4 ms·

The outrage was that 1. Sunscreen has chemicals which bioaccumulate with use and 2. No testing had been done on sunscreen as it was assumed that it was safe as

The outrage was that 1. Sunscreen has chemicals which bioaccumulate with use and 2. No testing had been done on sunscreen as it was assumed that it was safe as a topical medication. Combine that with the fact that sunscreen has not been shown to cause any population wide reduction in skin cancer prevalence and endemic vitamin D deficiency. I think that people have a right to be mad?

moffkalast 3y ago
Do people really wear sunscreen for cancer prevention and to get more vitamin D? I would imagine it's more about preventing painful ass burns (place hyphen as you wish) and blocking UV skin damage that accelerates aging.
- loeg 3y ago
  Yes, there are people concerned about skin cancer. For an anecdote, my uncle had skin cancer three times and became very conservative about always wearing hats and sunscreen.
- EdwardDiego 3y ago
  In the Southern Hemisphere (especially the Anglosphere countries due to our heritage of pasty white people), it's to prevent sunburn and especially cancer. Yeah, sunburn sucks, but thanks to the ozone hole that forms over Antarctica and then drifts northwards, melanoma is very high. And so is the sunburn risk, you can burn in 10 minutes here, but repeated sunburn increases melanoma risk.
  - lostlogin 3y ago
    It’s seriously grim at times - the burn time drops to 5-10 minutes and you want to mow the lawn. Suncream stinging your eyes you get it done. And you still get burnt, even with it on. Car paint fades fast and everything plastic or fabric gets destroyed by UV in a year or so.
    - EdwardDiego 3y ago
      > Suncream stinging your eyes you get it done As a ginger, the south sun is my mortal enemy, and I always struggled with sunscreen in the eyes when I got a sweat on hunting or tramping. And of course, all that sunscreen came from somewhere, so I ended up with sweat rivulet shaped sunburn on my forehead. After trying all the brands I now swear by the Neutrogena 50+ ultra sheer spray on, only one I've found that stays on my forehead and out of my eyes, no matter how hot the day or steep the ridge. I keep my can of it hidden away lest any of my kids decide to use it instead of the regular lotion because they like the spraying aspect.
      - pirate787 3y ago
        The spraying isn't safe, unfortunately, according the FDA. You really don't want your kids to breathe the stuff. https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/07/don-t-spray-sunscreens-on-kids-at-least-for-now/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/07/don-t-spray...
        dzhiurgis 3y ago
        Compressed aerosol one isn’t safe. Ones with squirt handle are ok and great with kids.
        EdwardDiego 3y ago
        I spray it into my hand and rub it on, as my forehead is right above my eyes, and my main goal is to keep my sunscreen out of my eyes! And I don't want my kids using it at all, it's for my specific purposes, and it's expensive! ;) Edit I see the "spray it in your hand" approach is what the article you linked suggests. Glad I've adopted harm-minimalising approaches already :D
      - dzhiurgis 3y ago
        I swear by Neutrogena too - the roll on pencils are especially good for face as it doesn’t sting as much for whatever reason.
- themk 3y ago
  Reading this was a real culture shock. In Australia, people definitely wear sunscreen for cancer prevention.
  - lostlogin 3y ago
    Here in New Zealand we do too.
EdwardDiego 3y ago
> sunscreen has not been shown to cause any population wide reduction in skin cancer prevalence Have you accounted for all variables? The moral hazard where people stay out in the sun longer when they're wearing sunscreen, the fact that testing shows there are manufacturers with poor quality control leading to significant differences between claimed SPF and actual SPF, have there been any changes in patterns of time spent outdoors over the years, and how about the fact that different cohorts have different rates and trends? We know that aging increases the risk of cancer, we also know that repeated instances of UV skin damage make skin cancer more likely. So, have a look at this graph (Figure 2). https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/occurrence-of-melanoma https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/occurrence-of-melanoma The rates in the 25-44 cohort, who grew up when health initiatives about "being sun smart" were introduced to school curricula and promoted in the media are lower and trending slowly downwards. Whereas the rates for boomers with a lifetime of accumulated UV damage are trending upwards as aging leaves them vulnerable to cancer if all kind. Endemic vitamin D deficiency is going to need a citation, I think. In my country at least, it's only been noted in children who have very high melanin already, and then dress in our local "tough gangsta" style with baseball caps and hoodies with the hood pulled up over the cap, thus drastically reducing the area of skin exposed.

moffkalast 3y ago

Do people really wear sunscreen for cancer prevention and to get more vitamin D? I would imagine it's more about preventing painful ass burns (place hyphen as you wish) and blocking UV skin damage that accelerates aging.

loeg 3y ago
Yes, there are people concerned about skin cancer. For an anecdote, my uncle had skin cancer three times and became very conservative about always wearing hats and sunscreen.
EdwardDiego 3y ago
In the Southern Hemisphere (especially the Anglosphere countries due to our heritage of pasty white people), it's to prevent sunburn and especially cancer. Yeah, sunburn sucks, but thanks to the ozone hole that forms over Antarctica and then drifts northwards, melanoma is very high. And so is the sunburn risk, you can burn in 10 minutes here, but repeated sunburn increases melanoma risk.
- lostlogin 3y ago
  It’s seriously grim at times - the burn time drops to 5-10 minutes and you want to mow the lawn. Suncream stinging your eyes you get it done. And you still get burnt, even with it on. Car paint fades fast and everything plastic or fabric gets destroyed by UV in a year or so.
  - EdwardDiego 3y ago
    > Suncream stinging your eyes you get it done As a ginger, the south sun is my mortal enemy, and I always struggled with sunscreen in the eyes when I got a sweat on hunting or tramping. And of course, all that sunscreen came from somewhere, so I ended up with sweat rivulet shaped sunburn on my forehead. After trying all the brands I now swear by the Neutrogena 50+ ultra sheer spray on, only one I've found that stays on my forehead and out of my eyes, no matter how hot the day or steep the ridge. I keep my can of it hidden away lest any of my kids decide to use it instead of the regular lotion because they like the spraying aspect.
    - pirate787 3y ago
      The spraying isn't safe, unfortunately, according the FDA. You really don't want your kids to breathe the stuff. https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/07/don-t-spray-sunscreens-on-kids-at-least-for-now/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/07/don-t-spray...
      - dzhiurgis 3y ago
        Compressed aerosol one isn’t safe. Ones with squirt handle are ok and great with kids.
      - EdwardDiego 3y ago
        I spray it into my hand and rub it on, as my forehead is right above my eyes, and my main goal is to keep my sunscreen out of my eyes! And I don't want my kids using it at all, it's for my specific purposes, and it's expensive! ;) Edit I see the "spray it in your hand" approach is what the article you linked suggests. Glad I've adopted harm-minimalising approaches already :D
    - dzhiurgis 3y ago
      I swear by Neutrogena too - the roll on pencils are especially good for face as it doesn’t sting as much for whatever reason.
themk 3y ago
Reading this was a real culture shock. In Australia, people definitely wear sunscreen for cancer prevention.
- lostlogin 3y ago
  Here in New Zealand we do too.

EdwardDiego 3y ago

> sunscreen has not been shown to cause any population wide reduction in skin cancer prevalence Have you accounted for all variables? The moral hazard where people stay out in the sun longer when they're wearing sunscreen, the fact that testing shows there are manufacturers with poor quality control leading to significant differences between claimed SPF and actual SPF, have there been any changes in patterns of time spent outdoors over the years, and how about the fact that different cohorts have different rates and trends? We know that aging increases the risk of cancer, we also know that repeated instances of UV skin damage make skin cancer more likely. So, have a look at this graph (Figure 2). https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/occurrence-of-melanoma https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/occurrence-of-melanoma The rates in the 25-44 cohort, who grew up when health initiatives about "being sun smart" were introduced to school curricula and promoted in the media are lower and trending slowly downwards. Whereas the rates for boomers with a lifetime of accumulated UV damage are trending upwards as aging leaves them vulnerable to cancer if all kind. Endemic vitamin D deficiency is going to need a citation, I think. In my country at least, it's only been noted in children who have very high melanin already, and then dress in our local "tough gangsta" style with baseball caps and hoodies with the hood pulled up over the cap, thus drastically reducing the area of skin exposed.