it looks like this will help the consumer some, it will still be a bit of caveat emptor for the majority of us |
_________________
early 60's, fair skin, combo skin, very few fine lines, vertical lip lines, crows feet & 11's, fighting aging! Using Palancia HF, dermarollers, CPs, Retin A Micro, Safetox, AALS, Clairsonic |
|
|
|
|
Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:23 pm |
| That is great! I've been doing a lot of research on UVB & UVA. I found it difficult to find good coverage of UVA. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:36 am |
Yes, finally! 
I just saw all the news headlines on the internet this morning about the New FDA Sunscreen Rules and it was even posted in my local newspaper.  |
_________________
56, Very Fair Skin, Oily with Mild Breakouts, Blonde, Blue Eyes, Irish/German Descent |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:00 am |
Surely thats negligence, knowing certain chemicals aren't safe and allowing misleading wording. Why hasn't someone sued the FDA?
I now feel lucky living in Europe, the authorities seem a bit more trustworthy than in America |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:21 am |
| gimidalight wrote: |
Surely thats negligence, knowing certain chemicals aren't safe and allowing misleading wording. Why hasn't someone sued the FDA?
I now feel lucky living in Europe, the authorities seem a bit more trustworthy than in America |
The FDA is a government organization, making it almost impossible to sue. Plus, they would probably take advantage of the fact that whoever is sueing them is probably poorly educated in the knowledge of ingredient safety. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:55 am |
| Finally, this should have happened ages ago. Mind you though if sdunscreen protects the skin, isnt it considered a drug, and shouldnt it be only available through a doctor. I know that would be silly but considering but considering its a drug wouldnt the same regulations apply to it? |
_________________
AGE: 25. Some laxity, fine lines, rosacea, and crepey skin. USING: Tripollar STOP, Lightstim, Slendertone Face, Microcurrent Wand, Almighty Ultrasound Device, Olay Cleansing Brush, Neck Line Slimmer. Retin-A, MUAC peels, and taking beauty supplements. Botox eyebrow lift and HG lip products are Too Faced. |
|
|
|
| Thu Feb 13, 2025 8:54 pm |
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. |
|
 |
|
|
