Sunscreens Exposed: Nine Surprising Truths
Sunscreens prevent sunburns, but beyond that simple fact surprisingly
little is known about the safety and efficacy of these ubiquitous
creams and sprays. EWG’s review of the latest research unearthed
troubling facts that might tempt you to give up on sunscreens
altogether. That’s not the right answer. Despite the unknowns about
sunscreens’ efficacy, public health agencies still recommend using them,
just not as your first line of defense against the sun. At EWG we use
sunscreens, but we look for shade, wear protective clothing and avoid
the noontime sun before we smear on the cream. Here are the surprising
facts:
1. There’s no consensus that sunscreens prevent skin cancer.
The FDA’s 2011 sunscreen rules allow sunscreen makers to advertise
that using their products can decrease the risk of skin cancer and
sun-related skin aging. But a wide range of public health agencies –
including the FDA – have found very little evidence that sunscreen
prevents most types of skin cancer. In reviewing the evidence, the FDA
said that the available clinical studies “do not demonstrate that even
[broad spectrum products with SPF greater than 15] alone reduce the risk
of skin cancer and early skin aging.” The agency also said that it is
“not aware of any studies examining the effect of sunscreen use on the
development of melanoma.” The International Agency for Research on
Cancer recommends clothing, hats and shade as primary barriers to UV
radiation. It says that “sunscreens should not be the first choice for
skin cancer prevention and should not be used as the sole agent for
protection against the sun” (IARC 2001a).
Read more.
2. There’s some evidence that sunscreens might increase the risk of the deadliest form of skin cancer for some people.
Some researchers have detected an increased risk of melanoma among
sunscreen users. No one knows the cause, but scientists speculate that
sunscreen users stay out in the sun longer and absorb more radiation
overall, or that free radicals released as sunscreen chemicals break
down in sunlight may play a role. One other hunch: Inferior sunscreens
with poor UVA protection that have dominated the market for 30 years may
have led to this surprising outcome. All major public health agencies
still advise using sunscreens, but they also stress the importance of
shade, clothing and timing.
Read more.
3. There are dozens of high-SPF products — but no proof they’re better.
The FDA has proposed prohibiting the sale of sunscreens with SPF
values higher than “50+.” The agency has written that values higher than
50 would be “misleading to the consumer,” given that there is an
“absence of data demonstrating additional clinical benefit” (FDA 2011a),
and that “there is no assurance that the specific values themselves are
in fact truthful…” (FDA 2007). Scientists are also worried that
high-SPF products may tempt people to stay in the sun too long,
suppressing sunburns (a late, key warning of overexposure) while upping
the risks of other kinds of skin damage.
Flouting the FDA’s proposed regulation, companies continue to sell
high-SPF offerings in 2012. More than 1 in 7 products now lists SPF
values higher than 50+, compared to only 1 in 8 in 2009, according to
EWG’s analysis of more than 800 beach and sport sunscreens. Among the
worst offenders are Walgreens and Aveeno brands. These manufacturers
boast SPF values greater than 50+ on more than 40 percent of their
sunscreens
Read more.
4. Too little sun might be harmful, reducing the body’s vitamin D levels.
Sunshine serves a critical function in the body that sunscreen
appears to inhibit — producing vitamin D. The main source of vitamin D
in the body is sunshine, and the compound is enormously important to
health – it strengthens bones and the immune system, reduces the risk of
various cancers (including breast, colon, kidney and ovarian cancers)
and regulates at least a thousand different genes governing virtually
every tissue in the body (Mead 2008). About one-fourth of Americans have
borderline low levels of vitamin D, and 8 percent have a serious
deficiency (CDC 2012). Particular groups are at the highest risk –
breast-fed infants, people with darker skin and people who have limited
sun exposure (NIH 2012).
Some people can make enough vitamin D from 10 to 15 minutes of
unprotected sun exposure several times a week. But many others cannot.
The right amount depends on the individual’s age, skin tone, the
intensity of sunlight, time outdoors and skin cancer risk. Check with
your doctor to see if you should get a vitamin D test or if you should
take seasonal or year-round supplements.
Read More
5. The common sunscreen ingredient vitamin A may speed development of cancer.
Recently available data from an FDA study indicate that a form of
vitamin A, retinyl palmitate, may speed the development of skin tumors
and lesions when applied to skin in the presence of sunlight (NTP 2009).
This evidence is troubling, because the sunscreen industry adds vitamin
A to 25 percent of all sunscreens.
The industry puts vitamin A in its formulations because it is an
anti-oxidant that slows skin aging. That may be true for lotions and
night creams used indoors, but FDA recently conducted a study of vitamin
A’s photocarcinogenic properties – the possibility that it can promote
cancerous tumors when used on skin exposed to sunlight. Scientists have
known for some time that vitamin A can spur excess skin growth
(hyperplasia) and that in sunlight it can form free radicals that damage
DNA.
In the FDA’s one-year study, tumors and lesions developed sooner in
lab animals coated in a vitamin A-laced cream than animals treated with a
vitamin-free cream. Both groups were exposed to the equivalent of just
nine minutes of maximum intensity sunlight each day.
It’s an ironic twist for an industry already battling studies that
have questioned whether their products protect against skin cancer. The
FDA data are preliminary, but if they hold up in the final assessment,
sunscreen makers have a big problem. In the meantime, EWG recommends
that consumers avoid sunscreens with vitamin A (look for “retinyl
palmitate” or “retinol” on the label).
Read more.
6. Free radicals and other skin-damaging byproducts of sunscreens.
Both UV radiation and many common sunscreen ingredients generate free
radicals that damage DNA and skin cells, accelerate skin aging and
cause skin cancer. An effective sunscreen prevents more damage than it
causes, but sunscreens are far better at preventing sunburn than at
limiting free radical damage. While typical SPF ratings for sunburn
protection range from 15 to 50, equivalent “free radical protection
factors” come in at about 2. When consumers apply too little sunscreen
or reapply it infrequently – and that’s more common than not –
sunscreens can cause more free radical damage than UV rays on bare skin.
The FDA could improve sunscreens’ ability to reduce free radical skin
damage by strengthening standards for UVA protection.
Read more.
7. Pick your sunscreen: nanomaterials or potential hormone disrupters.
The ideal sunscreen would completely block the UV rays that cause
sunburn, immune suppression and damaging free radicals. It would remain
effective on the skin for several hours and not form harmful ingredients
when degraded by UV light. It would smell and feel pleasant so that
people use it in the right amount and frequency.
Unsurprisingly, there is currently no sunscreen that satisfies all
these criteria. The major choice in the U.S. is between “chemical”
sunscreens, which have inferior stability, penetrate the skin and may
disrupt the body’s hormone systems, and “mineral” sunscreens (zinc and
titanium), which often contain micronized- or nanoscale particles of
those minerals.
After reviewing the evidence, EWG determined that mineral sunscreens
have the best safety profile of today’s choices. They are stable in
sunlight and do not appear to penetrate the skin. They offer UVA
protection, which is sorely lacking in most of today’s sunscreen
products. Mexoryl SX (ecamsule) is another good option, but it’s
available in very few formulations. Tinosorb S and M could be great
solutions but are not yet available in the United States. For consumers
who don’t like mineral products, we recommend sunscreens with avobenzone
(3 percent for the best UVA protection) and without the notorious
hormone disrupter oxybenzone. Scientists have urged parents to avoid
using oxybenzone on children due to penetration and toxicity concerns
What's unique about Catalyst Plus+ is that rather the using 10% L-Ascorbic Acid as we do in Catalyst, we're using 20% Ascorbyl Glucoside in the new Catalyst Plus formula. After long and extensive research I determined that Ascorbyl Glucoside is the most stable form of Vitamin C. The neat thing about this is that it is a sustained released product, giving your skin the time it needs to break apart the glucoside from the L-Ascorbic Acid, and delivering fresh Vitamin C into your skin. 
from oxidized Vitamin C. People with Rosacea will find that this is a better-tolerated formula due to the slow release of L-Ascorbic Acid into the skin. The new Catalyst Plus+ contains all of the components used to create the zinc finger technology but with one added attribute, aloe, adding a nice soothing quality about it. Be sure to remind your clients that there may be a response with purging skin for a couple of weeks after beginning use.
