Thread: Many Sunblock Brand Not Adequate

cricmart.com

The only decent one I've been able to find around here is by Boots and is called "Sun Care". It promises UVA/UVB protection, contains Titanium Dioxide and no Oxybenzone. Not waterproof, though.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Use a brand that has UVA protection, in addition to the usual UVB protection.

There is disagreement among organizations and dermatologist over Oxybenzone. Some believe it causes hormonal fluctuations and is even linked to cancer. If you care, look at the label on your sunblock/sunscreen bottle or tube. The brand I use, Banana Boat, has Oxybenzone, in it.

On the positve side: look for Zinc Oxide and/or Titanium Oxide on the sunscreen label. Banana Boat does not have these, so I'll try the brand that does, soon.

Oxybenzone:

Another issue: Is a key sunscreen ingredient safe?
Oxybenzone is a a popular UV filter in many sunscreens, one evaluated by the FDA as safe. The Environmental Working Group says its analysis of hundreds of studies of more than a dozen sunscreen chemicals finds that oxybenzone can penetrate the skin and pose health concerns, anything from hormone disruption to cancer.
The industry group representing sunscreen makers denies that oxybenzone causes harm and deems such claims irresponsible.


"Questions about the safety of oxybenzone unnecessarily alarm consumers," said John Bailey, the chief scientist for the Personal Care Products Council, which offers its scientific information about the safety of sunscreen ingredients online.

UVA protection

Sunlight is composed of two types of ultraviolet light: UVB rays, which cause sunburns, and UVA rays, which tan. Although both may increase the risk of skin cancer, sun damage and wrinkles, the FDA doesn't require sunscreens to protect against both, just UVB.

Link & Entire: Study: Some sunscreens overpromise on protection - CNN.com

yup ur right im from nz have had cancerous melanoma 3 times, and my holistic therapist also said to me that sunblocks are causing cancer
he recommends sunburning untill u get a slight pink tinge to increase the pigment in ur skin giving u a bigger bocking agent naturally...our skin needs sun...it increases a certain vitamin in our bodies to help prevent skin cancer.....slip slop slap i dont think so anymore and have almost totally stopped the use of sun screens, havent had a problem in 5 years...

Originally Posted by paulspad2002

yup ur right im from nz have had cancerous melanoma 3 times, and my holistic therapist also said to me that sunblocks are causing cancer
he recommends sunburning untill u get a slight pink tinge to increase the pigment in ur skin giving u a bigger bocking agent naturally...our skin needs sun...it increases a certain vitamin in our bodies to help prevent skin cancer.....slip slop slap i dont think so anymore and have almost totally stopped the use of sun screens, havent had a problem in 5 years...

Any dermatologist will tell you that the skin needs sun but just a little bit and "sunburning until to get a slight pink" is too much already. That just strengthens the low opinion I have of holistic doctors.

I don't do sun, period. My old mate Smithy had 70 melanomas taken off him. My Dad lost his entire calf muscle due to an undiagnosed melanoma.
Why do sun. It's shit.

there are many different kinds of melanomas....70 melanomas...i dont think so...

hed be dead by now im guessing its the scabby kind hes had im also guesing hes rather old right...squamas cell carcinoma i think its called....

yes i also lost muscles and nerves and sport a very nice scar......mine was a malignant melanoma with a bresslo rating of .55 so it was superficial but left would have given me a life line of about 1 year......what was ur dads one....did he get the rating......ive had a bout 15 moles taken off with 3 being cancerous....

not all are cancerous actually most arent ...there is a thought amongst most pl that having a mole off means its a melanoma this is untrue, if the resulting mole returns a positive reading for cancerous cells then its called a melanoma and then requires the minumum requirement of an opearation like ur dad had and me......and if left will always result in death as the cancer in a melanoma spreads downwards not across the skin and gores straight into the blood stream hence the appearance of lumps in other parts of the body......

no sun....its a bad thing as it increases the risk of worse sunburn hence more danger....when i say a pink tinge i mean just that...10/15 minutes is ok...i live in the worst part of the world with the worst melanoma record even more than australia....as we have no ozone......as for holistoc therapy...they have just cured what no doctor physio oestepath or acupuntureist could do with me.....we just dont know enuff about their practise to be truly confident in them....each to their own tho, whatever works you is always the best medicine

Smithy is 73. Worked out doors all his life. He reckons it was 70 but who knows, or cares, it was lots. Yes, scabby things I think.

Dads was weird. A mis-diagnosis about 5 years previous and it grew and grew. Silly old bugger didn't want to make a fuss. Finally it was sorted out and then they literaly took out his right calf. Looks pretty bad now but better off without it. I don't know about the rating stuff.

I agree NO sun at all is bad, but I don't go for the western obsession with tanning. Madness.