Do sunscreen chemicals cause cancer?
As we move into the heart of summertime, let’s check out sunscreens once again. While many medical professionals including a notible cancer hospital, the sunscreen industry and researchers all purport that the artificial compounded chemicals included and used within sunscreens do not cause cancer, the question remains, do they actually cause cancer? Let’s explore.
Which chemicals are used in sunscreen?
There are many compounds and chemicals that can be added to a lotion base that can reduce and absorb exposure to UV rays, but the chemicals don’t just stop there.
Here is a list of lab created chemicals:
- Avobenzone†
- Bemotrizinol†
- Bisoctrizole
- Cinoxate
- Dioxybenzone
- Ensulizole
- Homosalate†
- Meradimate
- Methylisothiazolinone†
- Octinoxate†
- Octisalate†
- Octocrylene†
- Oxybenzone†
- Octyl Methoxycinnamate
- PABA aka 4-Aminobenzoic
- Padimate O
- Sulisobenzone
- Trolamine Salicylate
Are there any “organic” or mineral sunscreen formulations?
Yes, but these mineral formulations may not do your long term health any favors, either. These mineral formulations have not been tested for long term repeated exposure just as the chemicals above have also not. Here’s a list of these mineral formulations:
- Retinyl Palmitate† (a form of Vitamin A — can be naturally or artificially derived)
- Zinc Oxide
- Titanium Dioxide
What else is in sunscreen?
Some sunscreens contain fragrances and other skin conditioners and oils that help the lotion smooth onto the skin and feel nice. These additional non-UV absorbing inactive ingredients may also increase the problems of …
Skin Absorption: The Trouble with Sunscreen Chemicals
The biggest difficulty with slathering any type of lotion onto your body is that the chemicals placed into the lotion can and do get absorbed into your body. The skin is not solid holdout barrier. The skin is porous and allows any substances placed onto it to eventually be absorbed into the skin, some ingredients absorb faster than others. The smaller the particles in the lotion, the easier it is for the skin to absorb.
Because sunscreen chemicals are finely milled and/or lab created, these particles can be as small as 100 nanometers in size or possibly smaller. When the sizing of such particles reaches 100 nanometers or less, this size is well small enough to transmit through the skin into the bloodstream and even cross the blood brain barrier. By comparison, a human hair is between 80,000–100,000 nanometers in width. These sunscreen chemical particles are very, very small… way smaller than the size of a hair.
Because those minerals can show up in your sunscreen in two ways: in nano form (teeny tiny particles smaller than 100 nanometers), or non-nano form (particles bigger than 100 nanometers)… A particle that minute can penetrate cell walls, breach the blood-brain barrier, and slip into the lungs. And. The smaller the particle, the more it reacts to UV radiation, forming free radicals…
Basically, the smaller the particle, the more easily it is absorbed by the body and the more it interacts with UV light, breaking those particles down into potentially problematic and/or toxic components that can also be absorbed into the skin and into the body. Once a particle is small enough to slip into the bloodstream, all bets are off for long term safety. What this means is that once these particles are swimming in your veins, they can land and deposit anywhere…. in your lungs, in your brain, in your muscle tissues, in your liver… literally anywhere.
Even in 2020, the FDA readily admitted that sunscreen chemicals do absorb into the skin (based on prior AMA research). As the FDA always does, it stops short of stating that there’s a risk posed with skin absorption. However, the FDA’s lack of risk confirmation DOES NOT state that there’s NOT a risk. It simply means the FDA has chosen not to investigate whether there IS a risk. Here’s a quote from the FDA’s statement:
[T]he FDA’s newly-published research in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) provides much-needed additional information about the absorption of the active ingredients in sunscreens into the body’s bloodstream after they are applied to the skin. It’s an important follow-up study to prior research … that showed when certain sunscreens were used at their maximal recommended use … , their active ingredients were absorbed through the skin and into the body.
The findings in these studies do not mean that the FDA has concluded that any of the ingredients tested are unsafe for use in sunscreens, nor does the FDA seeking further information indicate such.
Internal Consumption
Because sunscreen chemicals are not intended to be consumed internally, there’s no way to know the long term safety risks posed once absorbed. It’s entirely possible that some of these chemicals, like many heavy metals, never leave the body. Some of these sunscreen chemicals can even cause hormone disruption. Some of these chemicals may also break down under UV light or via other mechanisms into more dangerous particles that can be absorbed and which can disrupt the human body function.
The sunscreen industry has, unfortunately, predicated its product safety assumptions entirely on the fact that its lotion products do not enter the body or the bloodstream. That assumption has now been proven wrong. While the sunscreen industry has a large number of studies describing how effective and efficacious its lotions are when applied to the skin when wanting to avoid and limit UV exposure, there is a complete dearth of studies on whether these sunscreen chemical formulations enter the bloodstream OR whether the absorption of these chemicals lead to future long term chronic diseases. Yet, we already understand (and it has even been proven) that these very small chemical molecule sizes are able to penetrate and traverse into the bloodstream?
After all, no product manufacturer wants to point out that its products are dangerous. By remaining completely silent on whether sunscreen products do long term damage to the body, these manufacturers can continue to state that they are perfectly safe… that is, until someone produces a study that proves they aren’t safe. So far, no independent researcher has yet been willing to step up and call out the sunscreen industry on this safety fact involving skin absorption.
For this reason, this is why hospitals like MD Anderson can write articles espousing the safety of such sunscreen chemicals. In part, they’re willing to do this because if people don’t use sunscreen, we also know that risk of UV exposure causes skin cancers. However, using sunscreens for their short term UV blocking benefits can easily trick the user into thinking their skin is safe and covered, when it is not. More on this below. The question remains…
Are we trading in a single solution for more health risks?
Skin exposure UV reduction = ???
This equation is the question that needs to be answered. While using sunscreen is a short term solution in helping reduce skin exposure levels to harmful UV, it also leaves the other side of the equals sign empty. The sunscreen industry doesn’t want you to know that the other side of the equals sign likely contains a whole passel of long term diseases down the road and years later in life, simply because you slathered on sunscreen nearly every single day. Then, much much later in life, ended up with cancer anyway much later… or maybe even a worse debilitating disease? Who really knows?
You may not even be able to correlate your disease to the use of sunscreen if the two happened more or less in isolation and years apart. That’s exactly what the sunscreen industry hopes.
Here’s a recent example of such a product correlation. The talcum powder industry purported its short term health benefits of drying and preventing chaffing when used every day. People believed that assumption. Because talcum powder does offer limited short term benefits, the long term health tradeoff came once we fully realized that many brands of talcum powder also contain asbestos. Asbestos is a carcinogen and when exposed over and over, it increases the likelihood of cancer wherever that asbestos is applied or inhaled.
One might want to argue that this talcum situation was considered a matter of product tainting. Unfortunately, this is not tainting of a product. When talcum powder is mined, inevitably it is found where asbestos deposits also exist. Inevitably, manufacturers had to accept that their talcum could be laced with asbestos simply because that’s how the mines produced talc. You might, again, argue that the manufacturer could remove the asbestos, but that’s almost impossible at talcum powder particle sizes. For the manufacturer to sell talcum powder, they had to accept that it also contained asbestos. Of course, some manufacturers also denied that asbestos fact simply so they could say their product was safe. Sound familiar? I digress.
As in the talcum example above, sunscreen is now in a similar position. The short term health benefits of sunscreen obviously include preventing UV exposure over a several hour period. In that time, you’re required to reapply sunscreen every 2 hours or less depending on factors. This means, incidentally, a frequent amount of exposure and re-exposure to sunscreen chemicals continuously throughout a day. If you’re doing this for days on end, those repeated exposure sessions may cause these small nano particles to build up in your bloodstream, on your skin and within your body to unknowingly wreak havok internally.
The more often you use sunscreen, the worse it’s likely to get. This means that for the short term benefit of reduction in UV, you are very likely trading your future long term health to gain those short term skin benefits. Because no studies have been produced involving long term exposure to sunscreen chemicals, we simply have no idea what diseases might lurk in our future. Is the sacrifice of potential long term health worth the risk simply to prevent UV exposure? Only you can answer this question.
For those future diseases, will it involve cancer? Will it be mesothelioma? Will it become other chronic pain and disease we haven’t yet encountered? We simply do not know what is ultimately on the other side of that equals sign. There is definitely something on the other side and it’s not going to be pleasant, rest assured. Aging already takes a toll on the body. There’s no need to compound aging by slathering chemicals all over the largest organ on your body and then think nothing will happen.
Sunscreen in Every Day Products
This entire absorption issue is even more compounded because many daily wear products, such as cosmetics, lip balms and even regular lotions include SPF chemicals in their formulations. For women wearing makeup, these SPF formulations might offer minimal UV production, such as level 4 or 10. They might not even be broad spectrum. The problem isn’t in the UV protection factor, but the fact that women wear foundations and other makeup daily.
Makeup products also tend to stay on the skin for way longer than an average sunscreen you might wear at the beach across a day or two. Women might even refresh their makeup throughout the day adding even more exposure to SPF chemicals.
Adding SPF to regular health and beauty products adds even more to the risk of long term toxicity with these sunscreen chemicals and incidental ingredients. Yet, the cosmetic and sunscreen industries have both embraced these chemicals as if they’re some kind of health saver… when, in fact, the long term problems with these chemicals are actually unknown. Why are they unknown? Because long term studies simply don’t exist. Simply search Google for the terms ‘long term sunscreen chemical studies‘ and you’ll see for yourself that none exist. If a study exists, Google will find it.
If you’re not planning on being out in the sun for no more than 15-30 minutes in a day, there’s no need to wear SPF chemicals at all. You’re exposing your body to chemicals all with effectively no short term benefit. The only reason to wear SPF is if you need to be out in the sun for longer than 30 minutes. Even if you have a sun allergy, it’s best to cover up with clothing rather than relying on sunscreens to do that work. Clothing is much more protective than sunscreen. Incidentally, sunscreen begins breaking down the moment you put it on your skin. Clothing doesn’t break down and works so long as your skin remains fully covered.
Mineral Sunscreen vs Chemical
At this point, you might be thinking that you can avoid the chemical use situation by using mineral sunscreens instead; sunscreens which include Titanium Dioxide or Zinc Oxide. Unfortunately, while these mineral formulations aren’t lab created in the same way as a chemical like Octyl Methoxycinnamate, there’s no way to know the long term problems in the bloodstream when using these minerals sunscreens either.
Minerals are needed for a healthy diet. However, consuming too many minerals can become toxic to the body. Slathering on these mineral sunscreens regularly and constantly, you could find your body having negative reactions over time; reactions that could range from allergies to diarrhea or even worse health conditions.
With repeated exposure to sunscreens over many years, it’s entirely possible that the constant irritation to the skin from these chemicals and minerals might even trigger skin conditions up to and including skin cancer. The problem, however, with sunscreens is that it’s far too easy to blame any skin cancer that you might get on UV exposure and not blame on the chemical formulation used in the sunscreen. That’s exactly how sunscreen manufacturers play this legal situation, too. It’s super easy for sunscreen manufacturers to blame the UV for your cancer, not THEIR chemicals. Be cautious.
Best Answers?
The best answer to the above use of sunscreen is to stay out of the sun. Unless you absolutely need to be in the sun for some purpose, don’t. If you do need to be in the sun, wear high SPF clothing, hats and coverups, and even SPF umbrellas if laying out. For skin portions that do need to be exposed, use sunscreen only on those parts. That might include portions of your face and your hands only. Less sunscreen used means less problems to worry about later.
Yes, I realize that summertime is hot and wearing lots of clothing makes it even hotter. The problem is, slathering on sunscreen is a risk every time you do it. Wearing coverup clothing lets you avoid wearing sunscreen.
Again, the only reason to even put on SPF is if you intended to be out in the sun for longer than 30 minutes. If you’re only outside for 10 minutes, putting SFP lotion on is not only a waste of time and lotion, it’s a waste because you won’t get burned in 10 minutes.
Having a Tan
A lot of cancer alarmists believe that tanning is the bane of being exposed to the sun. In fact, tanning is actually just the opposite. Having a tan is actually a natural sunscreen barrier that your body produces naturally to protect your skin, assuming that you can tan. Getting the tan is where the damage occurs. Having that tan is what protects you. The faster you can get that tan, the faster that that skin melanin can begin absorbing UV to protect help your skin. Having a tan means you can remain in the sun longer than without a tan. It’s just that getting this tan is what leads to skin damage. Unfortunately, there’s still no way to activate a tan for many people without having this damage.
For those with naturally dark skin, consider yourself lucky in this regard. For those with light skin and who rely on being exposed to sunlight to get a base tan, that’s when the damage happens most.
Because every person’s tan is slightly different in intensity, each person needs to understand how long they can stay out even with their specific tan.
Tanning and SPF
One thing that’s not really well discussed is that wearing SPF works against getting a tan. While a portion of the UV does filter through even the strongest sunscreen, the point in using an SPF 50, though is to halt the tanning process. If you think you’re getting tanned safely while wearing an SFP 50, think again. Since the SPF 50 stops the tanning process, you will not get a tan wearing SPF 50. Yet, even at SPF 50 and because it’s a sunscreen, meaning some UV is still getting through, you’re still at risk of skin damage even wearing SPF 50. It’s actually worse for you because you’re not tanning and the UV is slightly getting through the sunscreen barrier to damage your skin. Yes, much lower risk than without wearing any sunscreen at all, but still the risk is not zero.
If you have a tan and wear sunscreen, your tan combines with that sunscreen to block even more UV rays than without a tan. However, obtaining that tan is the risky problem because it incurs sun damage to get that tan.
Are Tanning Beds Safer?
Unfortunately, there is no truly safe way to get a tan; not by laying out in the sun and not by using a tanning bed. Both are equally damaging in the same exact ways. However, unlike sunlight, tanning beds offer timed exposure. In the sun, it’s impossible to gauge UV rays exactly and how many you’ve absorbed. However, tanning beds offer timed and limited exposure for the duration of a session. Because a timer allows for short amounts of UV exposure, it’s much much easier to build a gradual tan without burning or peeling. Sunburn is what needs to be avoided most as a sunburn is actual visible sun exposure skin damage. Sunbeds are typically set to a time just short of burning you, giving you enough rays to trigger tanning, but not enough to actually burn.
Sunbeds, unlike uncontrolled sunlight, offer slow and steady progress without the burning… as long as that UV exposure is limited correctly and handled professionally by the operator. For this reason, tanning beds do offer a better alternative when compared than laying out in direct sun. Laying out in sunlight is problematic for a lot of reasons, the least of which is not knowing how many rays you’ve absorbed. In cloudy outdoor conditions, it’s even trickier to gauge.
It’s very easy to be outdoors for excessively long periods and remain unaware of exactly how much UV exposure you’ve received. Sun skin exposure is tricky and easy to misjudge when outdoors. A burn doesn’t show up for between 3 and 6 hours after exposure… at which point the skin gets hot, turns red and the pain and swelling begins. Before that, you may think you did just fine outdoors.
The point is, by the time you realize you’ve been sunburned, it’s already too late. Tanning beds, however, don’t usually offer enough time on the clock to burn you. It is possible to get a burn from a sunbed under certain abuse conditions (back to back sessions and/or salon hopping), but a trained operator will be able to assess your skin tone and know how much time you need in a single session. They also shouldn’t allow back to back sessions unless you’re choosing to hop between multiple tanning salons in the same day or by also sitting outdoors after having used a tanning bed…. note that you shouldn’t ever do this!
When tanning in a tanning bed, don’t use SPF lotions at all. The point to tanning in a sunbed is to expose your skin to the UV in a time limited and controlled fashion. There is no need to wear SPF when in a tanning bed. If you wear SPF in a tanning bed, you have just thrown your money away. The light effectively bounced off of your SPF and did nothing to help you gain a base tan. A professional tanning bed operator will be able to properly assess your skin tone and set the sunbed timing appropriately each tanning bed session. Many salons may even offer less intense beds and more intense beds. They will choose which sunbed is correct for you. You can always get out of the tanning bed early and stop the session if you feel that your skin isn’t reacting correctly.
These points above are all pluses when using a tanning bed in a tanning salon. Even though tanning beds are not any more safe than sitting in sunlight in terms of skin damage and exposure, sunbeds at least offer timed and controlled exposure, something that’s difficult to do when outdoors.
SPF Safety
The primary takeaway from this article should be to avoid the use of SPF lotions formulated with chemicals when at all possible. Even the use of mineral sunscreen is not a perfect alternative, but these lotions may be somewhat overall better when used in moderation. You should also avoid using sunscreen when you are not planning to be outdoors for longer than 30 minutes. Instead, cover up with clothing.
Slathering SPF lotion over your whole body is way more of a problem than using it only on your hands, neck and face when wearing sufficient SPF clothing coverups elsewhere. The best overall solution to being outdoors is to coverup as much as possible and minimally use SPF only where absolutely needed. Stay outdoors only the minimum amount of time needed. Wash the SPF lotion off thoroughly the instant you get back inside.
This article intentionally does not include naming any specific SPF lotion brands as this author believes all SPF lotions are problematic. Because there are many SPF lotion sellers out there who want to hawk their products, I will leave it up to you to research which SPF lotions might be best choice for you and your family. However, know that any use of sunscreen chemicals may be one step closer to a future disease.
SPF Lotion Failure
One thing that few ever discuss is the primary failure point of sunscreen. Sunscreen has the uncanny knack at deceiving and tricking you into thinking you’re protected when you, in fact, aren’t. What is meant here is that because SPF lotions apply and dry invisibly, there’s no way to know how well you’ve applied the lotion or how effective that lotion is at protecting you or even if you’ve missed spots.
Worse, not all SPF lotions are created equal. Some lotions require thick application and some don’t. Some use higher quality ingredients, some don’t. Because of all of these variables in lotion manufacturing, in lotion quality and, indeed, even in how well you apply the lotion to your skin, you may think you’re better protected than you actually are.
Because it takes 3-6 hours before the telltale signs of sunburn begin to show, it’s way too late to do anything about it when the sunburn begins. You can only tend to the sunburn itself using other remedies. That bottle of SPF won’t do you any good after-the-fact.
The point is, no one is perfect at applying lotions when they apply and disappear invisibly. Inevitably and invariably with sunscreen, you’re going to miss one or more spots and burn there.
It gets worse. Because the lotions break down in the sun as the UV strikes the particles, the lotions become less and less effective over time. The effectiveness wanes not just because of UV, but also because of sweating, heat, swimming and wiping your skin off. The more you do outside, the faster the sunscreen wears off. That means reapplication frequently, perhaps even more frequently than the 2-4 hour reapplication guidelines. You might need to reapply as frequently as every 30 minutes.
Reapplication
Most articles state that SPF lotions need reapplication after every 2 hours because the effectiveness of the product begins to wane due to chemical UV exposure and chemical breakdown. The difficulty is, lotions contain separate blockers for both UVA protection and UVB protection using separate chemicals. This makes a lotion known as broad spectrum. The thing that isn’t mentioned is that UVA chemicals break down at a much faster rate than the chemicals used to block UVB. This author recalls reading an article describing the exact breakdown times between UVA and UVB chemicals, but was unable to find that article to cite when penning this article.
Still, that SPF chemical break down article included a chart illustrating that UVA chemicals do break down in as fast as 15-30 minutes compared to UVB chemicals which break down at around the 2 hour mark. While the UVB chemicals keep you from burning, after 15 minutes your skin is being exposed to as much as 50-75% more UVA than when you first applied it. After the 30 minute mark, your skin might be exposed to as much as 90% of the UVA rays… where UVB might still be blocking in the 95% range. What that means is that while your skin won’t burn, you’re still receiving critical UVA damage if you don’t reapply as frequently as every 15 minutes.
UVA chemicals are apparently more volatile when exposed to sunlight than UVB chemicals. At least, that was the gist of the aforementioned article. If this author can find that article again, this article will be updated to cite it.
What this all means is to keep your SPF blocking at maximum protection for both UVA and UVB, you will need to reapply more frequently than what is recommended, perhaps as frequently as every 15 minutes when outdoors between the hours of 10AM and 4PM and especially on high UV index days. Because UVA chemicals are way more sensitive and way more volatile, you’ll need to keep this in mind as you wear SPF.
Chemical Blockers as Oxidants
Because UV chemical blockers break down as UV rays hit them, it releases heat as a result and the chemicals may turn into free radicals. As a result, these free radicals may enter your system as oxidants. What this means is that as these oxidants leach into the bloodstream and into the body, your body will need to fight off these with antioxidants. Some lotions include antioxidants to help thwart the breakdown of these UV chemicals into oxidants to bind with and help prevent them from becoming a problem.
The problem is that these included antioxidants may not be effective at catching all of the oxidant breakdown of UVA and UVB chemicals as they age and get struck by UV rays.
What this all means is that oxidants leading into the bloodstream may end up causing disease or other chronic problems. The more you use SPF lotions, the more likely these problems are to come to exist.
SPF Lotion Quality
The final issue that needs to be addressed, at least in the United States, is that SPF lotions are loosely regulated; very loosely. What this means for you as a consumer is that when you pick up a tube, bottle or spray, you have no idea if what’s included will be effective. Because of the loose regulations, lotions can be as cheap and ineffective as not wearing anything, to very effective because they’re made by reputable, honest companies.
The point is, big name brands are usually safer SPF lotion purchases than heading to a dollar store and buying their random brand names you’ve never heard of. While those lotions might be fine, they might not be. Do you want to trust your skin or the skin of your child to an unknown brand?
It’s better to stick with large name brands when buying SPF lotion. These large companies have reputations that they must uphold. They can’t risk putting out garbage, ineffective products, unlike the brands that show up at dollar stores where there’s zero accountability involved. Sure, the FDA is supposed to be regulating these, but we know how well regulation works in these industries. Everything the government does is reactive. Meaning, they wait until a company offends, then they go after them after-the-fact. That means that garbage, fraudulent, mislabeled, misleading and ineffective products can hit store shelves. With SPF sunscreen, choose wisely by sticking with known reputable brands.
Behind the Times
One additional problem is that the United States lags way behind the curve on SPF technology advancements. While the rest of the world is way ahead of the United States for SPF lotion technology improvements, the United States now lags behind because of its slow barge, antiquated approach at approving new sunscreen components. That’s partially because the United States classes sunscreens as an over-the-counter drug.
The last time the Food and Drug Administration approved any new active ingredients for sunscreen that helped to block our skin from ultraviolet rays was 1999.
Conclusion
SPF lotions have in place in blocking UV rays. However, they are not a cure-all, nor do they reduce or eliminate sun damage or skin aging as a result of sun exposure. SPF lotions are there to reduce your chances for a sunburn and to reduce your chances of get deep level tissue damage which might lead to skin cancer. However, because these SPF lotions are suncreens and not full out sunblockers (as they are sometimes called), sunscreens (as any kind of screens do) allow limited amounts of light through.
These problems eventually become apparent because these chemicals break down as a result of UV exposure and may turn into free radicals and other harmful or toxic chemical by-products on the skin. Some of these nasty by-products as well as the chemicals themselves may leach into the blood stream and into the system to cause longer term systemic damage.
Because both the SPF industry and the FDA refuse to investigate the systemic damage from skin absorption, consumers are left with no answers on how safe these lotions are for long term use. What this means is that it is entirely possible that some or many of these chemicals might, in fact, cause not only direct skin cancer, they might enter the body and cause internal cancer of organs, tissues and other types of cancers. These chemicals might be precursors that aid or encourage diseases to appear in the presence of other oxidants present in the system.
Because these SPF chemicals have not been tested once ingested, there is no way to know what level of damage they can cause once inside the body.
The safest approach to practicing sun safety is to wear high SPF clothing instead of lotions. Cover up exposed surfaces as much as possible. Use minimal amounts of SPF on exposed surfaces like the face and hands, if not wearing gloves on the hands.
Because regulators fail to provide us with adequate information regarding long term safety, not wearing SPF lotion on your body is the safest choice for long term health. Use it sparingly and only as needed. If you’re heading out for 15-30 minutes, even in midday sun, you might not even need it. If you’re planning on driving for hours on the road in a vehicle, wearing clothing to cover up might or might not work. In cases like this one, wearing SPF while traveling might be the best choice.
When choosing an SPF lotion, the mineral varieties might be the best alternative over choosing the chemical versions. Unfortunately, the mineral versions typically leave a white cast on the skin surface. Honestly, I’d rather have a white cast on my skin than worry about the long term consequences of wearing Oxybenzone on my skin.
Keep in mind that when driving in a vehicle or if you’re behind glass, UVA makes it through glass surfaces. You’ll want to find the best UVA protection you can find when you’re behind glass either in an office or in a car. Note that UV rays make it through clouds and bounce off of the blue sky itself. You don’t need to be exposed directly to sunlight. Even bounced light from the outdoors gives UV exposure.
Circling back around to answer the original question posed, “Do sunscreen chemicals cause cancer?”, there is no way to determine if long term use of SPF chemicals may cause cancer. Why? Because no studies have been produced. The reality, though, is that with enough repeated exposure to the chemicals, it is entirely possible that these chemicals may be just toxic enough to cause cancer because of years of exposure. Once again, it is recommended to rely on clothing and coverups rather than on artificial chemicals to protect your skin to support long term health. Everyone needs to consider their health not only in the now, but also in the years to come.
You don’t want to reach your 50s, 60s and 70s (and beyond) with chronic problems related to the use of SPF chemicals you used earlier in life. It’s easy enough to avoid this problem early in life by using clothing as coverups instead.
Citations
For the chemicals listed and marked with a †, check out the article 11 Toxic Sunscreens to Avoid for more information on these specific chemicals. This cited article is well written and offers much information regarding these chemicals as well as other ingredients used in sunscreen formulations.
In addition to those links included within the article, here are some additional sites to visit:
↩︎
Are electric cars really good for our environment?
On the surface, this question seems like it has a simple answer. And that simple answer is ‘Yes’… or is it? Let’s explore.
Green or Brown?
Electric cars seem like such a great idea until you realize that you have to plug it into the power grid to recharge the thing. So, how is this car greener than, say, its gasoline counterparts? On the one hand, the car itself runs clean. No fossil fuels to burn so no emissions to speak of. This is a good thing. The bad thing is that it has to pull from fossil fuel derived electrical energy to recharge. This ultimately means that while the electric car itself is no longer the gross polluter, that pollution has been pushed off onto the electrical suppliers. So they, in turn, have to ramp up more fossil fuel production to handle the added load to charge these 240v batteries in electric cars.
So, how did that exactly save us anything? Maybe it makes the buyer of the electric vehicle feel more environmentally conscious until we consider where and how the power was generated to recharge that electric vehicle.
I should point out here, though, that the tires, the plastic parts and the moving parts are all derived from or utilize fossil fuels. For example, nearly all lubrication is almost always fossil fuel derived.
Alternative energy sources
As more and more electric vehicles are deployed onto the nation’s roads, the power grids will have to be enhanced to support the power generation needed to recharge these cars. That means, ultimately, more fossil fuels being burned to create that energy to send it down the line to recharge your car to let you go to work.
We need to rethink this entire process. We need to find a way to get clean power generation from nature. Unfortunately, energies derived from solar, wind or water are temperamental and, at times, impractical. That is, we can’t rely on solar, wind and water derived energy to support the numbers of people who want to buy into electric vehicles let alone power the entirety of people living in the US. So, the grid suppliers have to dip into fossil fuel derived energy generation to provide electricity across the board. As more and more of these vehicles hit the road, the grid may eventually become overtaxed by the cars and we may, once again, end up in rolling blackouts.
So, we need more stable forms of energy that are renewable for a lot longer than fossil fuels.
Running out
It has already been predicted that we are on the downward slope of fossil fuel supplies on earth (i.e., peak fossil fuel supplies). Those rich abundant supplies that were once everywhere are slowly drying up. If we, as a society, don’t find more clean renewable power generation, our information age may come to a halt leaving us squarely back at a time without electric power or natural gas. A time when there were no cell phones, no cars and no grocery stores.
If you think about the things that are all around you every day that derive their existence from fossil fuels, you begin to understand the scope of a society where fossil fuels have run out. That means, no new plastic, no gasoline, no fossil fuel generated power, no oil for motors, no computers, no iPods and no cell phones. In fact, there won’t be much of our present society left if the earth runs out of fossil fuels. This also includes lack of medicine and all that that implies, but let’s stay focused on energy sources.
Clean burning, natural, renewable energy sources
Are there any? Sure, if you count water, wind and solar. But, as I said, these are temperamental. What other power generation tools do we have? Well, there’s also atomic energy that heats water to steam and turns turbines. Unfortunately, the safeguards necessary to prevent another Chernobyl are too prone to human error. Atomic energy generation is just too risky. So, are there any others? Yes.
Thermal energy
Not just any thermal energy, the earth is home to lots of geothermal energy. The difficulty with geothermal energy is getting to it and, secondarily, preventing the creation of accidental volcanoes and eruptions. So, where could we utilize geothermal energy and maximize the energy generation? In the ocean, of course. There’s plenty of water to steam and turn turbines. There are plenty of open geothermal pockets under the ocean that lead into the water. So, we should be able to figure out a way to take advantage of these open pockets to turn ocean water to steam and generate electric power. The trouble, of course, is getting the power from the ocean floor back to a distribution grid to send the power out.
Geothermal energy is about the only energy on the planet that can be easily harnessed, that exists on its own and that is completely renewable. Unless the Earth dies, geothermal energy is about the only source that we can rely on as constant. Just look at Old Faithful to see just how stable geothermal energy can be. The only difficulty is in trying to find a reasonably consistent geothermal vent that can be reliably used to generate energy using steam turbines. However, once enough of these are found, these can be used to eventually replace burning of fossil fuels to generate heat to generate steam to to turn turbines to create energy.
Energy deficit
Fossil fuel sources should be considered as previously stored energy pockets. Energy that was created by the sun. The sun first fostered the growth of plants and animals here and then these plants and animals died, decayed and converted into fossil fuels. These fuels from many many years ago are now being used today to operate our economy. The trouble is, these fossil fuels are finite and we are using them very rapidly. In fact, we may have used more than half of all of what’s on Earth to operate our economy from day to day. Consider when we drilled our first oil well vs how much fossil fuel we use today. As a result and because these resources are finite, we will eventually run out of it. Since we really have no idea how much more we have until it all ends, we should now consider that we are living in an energy deficit, and on borrowed time. That is, we are using more energy now than we should in order to allow for support of future generations.
So, while people continue to have babies, they aren’t asking when these babies become adults will they have a future? And, what of these kid’s babies? Where will they be? This is why we are now living on borrowed time at the expense of our future generations who may find themselves looking back at us thinking how selfish we were. And they will be living at a time when they may be burning candles, eating locally grown foods and doing subsistence farming just to keep food on the table. They may have our technology, but no energy to run it. What will become the currency of that day? Perhaps seed. Once the world ends up as local economies without contact to other remote economies, the government won’t be able to keep order. So, the government as we know it will cease to exist. Without cars, then there’s no need for driver’s licenses or car license tags or any other governmental taxes or fees as they won’t make sense in a local economy.
Without thinking ahead for renewable energy sources, our future generations may have no future. At least, not the future we see today. In fact, their future may not resemble anything of our information society. This is very likely where we will end up without finding a new fuel source for power generation. This is the importance of finding clean renewable energy that is synergistic with the Earth.
Electricity is not a power source
Electricity generation is the end result of the work from some other device (i.e., burning fossil fuel turns turbines that generate power). Electricity is not a power source itself, however. But, electricity is what drives every part of our economy today. Just think what the world would be without electric power. Without locating and instituting a replacement for fossil fuel electric power generation, the world’s economy will likely end as we know it when our fossil fuel supplies dry up. Our dependence on fossil fuel power generation is nearly 70% of all power generation in the US as of 2009 (and it is likely similar if you look at the world overall).
Full circle
So, that electric car you buy today borrows against fossil fuel power generation (coal, natural gas & petroleum) to recharge your brand new electric car. Obtaining power from the local power grid ensures that at least 70% of the energy placed into your electric vehicle was generated by coal or natural gas, both of these resources are finite and coal does not burn clean. So, a renewable synergistic power generation source is a must for the Earth and the future of humanity, let alone the electric vehicle which is only truly green once we have this renewable power source.
In addition to regenerative braking, we also need to consider more car regenerative power sources to keep the car from requiring recharging nearly as often and to allow for farther traveling distances. For example, someone could invent a paint that acts as a huge solar panel. So, every inch of the external painted surface could double as a huge solar power generation panel while driving in the sun. Additionally, alternating polarity magnets could be placed below highways to generate current as you drive over them which continually recharges your car’s batteries as you drive. Thus, drastically increasing the mileage of an electric vehicle with far less need to recharge as often. Also, fans could be placed behind the grill of the vehicle to capture wind energy as you drive. Again, all of these techniques add even more power generation to the vehicle that increases mileage while also keeping that car aesthetically pleasing.
Looking at today’s electric vehicles, these designs seem so infantile compared to what could be achieved with proper governmental infrastructure support of electric vehicles. Right now, electric vehicles look green, but really aren’t. Once we harness truly clean renewable energy sources (like geothermal energy) combined with more extensive regenerative power sources, we might finally be able to call the electric vehicle green.
Sunscreens vs Natural Tanning
Every year at this time, the zealots come out of the woodwork promoting sunscreens. After all, it’s a multi-billion dollar industry. The truth is, no one has any idea of long term toxicity risks with regards to the use of sunscreen chemicals. Worse, people slather them all over their bodies without thought to the fact that your skin is the largest organ on your body. Is it worth the long term exposure and unknown health risks with the use of Parsol 1789, Mexoryl or Methoxcinnimate (or any other chemicals)? Unless you have a form of albinism or vitaligo, you should attempt to utilize the skin’s natural tanning properties over the use of chemicals in sunscreens. The natural sunscreen that appears in the skin is melanin. Melanin is much more broad spectrum than any lab created chemical at blocking the various wavelengths of UV (other than UVC, which doesn’t reach Earth).
UVA and UVB
Sunscreens protect you mainly from UVB (think of the B to mean ‘Burn’). These rays are shorter wavelengths and only penetrate shallow skin surface layers. These are the layers that lead to burning. UVA is a much longer wavelength and is associated with deeper skin level exposure (and is thought to aid in premature aging). Sunscreens have limited ability to protect you from UVA. Note that the Sun’s natural mix of UVA and UVB (that reaches the earth) is up to 5% UVB and 95% UVA. However, during some times of the year, the UVB can slightly higher than 5% (where the UV index is at its highest). These are the times where burning is very easy.
Bad Burns
The use of sunscreen chemicals can promote a bad burn. The reasoning is very clear. When you use these chemicals to block the sun, these chemicals prevent tanning. So, the one time you forget the sunscreen, improperly apply it or forget to reapply it, you will likely get a very bad burn. Even though many dermatologists recommend and endorse the use of sunscreens, utilizing the skin’s own tanning properties helps prevent a bad burn. Melanin works 24/7 and doesn’t need reapplication every hour or two. Although, a natural tan does wear off over several weeks if you don’t keep the tan going. On the other hand, sunscreens require frequent reapplication (probably every hour, especially if you’re in water or are sweating). The UVA chemicals actually break down rapidly (as quickly as 30 minutes depending on brand, quality and body chemistry) once applied, so you need to reapply a lot more often than you think to maintain UVA protection. The UVB chemicals also break down, but much more slowly. Having active UVB protection without UVA isn’t that helpful, though. So, you need to reapply.
The point, however, is that you want to avoid a bad burn at all costs. You want to tan and not burn. Thus, the use of sunscreens does not promote natural tanning and promotes forgetting to reapply which can then lead to accidental burns after the chemicals have stopped working. Remember that sunscreens give no warning when they have worn off. Worse, you won’t know your skin is burned until 3-6 hours after sun exposure.
Vacation and Tanning
If you will be traveling to a sunny destination, it is better to build up a natural base tan than constantly applying sunscreen every hour. You can build your tan slowly and steadily outdoors or you can do it in a tanning bed. Nothing ruins a vacation more than a bad burn, however. Having a base tan allows you to be outdoors without worrying about getting a bad burn. Yes, you can still get burned even with a tan, so you should always be cautious. But, having a base tan reduces your chance of a bad burn substantially over forgetting to apply sunscreen.
Beginning your Tan
To obtain a base tan, start the tanning process at least 6 weeks out from when you leave to go on vacation. You can do this outdoors or in a tanning bed. Note, however, that tanning beds are concentrated, but also timed. So, for example, 12 minutes in a high pressure bed is equivalent to about 2 hours outdoors. So, if you can only do about 15 minutes outdoors in midday sun, then you should start at about 6 minutes in a 12 minute bed. You would think to start at about 2-3 minutes, but 6 minutes isn’t enough to burn you in a bed in one session. Needless to say, always discuss tanning bed times with your salon professional.
Another note about tanning in a tanning bed. DO NOT USE SPF SUNSCREEN WHEN TANNING IN A TANNING BED! This is emphasized because it wastes your money. Yes, you can use low SPF to aid tanning outdoors only, but never use SPF in a bed. Even though a tanning bed mimics the UV from the sun, it isn’t the sun. It is also time controlled.. and this is very important to understand. Time controlled means that you do not need to worry about accidentally getting too much exposure. The maximum you can get in one session is equivalent to 2 hours outdoors at maximum bed time. Because the time is controlled and there’s little risk of a burn, there is no need for sunscreen. Further, using a sunscreen in a bed is a waste of money. If you spend $10-$40 per session, using SPF sunscreen completely prevents the rays from tanning you. So, you will have spent your money for nothing, literally. When using tanning beds, you are paying for access to the UV. SPF lotions prevent that UV from tanning you. Don’t do this unless you really like throwing your money away.
Reading your Skin
Understand that a burn is red and melanin is also red (initially.. and oxidises to brown). So, which is a burn and which is melanin? If there’s heat, redness and/or discomfort (followed by peeling), then it’s a burn. If you see redness only without any heat or discomfort, then that’s melanin. Controlled tanning will allow you to build up a base tan without peeling. If you peel, then you’ve 1) burned your skin and 2) lost your tanning efforts. You want to gain color slowly to prevent burning and peeling.
Lotions
When tanning in a tanning bed or outdoors, using a high quality tanning lotion is important. A lotion hydrates your skin before, during and after UV exposure. So, always use a lotion as sun exposure is very dehydrating. Tanning bed lotions can be used outdoors. However, most outdoor lotions cannot be used in a tanning bed (it can cause reactions with the acrylic surfaces). So, if you want to combine bed tanning and outdoor tanning, buy a lotion that works in a bed and also use it outdoors. Again, make sure the lotion does not have any sunscreen at all. You can buy a sunscreen lotion if you really need it for outdoor use.
There are various lotions on the market from various vendors. The one thing I will caution you about is that some tanning bed lotions can be very expensive and, yet, completely ineffective. You want to find a lotion that works for you and that provides results. However, don’t be fooled by ‘Triple Bronzing Formulas’ or ‘Quadruple Bronzing Formulas’. These are buzzwords that mean they have added either 1) color or 2) self-tanners (yes, like the ones you can get at the drug store). If you want to see how you are progressing naturally, make sure to NOT buy any lotion with a self-tanner. This may mean you have to buy the lotion from the Internet (which are cheaper this way anyway) than buying it from the salon.
You will need to read the label for self-tanners. The two common self-tanners are dihydroxyacetone and erythrulose. So, if you find these ingredients in the lotion, put it back on the shelf and find something else. You may find that your salon does not carry any lotions without self-tanners. The reason that salons carry ‘Bronzing formulas’ is that these lotions give immediate color (or, at least, within 4 hours). This immediate gratification supposedly brings back the customers. However, don’t be fooled. You want a real base tan, not a self-tanner tan. So, skip self-tanner bronzer lotions and find a lotion without self-tanners.
Here are a couple of manufacturers that make lotions without self-tanners: Designer Skin (Intrigue and a select others) and Hoss Sauce (Dark, Super Dark and Ultra Dark). I personally have found Hoss Sauce to be more effective than Designer Skin, but your mileage may vary. There are some lotions that also offer tingle, hot or cold sensations when you are tanning. Avoid these until you have a base tan. Otherwise, these may interfere your tanning or increase your chances of a burn.
Note: Self-tanner color offers no protection from UVA or UVB. Don’t be fooled by the color from a self-tanner. It offers no protection from the sun and, again, can encourage a bad burn. When trying to obtain a base tan, always use a lotion without self-tanners!
Tanning Beds
When tanning at a salon, you will find many different tanning beds. The least expensive beds (sometimes $6-8 a session) are the least effective beds at tanning. They should have a ratio of 5% UVB to 95% UVA (just like the sun). However, you may find these beds aren’t that effective. There can be many reasons for this. Cleanliness in a salon is very important. Bulb age is also important. Many tanning salons have these beds booked every open hour of the salon. These bulbs, then, get a lot of use. Many salon owners try to cut costs by not replacing the bulbs as often as they should. If you find that you get nothing out of a bed, the two main reasons are that 1) the acrylic is dirty and 2) the bulbs are old. When I say the acrylic is dirty, I’m not talking about the part where you lay. I’m talking about the underside of it. These acrylic surfaces must be removed about once a week and thoroughly cleaned on both sides. The bulbs themselves should also be wiped down to prevent any buildup on the bulb. Doing this frequently increases the tanning capability of the bed to what it should be.
Many salons pride themselves on thoroughly cleaning the bed surface, but how often do they remove the acrylics and clean the underside? Not often in many cases. Yes, even the ‘expensive salons’ as well. So, you should ask the salesperson how often the underside gets cleaned.
As far as tanning capacity, on the high end beds (high pressure beds), it is not uncommon to find up to 18000-20000 watts in the bed. The low end beds might provide around 9000-11000 watts. The difference in wattage (and UV output) is substantial. The high pressure beds, then, will probably run between 8-12 minutes for the maximum time of that bed per session. Low pressure beds might run between 20-30 minutes. So, if time is important to you, the higher pressure beds get you in and out faster.
Note, never tan in a bed and then immediately lay out or stay outside for extended time without sunscreen. You are asking for a bad burn. Do not do this. If you tan in a bed and then end up outdoors in the sun the same day, wear some sunscreen outdoors. Or, better, don’t tan in a bed on the day you plan on being outdoors.
Tricks for tanning in a bed
When trying to get your base tan in a tanning bed, you will need to move around in the bed. Don’t lay absolutely still. For example, lay on your back for a bit, then lay on one side, then the other, raise your arms, etc. Doing this will give you a much more even tan than lying perfectly still. If you stay still, you will get telltale bed marks on certain places like your shoulder blades and between your buttocks (where the acrylic touches). Moving around prevents these marks. You might even turn over and lay on your stomach for a while (even in a bed where you don’t need to turn). You can also use a standup tanning booth to avoid these issues.
How long does it take?
This question can really only be answered by the salon operator after they have assessed your skin type. Once they determine your skin type, they can tell you what you need to do in order to progress. However, you need to read your skin after you have tanned at a salon to know if you are going too fast. If, after a session, you have no color or redness by the next day, then you may be progressing too slowly. However, if you are red, hot and having discomfort, you are moving too fast (burned). If you do get a burn from a bed or outdoors, do not tan until the burn has gone away (takes several days).
For the lightest skins, it may take between 6-9 weeks to build a minimal base tan. For medium skin tones, you can probably see a base tan in 3-6 weeks. For dark tones, you probably already have a base tan, but if you are a lighter skinned, it may take 2-3 weeks in a bed. As a side note, dark tones can still get darker. Melanin works the same way in all people who can produce melanin.
Again, these are only estimates. You should always discuss your skin type with the salon owner to set up a proper regimen that works for you.
Melanin Colors
This portion is to set expectations on how your skin may look tanned. Note, there are two different types or melanin (pigment): 1) pheomelanin (reds and yellows) and 2) eumelanin (dark browns). The darkness of color depends on which types of melanin your body produces and the concentration of each type. Lighter skinned people tend to produce more pheomelanin (reds and yellows) and less eumelanin (dark shades). This mix gives the redish and yellowish copper or ‘golden’ colors. Darker skinned and olive toned people tend to produce much more eumelanin and with less pheomelanin. This color becomes much darker brown to black. Darkest toned people tend to produce nearly all eumelanin and in high concentrations. So, depending on your body’s type of melanocytes, your body may produce a range between both of these types of melanin. You’ll just need assess your tone after you’ve tanned. This also means that, depending on your skin type and melanin mix, you may not be able to turn very dark brown (if that’s what you are wanting). Or, alternatively, you may find that you get darker much faster than you thought.
You can gauge your skin’s tone by your hair color. The darker your hair, the more eumelanin your skin is likely able to produce. Melanin is also used to produce hair color. So, red haired people will likely produce more pheomelanin. You can see this color in the freckles of many red haired people. Blonds are likely to produce much more pheomelanin than eumelanin (blond would be the yellow melanin). Black haired people should be able to produce the darkest brown eumelanin tones. Note that hair color should only be used as a guide as some dark haired people may only produce a lighter ‘golden’ tan.
Melanin of all types will eventually oxidise to a brown color from its initial color and deepen the color of the tan. This oxidation will make the familiar brownish tones (yes, even the reds and yellows will oxidise).
Other Benefits
Getting UV exposure to your skin also helps maintain health with Vitamin D. Sunscreens prevent the creation of Vitamin D as UV is blocked. So, getting some UV exposure aids in stimulating the creation of beneficial vitamins. So, before you immediately put on that sunscreen, leave it off for a small amount of time to get your vitamin D. Put it on later to prevent the burning.
Suntans, Skin Types and Hormones
Some people feel that a suntan looks bad and prefer not to have a tan. Again, that thinking promotes a bad burn when you do need to be outdoors. Some people may think this way because they haven’t previously been able to tan. Some skin types (type I) can’t readily tan. For Type 1 and Type 2 skins, there is a product that may soon be on the market to help. It is a peptide (melanocyte stimulating hormone) that stimulates the melanocytes to produce melanin in individuals who do not have this hormone or where the hormone is ineffective. For many people, this simulated hormone works and allows people to tan in the sun or in a tanning bed when they previously couldn’t get a tan. Of course, this hormone only works if the melanocytes are functioning properly. By having a base tan, this prevents burns and also helps reduce premature aging by blocking UVA. Note, however, that you must get sun exposure to obtain a tan even with the use of this hormone. It does not tan you without sun exposure. So, the use of the hormone still requires UV exposure to obtain the initial tan.
Overall, sunscreens may not be long term healthy for your skin. Getting a tan requires some sun damage to obtain the tan. But, the melanin helps reduce the risk of burns and other related issues. It’s up to you to choose what you want to do, but nothing in life is without risks. Know that a tan is a natural skin process. Placing chemicals on your skin is not natural. Even though you cannot see or feel any damage by using sunscreen chemicals, that doesn’t mean no damage exists. When you get a sunburn, you feel it and know the skin is damaged. With sunscreen, there’s just no way to know if something you get later in life was related to earlier years of using large amounts of sunscreen. It’s your choice, however.
Skin Cancer and Burning
Yes, I know, we’ve all heard the rhetoric: Exposure to UV causes cancer. I’ll leave this one for you to decide. But, I will say is this. Tanning beds produce UV. The Sun produces UV. UV is UV is UV. It doesn’t matter whether it comes from the Sun or from a flourescent bulb in a tanning bed, it’s still UV. But, as I stated above, the difference between a tanning bed and laying outdoors: one is controlled, one isn’t. Again, it’s for you to decide which to choose. But, because of varying conditions with laying outdoors, you could end up burned and not know it for several hours. On the other hand, a salon will assess your skin and put you in a bed that’s timed based on your skin tone and type. So, they are trying to keep you from getting burned in a Salon. The Sun is not controlled or timed to shut off. This means, if you lay out longer than you had wanted or get caught up in an activity, you can easily forget and burn yourself. Burning is definitely damage to the skin and it is theorized that this damage leads to cancer… so you want to avoid a burn at all costs.
UPDATE: World Health Oganization (WHO) lists sunbeds (specifically) and all UV exposure as fully carcinogenic at all wavelengths (highest risk)
A new study conducted with mice, that I’ve yet to read, has classified sunbeds specifically and all UV exposure as the highest risk of causing skin cancer. I’m not sure what prompted this change in view, other than a single study, but they have made this change. Clearly, one study is not enough to make this determiniation, but that is exactly what the World Health Organization is doing. There must be some subtext here that’s prompting this change. Perhaps the sunscreen industry is losing more money to people choosing to tan rather than slather on the sunscreen.
Random Thoughts - Randocity! 
leave a comment