Some Facts About Sunscreens

Behind the Screen By: Shivani Vora May 14, 2007 - 4:41:20 AM Sunblock has had a few bad years, including class-action lawsuits and new claims that it causes—rather than prevents—cancer. How do you protect yourself this summer? You exercise regularly. You don’t smoke. You always wear your seatbelt. And when you’re in the sun, you never forget your SPF. Bases covered? Not so fast. Researchers at Harvard Medical School recently found that a vitamin D-deficiency—which can result from diligent sunscreen use—is linked to an increased risk of prostate cancer. Meanwhile, a class-action lawsuit is in progress in California against five major sunscreen manufacturers, claiming that their products don’t live up to their label claims of providing protection against UV rays or of being waterproof. Experts, however, warn that this brouhaha isn’t a reason to toss out your sunscreen. “There isn’t an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency,” says Coyle Connolly, a board--certified dermatologist in New Jersey, “but there is an -epidemic of skin cancer from too much sun -exposure.” To maintain adequate levels of vitamin D, says Dr. Connolly, just spend a few minutes in the sun, without sunscreen, over the course of each day. The lawsuits have drawn attention to one dirty secret of sunscreen, however: You have to be a real label hawk to know if your tube is truly “broad spectrum,” meaning that it protects you from both UVA and UVB rays. Any sunscreen with an SPF of 15 will block 94 percent of UVB rays, which penetrate the skin superficially, causing sunburn and skin cancer. UVA rays, on the other hand, cause up to 80 percent of sun-related wrinkles and age spots, and also increase your risk of skin cancer. UVA rays are trickier to fight because they penetrate the atmosphere even on cloudy days, and only four ingredients provide solid protection against them. Two of those ingredients are chemical sunblocks—avobenzone and Mexoryl SX—which work by absorbing and neutralizing UV radiation after it hits your skin, but before it can damage cells. The other two—zinc oxide and titanium dioxide—are physical sunblocks, which form a shield and actually reflect and disperse the radiation before it hits your skin. "Stay away from any sunscreen if it has an SPF of less than 15 or if it does not contain one of these four ingredients,” says Dr. Connolly. Which sunscreen you should grab depends on your needs. Chemical sunblocks are generally more waterproof, but they take 30 minutes to absorb into the skin, while physical sunblocks are effective as soon as you apply them and, because they are made from natural ingredients, can be less irritating. Mexoryl SX has been available in Europe for years, but it was not FDA approved until last year. It provides excellent protection against both short and long UVA rays, whereas the others primarily protect against long UVA rays. No matter which sunscreen you choose, David J. Leffell, MD, professor of dermatology at the Yale University School of Medicine, recommends reapplying it every couple of hours. “Ignore any claims about the longevity of sunscreen,” he warns. Even potions labeled “all day” wear off long before eight hours, he says, and sooner if you’re swimming or sweating. For Your Face Anthelios SX is a daily facial -moisturizer that combines Mexoryl SX and avobenzone to prevent wrinkles, sunspots, and cancer. Chemical sun--screens like these don’t cast a whitish pall over your face like titanium oxide and zinc oxide do. $29, laroche-posay.us.com For Your Lips Men get lip cancer at a much higher rate than women do because lipstick is a physical sunblock. NeoStrata SPF 15 Lip Conditioner ($6.50, neostrata.com) contains titanium dioxide for UVA protection. Most lip products with SPF (including ChapStick) contain oxybenzone for UVA protection, which experts say is not as effective as titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, or avobenzone. For Your Body Jack Black Ultra-Light Spray Sunscreen SPF 25 combines avobenzone for UVA protection with citronella to repel mosquitoes ($18, getjackblack.com). If bug bites aren’t a concern, try UV Expert 20, which combines Mexoryl SX, avobenzone, and titanium dioxide for complete coverage ($39, lancome-usa.com). Recommendations FDA has spent the past 29 years drafting sunscreen standards (FDA 2007), which it urges manufacturers to follow voluntarily. FDA has no public plan for setting a date by which these standards would finally become effective and mandatory. In lieu of enforceable standards, each sunscreen manufacturer decides on test methods, marketing claims, and the level of protection they are willing and able to provide consumers. Health authorities recommend sunscreen, but people are left wondering which of the hundreds of sunscreens on store shelves will best protect their and their families' skin from the sun. Sunscreens are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to ways that the chemical industry and the government are failing to protect public health. An extensive body of scientific literature demonstrates that everyone in the world carries in their body hundreds if not thousands of industrial chemicals at any given moment, the result of exposures to contaminants in air, water, and food, and to ingredients in everyday consumer products. No one understands the health implications of our exposures to complex mixtures of low doses of industrial compounds and pollutants: remarkably, federal health standards do not require companies to test their products for safety before they are sold, including nearly all chemicals in sunscreen and other personal care products, and the federal government approves new chemicals for the market using computer models to predict if they are toxic to humans. These are particularly risky methods given the many studies showing that these pollutants cross the placenta to contaminate babies even before the moment of birth, including a recent study conducted by EWG finding an average of 200 chemicals in umbilical cord blood from 10 newborn babies [read more]. This situation is unacceptable. To protect public health, including the health of the fetus, infant, child and others who are most vulnerable to toxic injury, we recommend: FDA must set mandatory sunscreen safety standards. As mandated by Congress, FDA must complete their safety standards (the "sunscreen monograph"), and establish a date by which these standards will become mandatory. This study confirms the need for mandatory standards — the voluntary system currently in place leaves the public with many sunscreen products that are not as safe and effective as the public needs and expects. FDA must develop UVA standards for sunscreen. While FDA has set guidelines for sunburn (UVB) protection, the agency has not established protocols and requirements for UVA protection. This is a critical gap in public health protection. UVA radiation is deeply penetrating and is linked to skin damage, including premature skin aging, wrinkling, and possibly cancer. FDA is charged with regulating sunscreen and protecting public health, and both of those charges demand that the agency set standards for UVA protection. FDA must approve new, effective and safe sunscreens for use in the U.S. Some sunscreen chemicals have been under review at the Agency for over than a decade. Effective sunscreens not approved in this country are in widespread use elsewhere in the world. FDA sorely needs to streamline and modernize its sunscreen review process to give consumers access to the best products possible. In the larger picture, our system of public health protections allows the vast majority of industrial chemicals to enter commerce with no requirement for premarket safety testing, even for chemicals that will end up in the bodies of Americans from their everyday exposures to ingredients in consumer products. Many state and local organizations and coalitions like the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics are working for important changes that help close the gaps in our system of public health protections. We not only need sunscreens guaranteed to be safe and effective, but we also sorely need policies that would require companies to document the safety of chemicals before they go on the market. And, most importantly, we need policies that would require that chemicals be safe for the fetus, infant, and other vulnerable populations — a simple, commonsense idea completely absent from current federal law. Such advances would dramatically improve our understanding of health impacts from chemical exposures, and would go a long way toward sealing the gaps that leave consumers at risk from a lifetime of exposure to chemicals. U.S. lags behind the world in sunscreen safety and effectiveness. FDA has approved just 17 sunscreen active ingredients for use in the U.S. In Europe 29 have been approved, including some that are more effective than those available here, particularly for blocking UVA. When FDA issued their so-called final monograph for sunscreens (which they subsequently stayed indefinitely at the request of industry), they received multiple petitions urging that they review active ingredients approved for use in Europe. The Agency replied it would "address sunscreen active ingredients that have foreign marketing experience and data at a future time," a hollow promise if their 30-year track record on developing sunscreen standards is any indication. FDA faces pressure from industry, states, and Congress to set UVA standards and approve new UVA sunscreens to protect the public. The industry's trade association petitioned the agency to approve new UVA filters beginning in 2003 (CTFA and CHPA 2003). In a May 2007 letter to FDA's commissioner, six senators urged the agency to finish setting UVA standards for sunscreen (Dodd 2007). They reminded the Commissioner that the agency had missed the Congressisonally mandated deadline of May 2006 for finalizing the draft sunscreen standards, including new UVA standards. "We continue to find this baffling [the lack of UVA standards] since many other countries, including the European Union, have adopted sunscreen standards including UVA to protect their citizens," they wrote. FDA has not reviewed or approved new, effective sunscreens available in other countries.