Green Fact
Sunscreens with high SPF factors are not completely shielding us from harmful effects of sun radiation: even the
newest sunscreens, such as Anthelios SX, deliver only 80 percent protection from UVA and 90 percent protection
from UVB rays.
Sunblocks are physically blocking sun rays. Also called mineral sunscreens, sunblocks include
zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. They are highly effective in protecting against both UVA and UVB
rays. They do not require any complex chemical cocktails to make them safe and effective, so they can
be used in completely green and natural sun protective creams and lotions that are more suitable for
children than deeply penetrating sunscreens. The only drawback is that sunblocks often appear white
on the skin, however, the newest micronized forms of zinc oxide blend well into skin and appear to
be invisible.
But let’s go back to sunscreens since they are much more popular than sunblocks. So, what do we
get with a conventional sunscreen—freshly scented, easily absorbed, packed in a convenient bottle?
We get a nice skin moisturizer and relatively effective protection from UV radiation. Instead of
allowing our skin to accommodate the increased sun exposure by thickening the epidermis and
increasing pigmentation, we switch off these biological mechanisms by slathering on even more
sunscreen. At the same time, we turn off the skin’s ability to produce vitamin D that may offer
additional protection from various types of cancer, including melanoma. “Sunscreen users may
compensate for their sunscreen use by staying out much longer in the sun, or may use sunscreen lotions
inconsistently,” noted Martin A. Weinstock, MD, PhD, director of the Photomedicine Unit of Brown
Medical School Department of Dermatology, Rhode Island, noting that we may “require another
decade or more of experience with sunscreen use” before we would know how sunscreen works
against skin cancer.
Only a few epidemiological studies have examined the relationship of sunscreen use and skin
cancer, yet two studies suggest that sunscreens may not be effective in preventing it. Researchers from
the University of Southern California in San Diego found that the use of common sunscreen
formulations that absorb UVB almost completely, but do not block UVA rays, may contribute to the
risk of melanoma in people who live in southern regions (Gorham et al. 2007).
Another study focused on the use of sunscreens and the amount of skin hyperpigmentation in
children. Dermatologists in Israel found that regular sunscreen use contributed to the risk of moles in
children as young as seven years of age. Such moles can often evolve into melanoma, especially in
people with fair skin and hair (Azizi et al. 2000). Scientists suggest that sometimes sunscreens can
play a negative role in prevention of skin cancers because sunscreens suppress the natural warning
signals of excessive sun exposure, while leaving the skin defenseless to the damaging UVA rays they
do not block. Instead of cautious and sensible tanning, we heavily rely on SPF100 sunscreens and
continue baking under the tropical sun for hours.
Another concern about sunscreens is their formulation. Most sunscreens appear to act as endocrine
disruptors. During a 2001 study at the University of Zurich, some of the most popular sunscreens,
including benzophenone, homosalate, methylbenzylidene camphor, methoxycin-namate, and octyl-
dimethyl-para-aminobenzoic acid, showed estrogenic activity in animals (Schlumpf et al. 2001).
Avid sunscreen proponents argue that animals in this study were fed sunscreens, and only a few
received topical applications, so why should we worry? Humans don’t eat sunscreens. Actually,
sunscreen ingredients are able to penetrate the skin and enter our bloodstream. An earlier Swiss study
has shown that ben-zophenone and methoxycinnamate can be found in dermis six hours after