Comments on: Sunscreen Safety: SPF, UVA, UVB, Oxybenzone & Vitamin D

By: Heather

Heather — Sun, 15 Oct 2023 14:03:13 +0000

In reply to cady. If an increase in skin cancer occurrence was due to a user’s false sense of security after sunscreen application that led to overexposure, there would be a corresponding increase in serum vitamin D levels, rather than the deficiency of vitamin D levels that we’re actually observing.

By: Anne

Anne — Fri, 28 Aug 2020 22:17:39 +0000

In reply to cady. Well said. This from another skin cancer scientist.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Fri, 29 May 2020 00:02:58 +0000

Hello! I went directly to EWG’s site and found the two Babyganics products listed are no longer on their list 🙁

By: cady

cady — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:53:10 +0000

I love the website, but have to bust this. I’m a multi lingual skincare researcher. I’ve compiled peer-reviewed suncare studies from different languages. I know the science. Yes, some chemicals in sunscreens can be harmful, but they are more beneficial. FDA APPROVED SUNSCREEN ALWAYS HELPS MORE THAN IT HURTS (excluding allergies). Even if some ingredients are potential carcinogens, radiation, like the sun’s rays, is far a more potent carcinogen. Some reports have found skin cancer rates and sunscreen use seem to increase together because sunscreen creates a false sense of security for a lot of people, so they will apply it instead of wearing clothing on exposed areas, they will spend more time in the sun believing they are safe, and they won’t reapply, leading to more skin damage (correlation, not causation). Chemical formulations are made to a certain molecular size so that they will not penetrate deeper than your dermis, so they will not enter the blood stream (a few molecules will get through, not enough to hurt you). So why are these chemicals found in so many people’s bodies? They’re in food packaging and other products you consume, to protect those items from the sun. The research you cite is poorly reviewed in the industry. The reason the FDA didn’t put out any kind of recall on sunscreens is because these chemicals most likely came from food packaging, polluted water, and sunscreen inhalation. That’s why you don’t want to use some sunscreens on kids — they are much more likely to inhale it. The FDA has asked for more research on many sunscreen ingredients, including zinc oxide, because the industry is now decades old, so it is time to re-evaluate every single ingredient’s efficacy. I am appalled that an MD reviewed this article and did not correct these errors.
Also, retinyl palmate does not speed up the growth of skin cancer cells. Retinyl palmate increases skin cell turnover, meaning it increases the rate at which skin cells regenerate. So yeah, if you used this chemical on a cancerous spot, that would be bad, as the cancerous cells would reproduce faster. Very important to check your skin for cancerous spots frequently regardless! Furthermore, if it is not applied directly to cancerous growths, retinyl palmate can reverse some sun damage on the skin. Admittedly, research on retinyl palmate is rather limited, but other similar vitamin A derivatives have been around for decades, including the acne drug Accutane, which I gladly used as a teenager to combat the issue I had with picking at my own acne due to my OCD.

Overall, I really appreciate the amount of work you put in to your website, I just feel like it’s dangerous to promote untested, unregulated sunscreen over what decades of evidence has shown will help lower our skin cancer rates.

By: Katie Wells

Katie Wells — Tue, 23 Jul 2019 22:29:41 +0000

In reply to Naomi.

That’s not actually the case: https://wellnessmama.com/91827/cholesterol-benefits/

By: Naomi

Naomi — Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:38:48 +0000

Great article, except for “drinking a 1/4 cup coconut oil melted in a cup of herbal tea per day-
the Medium Chain Fatty Acids and saturated fat are easily utilized by the body for new skin formation and are protective against burning.”

Drinking saturated fat is not a good idea. It’s raises LDL Cholestrol linked to heart disease and It certainly is not utilized by the body for new skin formation. Topically yes, great for the skin, but not internally. There is no evidence to suggest this.

By: liame

liame — Tue, 11 Jun 2019 08:42:51 +0000

thank you!!!

By: Katie Wells

Katie Wells — Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:21:56 +0000

In reply to Shonna. I haven't researched that one much as I'm not a fan of MLM companies in general...

By: Shonna

Shonna — Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:15:14 +0000

Thank you so much for this comprehensive post! I wish more people took this seriously, I can’t tell you how many times I get a giant nose and mouthful of chemicals while someone is hosing down their child with spray sunscreen at the pool!

I’m wondering, do you know anything about the Beauty Counter Sunscreen Spray (and stick)? I didn’t see it on your list, but I believe it does not have any of harmful ingredients, and it is the one I’ve found that seems to rub in the best, and not have that purple/white sheen.

By: Kris

Kris — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 19:36:57 +0000

In reply to Rebecca. So she should just allow other people to put products on her daughter that cause an allergic skin reaction because minor allergies should be treated as less important since more severe allergies exist? That's silly. All allergic reactions should be taken seriously because a minor one today could turn into a major one tomorrow. I developed an allergy to amoxicillin in my 30's and while I only broke out in hives after taking it, continuing use could have led to something more severe. I also have a skin allergy to nickel so I have to be cautious about the kind of jewelry I can wear and nickel-plated rivets in jeans become a big problem. The resulting weeks-long painful rash certainly won't kill me, but it isn't something I shouldn't take precautions against just because it won't send me into anaphylactic shock.

By: deb

deb — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 15:52:06 +0000

Babyganics cream yes but spray no ! Contain octonoxate. Used the cream for year and once ordered the spray, only to find it is not the same product !! You might want to remove from your list (ref gives different rating for both too)
Thanks for the great article

By: Katie Wells

Katie Wells — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 14:49:11 +0000

In reply to Flora Hearst.

You’re right, there is a lot of controversy surrounding cod liver oil. I wrote a bit more about it here: https://wellnessmama.com/59039/fermented-cod-liver-oil-safe/

By: Flora Hearst

Flora Hearst — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 13:40:08 +0000

I am so glad you are discussing this subject but I strongly object to one thing you have suggested: fermented cod liver oil. I am sure you have heard about the huge controversies regarding its safety. It is clear to me that something is really not right with how it is being produced and marketed and I am kind of shocked to find that you are among the wellness leaders who is not owning up to this.
I also think that: your body does not make Vitamin D when you cover up either or stay in the shade. We need to be in the sun to make vitamin D. I personally suggest doing 20 minutes of high level sun (or working up to that if you are really sunburn sensitive) and then putting on the good mineral sunscreen and/or protective clothing. Also, its beneficial to wait to shower a few hours after your sun exposure or even until the next morning. You can wash some or potentially all of the vitamin D production off your skin if you shower too soon.
Also, another tip: we bring two sun shirts to the beach, one for wearing in the water and getting wet and the other for dry times on the beach. This way, after our twenty minutes of open skin sun time, we can really cover up.

By: Haley

Haley — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 03:23:51 +0000

In reply to Janet Roca. Even if you don't burn and are outside for multiple hours a day without SPF you damaged your skin. The UVA rays are the ones that penetrate deep in the skin that will cause ageing and are associated with certain skin cancers. It's the cumulative exposure that really adds up. I work in dermatology, and have yet to have a skin cancer patient that wore daily SPF. If you are concerned about ingredients find a good mineral SPF, nothing homemade because it's a lot of work even for chemists to make an SPF.

By: Haley

Haley — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 03:21:38 +0000

In reply to Julie. Even if you don't burn and are outside for multiple hours a day without SPF you damaged your skin. The UVA rays are the ones that penetrate deep in the skin that will cause ageing and are associated with certain skin cancers. It's the cumulative exposure that really adds up. I work in dermatology, and have yet to have a skin cancer patient that wore daily SPF. If you are concerned about ingredients find a good mineral SPF, nothing homemade because it's a lot of work even for chemists to make an SPF.

By: Carlie Goddard

Carlie Goddard — Sun, 26 May 2019 11:51:18 +0000

Hi! I have the babyganics sunscreen but it contains octisalate which I thought wasn’t considered safe. Thoughts? Thanks

By: Katie Wells

Katie Wells — Fri, 24 May 2019 23:57:09 +0000

In reply to Deric. Sorry to hear that. It's possible they've changed their formulation since I last used it...

By: Deric

Deric — Fri, 24 May 2019 20:37:39 +0000

I ordered the Bull Frog sunscreen based on your list of recommendations above, and when I received it, the label shows it is full of the chemicals you said should be avoided. Now I have to bother with returning the product and finding a different option.

By: Janet Roca

Janet Roca — Sun, 19 May 2019 12:29:26 +0000

Third generation of skin cancer.
Father & Grandfather had skin cancer. Grandfather died from skin cancer. Mother had squamous cell.
I had basal cell on my upper lip that was misdiagnosed as a cold sore.
Had cutting edge Mohs surgery 24 years ago
with over 5 reconstructive
surgeries. No reoccurrence. Family has always lived on or near the water. Have shared your info with friends and family.

By: Anna

Anna — Thu, 16 May 2019 03:28:03 +0000

In reply to Alexis. Thank you for this comment! It is upsetting that people base their opinions about important issues using blogs and non scientific articles. Author's vitamin D understanding is misleading to say the least