# Sunscreen Issues / Problems



## athena123 (Jan 17, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *Kuuipo* 

 
_ using a sunscreen and not reapplying every 2 hours( avobenzene breaks down and brings free readicals below the surface of the skin-causes more damage than no sunscreen), believing in the "halo" effect of sunscreen impregnated foundations (like eating at Subway-where people actually consume more calories because they think they are doing something healthy-SPF foundations give us a false sense of security)_

 
This may be worthy of a new thread - when I learned that chemical sunscreens break down and have to be reapplied frequently in order to give you the protection you need, that's when I started searching for physical sunscreens that sit in top of your skin and don't break down. Still don't completely understand how PPD ratings work to indicate protection from UVA but eventually I will. 

I fully agree with you that the use of sun protection tends to offer the same false sense of security that wearing helmets on a motorcycle at 100 MPH does. If you crash, with helmet or without, you will be hurt badly...


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Biggest Skin Care Crimes*

Sunscreens can damage skin if not used properly, study warns


one interesting article......there are literally thousands of articles on sunscreen degradation, sunscreen and ros, sunscreen and free radicals, and a rather nice rating system by the cosmetic safety database.  Its important to be a good consumer and not a victim of infomercialism.  There is no such thing as hope in a jar.


----------



## user79 (Jan 18, 2008)

New thread for an important topic, imo.

So basically, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. That's an interesting article, thanks for posting it Kuuipo. I'm annoyed that they don't suggest brands of sunscreen to use that have these advanced filters, as a consumer we're left wondering what is the best way to fully protect against UV rays now? It's not practical on a day to day basis to reapply sunscreen every 2 hours. Unless you're going to the beach or spending the day outisde in the sun in summer, who actually does this? I apply a daily moisturizer with spf15 in it, now I'm wondering if this is enough. I'm on a fight against wrinkles!! Haha...


----------



## Lissa (Jan 18, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *MissChievous* 

 
_I apply a daily moisturizer with spf15 in it, now I'm wondering if this is enough._

 
Me too. I put mine on in the morning under makeup, and I can't keep putting it on again over the makeup throughout the day. Can anyone suggest any of these advanced sunscreens?


----------



## frocher (Jan 18, 2008)

...


----------



## user79 (Jan 18, 2008)

How practical are these kinds of sunscreen for wearing under makeup? I'm also weary of anything over spf 25 because it offers hardly any more protection, it's only incrimental. That's why in some countries like Australia you can't label sunscreen as higher than 30, I believe. An spf 30 is not double as strong as spf 15, although that's what some people tend to think.


----------



## frocher (Jan 18, 2008)

..........


----------



## athena123 (Jan 18, 2008)

Mischevious, did you move this post to start this thread, 'cause I know I didn't! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Either way, good move. I never realized how complicated sun protection can be until I started participating in health and beauty forums! 

I was diagnosed with basal cell carcinoma last year and started researching sunscreens to find my HG facial sunscreen that won't clog pores, leave my face looking shiny, has a nice texture that I'll actually use.  I did try Clarins UV40 and think it had the most elegant texture of all, but the price! Sorry, at nearly $40 per ounce I wouldn't use enough of it to give me the protection I need. I had given up on finding a completely physical sunscreen and settled on a chemical/physical sunscreen made by one of my favorite skincare lines www.pureskinformulations.com. 

I just tried yet another new sunscreen made by NIA24 that contains both titanium and zinc oxide, so it's completely physical and I think this is finally gonna be it! No chemicals that degrade, lovely light and elegant texture that doesn't clog my pores or cause me to break out and also contains 5% niacin. It leaves my face looking a little white for a few minutes but manages to absorb quickly since it the titanium and zinc are micronized. Even better, it slightly mattifies my face and I noticed my makeup goes on very smoothly on top of this so it can be used as sunscreen AND makeup primer!  Since I use mineral makeup, the additional layer of titanium dioxide and zinc oxide also give me another layer of protection. Unless I sweat it off or go for a swim in the ocean, I don't have to worry about reapplying through out the day because physical barriers don't break down. 

There are supposed to be some chemical sunscreens that are more stable and DON'T break down, but I'm still uncomfortable with how they work. This isn't based on anything scientific by any means, but I just don't like the concept behind how they work at all. Apparently they sink in and absorb the UVA rays under the surface; at least with a physical sunscreen, the UVA rays are deflected rather than absorbed. 

I'll try to dig up some articles from much more informed sources and post them.


----------



## athena123 (Jan 18, 2008)

More information than you probably wanted to know. I'm slightly concerned that this site doesn't seem to think that ANY chemical barriers are sound. This site also expresses a lot of concerns about micronized use of minerals, but who wants to put a heavy, occlusive white cream on their face that looks like a lifeguard's nose? Nevertheless, a great place to start your research and draw your own conclusions.
More Healthy Suntanning, Best Sunblockers, Suntan Vitamins, Skin Cancer and Chemical Sunscreens

Sun screens are a very controversial topic within the FDA as well. Because of the FDA, the term "sunblock" isn't supposed to be allowed, since nothing can truly BLOCK UVA/UVB rays, although physical screens like Titanium and Zinc do deflect. They're also trying to come up with a rating system that will more accuratel y reflect protection from UVA rays, which is a lot more complicated than UVB. 

FDA proposes sunblock testinganother forum-another forum-another forumThe Washington Times, America's Newspaper

Very dry reading, Q&A from the FDA website: Questions and Answers on the 2007 Sunscreen Proposed Rule


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 19, 2008)

Thanks Athena, for perpetuating the topic of sunscreen use.  I have mentioned in other postings about metallic sunscreens like zinc (which is now available in clear-and is a component in mineral makeups) and titanium. Zinc does have a reputation for being in comedogenic formulations (pore cloggers). Sun protection is not just for vanity's sake.  Some skin cancers that are small on the surface reach down into muscle and connective tissue -and can require enormous excisions-or can become malignant and spread to other areas. I've had patients in Hawaii who have had entire ears or noses removed due to skin cancer-and some who have lost their lives from malignant melanoma.


----------



## janwa09 (Jan 19, 2008)

Yes I'm really confused with sunscreens.  In what I've read so far a suncreen is a good sunscreen as long as it's broad spectrum--period.  I never knew that there's more to this such as ingredient content, etc.  And I've never even thought of reapplying it throughout the day either.  I always thought that you only reapply if you are exposed to water or if you sweat a lot.  Well now I know better thanks to this thread!

How protective do you guys think of foundations with SPF?  Will wearing this alone suffice, or should we still supplement with sunscreen?


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 19, 2008)

Don't rely on foundations with SPF for any degree of protection-especially if you drive or walk to work in daylight. Same thing, in 2 hours your SPF protection has degraded and is delivering free radicals below the surface of your skin.  A hat is a better option.  Mineral makeup is better than the SPF in liquid foundations because its generally zinc, which is photostable.
Broad spectrum only means that it screens out UVA/UVB rays up to 2 hours with some reliability. For reliability, it must be applied generously (slathered on) every 2 hours.


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 19, 2008)

Print Story
Email Story
Sunscreens Can Damage Skin, Researchers Find
Filters in sunscreens that keep out ultraviolet radiation can generate compounds that attack skin cells, say UCR chemists
(August 29, 2006)

Print Quality Image: Right click image and select "Save Target As." 

 Two-photon fluorescence intensity images of cells deep in the epidermis showing reactive oxygen species activity following sunscreen application to the skin surface. Reactive oxygen species can react with cellular components, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging. Credit: K. Hanson. 
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – Are sunscreens always beneficial, or can they be detrimental to users? A research team led by UC Riverside chemists reports that unless people out in the sun apply sunscreen often, the sunscreen itself can become harmful to the skin. 

When skin is exposed to sunlight, ultraviolet radiation (UV) is absorbed by skin molecules that then can generate harmful compounds, called reactive oxygen species or ROS, which are highly reactive molecules that can cause “oxidative damage.” For example, ROS can react with cellular components like cell walls, lipid membranes, mitochondria and DNA, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging. 

When sunscreen is applied on the skin, however, special molecules – called UV filters – contained in the sunscreen, cut down the amount of UV radiation that can penetrate the skin. Over time, though, these filters penetrate into the skin below the surface of the epidermis, the outermost layer of skin, leaving the body vulnerable to UV radiation. 

Led by Kerry M. Hanson, a senior research scientist in the Department of Chemistry at UCR, the researchers report that three UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene), which are approved by the Food and Drug Administration and widely used in sunscreens, generate ROS in skin themselves when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, thus augmenting the ROS that is naturally produced. The researchers note that the additional ROS are generated only when the UV filters have penetrated into the skin and, at the same time, sunscreen has not been reapplied to prevent ultraviolet radiation from reaching these filters. 

Study results will appear in an upcoming issue of _Free Radical Biology & Medicine_. An advance copy of the paper is available online at the journal’s Website. 

“Sunscreens do an excellent job protecting against sunburn when used correctly,” said Hanson, who works in the laboratory of Christopher Bardeen, an assistant professor of chemistry at UCR. “This means using a sunscreen with a high sun protection factor and applying it uniformly on the skin. Our data show, however, that if coverage at the skin surface is low, the UV filters in sunscreens that have penetrated into the epidermis can potentially do more harm than good. More advanced sunscreens that ensure that the UV filters stay on the skin surface are needed; such filters would reduce the level of UV-induced ROS. Another solution may be to mix the UV filters with antioxidants since antioxidants have been shown to reduce UV-induced ROS levels in the skin.” 

In their research, Hanson and colleagues used epidermal model tissue and applied sunscreen to the surface to test the effect of sunscreen penetration on ROS levels in the deep epidermis. A two-photon fluorescence microscope allowed them to visualize ROS generation occurring below the skin surface. The ROS activity was detected using a probe molecule whose fluorescent properties change upon exposure to ROS. On comparing images taken before and after the skin was exposed to UV radiation, they found that ROS generation in the skin increased after sunscreen penetration. 

About 95 percent of the visible signs of aging are associated with UV exposure. About 90 percent of a person’s total life-time UV exposure is obtained before the person is 18 years of age. Only a few UV filters are available that block “UV-A,” the wavelengths that penetrate more deeply into the skin, all the way into the dermis where collagen exists. 

“For now, the best advice is to use sunscreens and re-apply them often – the Skin Cancer Foundation recommends every two hours, and especially after sweating or swimming, which can wash away sunscreen – to reduce the amount of UV radiation from getting through to filters that have penetrated the skin,” Bardeen said. “This, in turn, would reduce ROS generation.” 

Next, the researchers plan to investigate the effect of smog on ROS generation in the skin. 

Besides Hanson and Bardeen, Enrico Gratton in the Laboratory for Fluorescence Dynamics, UC Irvine, collaborated on the study. The research was funded by grants from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health.



Related Links:
<LI class=newsroominfo>Department of Chemistry <LI class=newsroominfo>More on Christopher Bardeen <LI class=newsroominfo>_Free Radical Biology & Medicine_ Additional Contacts:
<LI class=newsroominfo>Kerry Hanson <LI class=newsroominfo>Christopher Bardeen The University of California, Riverside is a major research institution. Key areas of research include nanotechnology, health science, genomics, environmental studies, digital arts and sustainable growth and development. With a current undergraduate and graduate enrollment of more than 16,600, the campus is projected to grow to 21,000 students by 2010. Located in the heart of Inland Southern California, the nearly 1,200-acre, park-like campus is at the center of the region's economic development. Visit www.ucr.edu or call 951-UCR-NEWS for more information. Media sources are available at http://www.mediasources.ucr.edu/.
News Media Contact:
  Name: Iqbal Pittalwala
  Phone: 951.827.6050
  Email: [email protected]



Produced by the Office of Strategic Communications.
Copyright  2007, Regents of the University of California
This page is dynamically generated.
Maintained by: Webmaster


----------



## user79 (Jan 19, 2008)

Ack! That sucks! Well I use mineral makeup as foundation so can that prevent some of these free radicals forming? I have never seen any sunscreen that is advertised as containing zinc. Since this is all very new research findings, I expect it will take some time before the market adjusts...


----------



## athena123 (Jan 19, 2008)

Misschievous, certainly mineral makeup will help, since both titanium and zinc are physical barriers that DEFLECT the sun. A hat is always good if you're on the beach or in full sun. I even apply sunscreen to face, hands, neck and chest during the winter since UV can travel through glass and clouds. 

The study Kuippo was so kind to locate and post is in reference to chemical sunscreens that absorb and interact with UVA rays; that's why they break down and can contribute to free radicals. Once I started reading stuff like this, my search for a mineral chemical free facial sunscreen began. I'm honestly not sure how stable Mexoryl or Parsol 1789 are supposed to be, although Kuippo may be able to shed some more light on that. 

Kuippo, sorry to go off topic but are you a doctor or derm, sounds like you know a ton about this! What kind of sunscreen do you use? 

I spent so much time and money trying to find a good facial sunscreen, I hope my search will be over with the NIA24 - it's so lovely, completely physical and feels almost as nice as the uber spendy Clarins UV40. Too many zinc based sunscreens like Badger Balm and UVNaturals is simply too heavy and occlusive for oily skin like mine.


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 19, 2008)

I'm a nurse, but I have degrees in several branches and science and in the fine arts (learning is an obsession ....)

Parasol 1789, widely promoted in the 90's is very unstable. 

I'm pretty much a noctornal person, I even go to the beach at night. My sunscreen choices are clear zinc, lots of clothing, and some of the most stable sunscreens I can find by Blue Lizard. 

I used to use sunscreen religiously every few hours when I went on day hiking trips, etcs. 

I do recommend that if you are out in the sun to consider a generous base of mineral makeup like BE. It's sweat proof. On the neck and body, I'd get a zinc based cream.  If you look at older people who live in tropical areas who don't sun themselves, but just live, shop, drive,etc, you will notice heavier pigmentation on the chest area,freckles on the arms,shoulders, neck, back,face, and hands. The skin on the belly-not so much.  Melanin will concentrate in areas given constant exposure. You may notice some older women with "perma-tan" cleavages........this is sundamage.  Recently I saw a 97 year old Japanese woman who never, ever leaves her home and she had pale, unmarked, and unlined skin. There was loss of elasticity, there was herniated sacs of fat under the eyes, but the pigmentation was that of a young child. She also had osteoporosis (sunshine gives us vitamin D, strengthens the bones). 

When I was a child, everyone used baby oil. We thought the sun was good for you. In the winter we had ultra violet lights in the bathroom to "dry up colds, help with arthritis, clear up the skin". In the late seventies we got sunscreen, but it wasn't very good.  
The most important weopon in your arsenal is common sense. Some sun exposure is vital. Laying out and baking is foolish. 45 min of volleyball in a bikini every so often won't hurt you, but if you are on the Rainbow Warriors Volleyball team-you need to have a good skin protection strategy .  
Skin damage is cumulative. The body forgives some sundamage, but repeated insults can scar for life-subcutaneously.


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 19, 2008)

From The National Cancer Institute:
*Skin Cancer - Australian Experience*






The incidence of skin cancer is higher in Australia than in any other country, and incidence rates are still rising. In response to this problem, Australian officials adopted a variety of initiatives. 
Many of these initiatives focused on public education. For example, the "SunSmart" education program, implemented from 1988 through 1990, significantly increased the use of sunscreen and hats among a test group of more than 4,000 adults. Women, particularly adolescents and young adults, developed positive attitudes about protection and behavior. Similarly, the public service announcement "Slip! Slop! Slap!" (that is, slip on a shirt, slop on sunscreen, and slap on a hat) raised awareness of skin cancer, especially among outdoor workers. Responding to the need to promote sun-safe attitudes, Australian fashion magazines have started to feature hats and use fewer models with tans. 
Other educational programs have emphasized the need for regular self-examination and have encouraged physicians to routinely perform skin examinations on all patients they see. 
Community changes have been important components of skin cancer prevention programs in Australia as well. These changes include building awnings and other structures to provide shade wherever possible, rescheduling sports and other outdoor community events away from midday hours to avoid peak ultraviolet-light exposure periods, and reducing taxes on sunscreens. 
The Australian government has promoted research on health risks associated with skin cancer. It also has encouraged organizations and communities to establish screening programs to reach individuals who are at particularly high risk for skin cancer. 
*Skin Cancer - Deaths*

*



*The American Cancer Society estimates that approximately 9,000 die each year from skin cancer. About 7,000 of these deaths are from melanoma; the other deaths are related to other types of skin cancer. 
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that from 1973 to 1992, the death rate for melanoma increased 48 percent in U.S. men. And in 1996, the CDC reported that the rate was continuing to rise, despite how easily the disease can be prevented or treated (if detected early). One explanation for this trend is increased recreational exposure to the sun. 

*

* *1* | 2 | 3 |


----------



## chameleonmary (Jan 20, 2008)

I think a lot of people are reluctant to apply moisturiser and sunscreen together because if the thickness of wearing both, and then possibly makeup on top.

In Australia, a company called Banana Boat (not sure if its also overseas) has a powder-dry formula which I would guess is more comfortable to wear with a moisturiser and makeup?


----------



## user79 (Jan 20, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *athena123* 

 
_I spent so much time and money trying to find a good facial sunscreen, I hope my search will be over with the NIA24 - it's so lovely, completely physical and feels almost as nice as the uber spendy Clarins UV40. Too many zinc based sunscreens like Badger Balm and UVNaturals is simply too heavy and occlusive for oily skin like mine._

 
I'm gonna see if we can buy that here in Switzerland, thanks for the advice!


----------



## athena123 (Jan 20, 2008)

Dear Miss misschievous, here's the link where you can find out more about NIA24 and the breakthrough treatment of niacin in skincare. NIA24™

If you click on the contact us link, you can send them an email and request samples. I've been pretty intrigued by this line and their entire philosophy for quite awhile but since I'm pretty happy with my current routine, held off on trying their products. Too afraid I'd like them and they're kind of spendy, but the samples arrived in a week and I've found an ebay seller that offers their product for very reasonable prices. 

For my birthday present next month, I'll add NIA24 skin strengthening complex and mineral sunscreen to my haul. Sigh, I'll have to forgo purchasing any new clothing to supply myself with this but the way I see it, I wear my face and skin everyday, so I tend to invest more in skincare/makeup than anything else.


----------



## chameleonmary (Jan 20, 2008)

Hi all,

This thread really opened my eyes on sunscreen and skin care... I thought my mother was a little nuts when she told me sunscreen might do more harm to your skin than good!

I wanted to know, though... would clear zinc be a good alternative? I am quite fair and burn easily... also, would anyone be able to tell me if sun exposure while you are in a car is dangerous (ie. sun through the window)?


----------



## athena123 (Jan 22, 2008)

^^^ - by clear zinc, do you mean micronized zinc? If that's the case, yes, micronized zinc and titanium are both broad spectrum physical sunblocks that tend to deflect both UVA/UVB rays. There is some debate about whether or not zinc is more effective than titanium - I honestly don't know which is better, but zinc also has a reputation for being very soothing for troubled skin not to mention a great immune booster during the cold and flu season. Paula Begoin [Paula's Choice] indicates that physical blockers can clog pores but I have to disagree with her. I think it's all the other ingredients that go into physical blocks that are more likely to clog pores, but then again she doesn't seem to like anything unless it's a product from her own line....


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 22, 2008)

I am using Blue Lizard Austrailian Suncream. My dermatologist friends use it too, and it can be found in drugstores like Long's. (5oz,12.49) It's zic oxide and titanium oxide. (patent protected) It's chemical and fragrance free. hey do make a facial kind with hyraluronic acid as a moisturizer, and that formula is noncomedogenic as well.
There is controversey on micronized vs non-not really sure about nano-particles either, I have read conflicting studies.
There is also conflicting reports on Meroxyl,some studies show it as a potential carcinogen. Not many Meroxyl brands on the market-and Anthelios from the French company is supposedly the best.
The cosmetics Database also lists sunscreens and rates their ingrediants as to potential carciogenicity and tetrogenicity (birth defect producing).


----------



## chameleonmary (Jan 23, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *athena123* 

 
_^^^ - by clear zinc, do you mean micronized zinc? If that's the case, yes, micronized zinc and titanium are both broad spectrum physical sunblocks that tend to deflect both UVA/UVB rays. There is some debate about whether or not zinc is more effective than titanium - I honestly don't know which is better, but zinc also has a reputation for being very soothing for troubled skin not to mention a great immune booster during the cold and flu season. Paula Begoin [Paula's Choice] indicates that physical blockers can clog pores but I have to disagree with her. I think it's all the other ingredients that go into physical blocks that are more likely to clog pores, but then again she doesn't seem to like anything unless it's a product from her own line....
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 
I am not sure if it is micronized zinc but I suppose it would be the normal zinc cream you could pick up from a drugstore, but only a colourfree version? The Megan Gale range was the one I had in mind:

Megan Gale Invisible Zinc Anti-Ageing Facial Moisturising Sunscreen SPF 30+ (Tinted) 50g - Compare Prices & Buy Online in Australia - MyShopping.com.au

And i would definately need something non-comedogenic because I tend to get greasy by the end of the day... right now, even the light aerosol sunscreen mist feels greasy on my skin


----------



## user79 (Jan 23, 2008)

I was at a Clarins counter yesterday and found a great product. It's an eye cream that has a *100% mineral physical sunblock* spf 30 in it.






Looks like this would be a good eye cream to use during the day. It goes on white at first but once absorbed, the white film disappears. I think I might buy it, but it's pretty expensive for a small bottle. Dang!

Product Page


----------



## janwa09 (Jan 23, 2008)

So does this mean I have to trash my Neutrogena Dry-touch Sunblock now?


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 23, 2008)

Are you willing to apply it every couple of hours while in the sun, if yes, use it up!


----------



## MsCocoa (Jan 24, 2008)

This whole thing is making me think eff sunscreen my daily moisturiser uses titanium dioxide so I guess I'm ok, but it seems like more hassle than it's worth.


----------



## janwa09 (Jan 24, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *MsCocoa* 

 
_This whole thing is making me think eff sunscreen my daily moisturiser uses titanium dioxide so I guess I'm ok, but it seems like more hassle than it's worth._

 
What moisturiser do you use?


----------



## MsCocoa (Jan 24, 2008)

Origins Have A Nice Day Lotion.


----------



## athena123 (Jan 24, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *MsCocoa* 

 
_This whole thing is making me think eff sunscreen my daily moisturiser uses titanium dioxide so I guess I'm ok, but it seems like more hassle than it's worth._

 
It's worth it - sun damage is one of the primary causes of aging; I wish I would have started using sunscreen when I was young [we used to think it was GOOD for you] 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 but at least I can prevent environmental aging now. 

The best way to prevent yourself from having to constantly reapply sun screen, a true hassle when you wear makeup is to find a mineral based sunscreen.

Good luck,
Athena


----------



## V15U4L_3RR0R (Jan 24, 2008)

Personally, I wear it to prevent skin cancer and not to prevent aging. We're all going to age whether we like it or not. I'd rather just eat healthy and exercise regularly and see what I get. But that's a whole differnt topic me thinks.


----------



## janwa09 (Jan 25, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *V15U4L_3RR0R* 

 
_Personally, I wear it to prevent skin cancer and not to prevent aging. We're all going to age whether we like it or not. I'd rather just eat healthy and exercise regularly and see what I get. But that's a whole differnt topic me thinks._

 
I agree.  Skin cancer prevention should be the #1 concern and priority in terms of incentive to apply sunscreen.  But of course, if this delays aging, then all the better! 

My sister's BF who is 44 yrs old just got the results of his biopsy from an excised skin from his nose and sadly it's positive for skin cancer.  Well this is from 44 years of being exposed to the harsh Australian sun with no sunscreen! I think his condition can still be cured through this procedure I'm not really too familiar with.  Thankfully it's not Melanoma.


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 25, 2008)

*Skin cancer statistics*


Over 380,000 Australians are treated for skin cancer each year [1,2] – that’s over 1,000 people every day. 
Over 1,600 Australians die from skin cancer each year [3]. 
Skin cancer costs the health system around $300 million annually, the highest cost of all cancers [4]. 
Australia has the highest rate of skin cancer in the world. Skin cancers account for around 80% of all new cancers diagnosed each year in Australia. Each year Australians are four times more likely to develop a common skin cancer than any other form of cancer [1]. 
The melanoma incidence rates in Australia and New Zealand are around four times as high as those found in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom [5]. 
In 2005, 245 Victorians died from melanoma [3]. 
Relative five-year survival rates for all melanoma are 90% for Australian males and 95% for Australian women. Survival rates have risen significantly since the early eighties as a result of early detection [6]. 
*
References *

1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) & Australasian Association of Cancer Registries (AACR). _Cancer in Australia an overview, 2006_. Cancer Series Number 37. Canberra: AIHW, 2007.
2. National Cancer Control Initiative. The 2002 national non-melanoma skin cancer survey. A report by the NCCI Non-melanoma Skin Cancer Working Group. Edited by MP Staples Melbourne: NCCI, 2003.
3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. States & territories GRIM (General Record of Incidence of Mortality) Books. Canberra: AIHW, 2005.
4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. _Health system expenditures on cancer and other neoplasms in Australia, 2000-01_. Health and Welfare Expenditure Series Number 22. Canberra: AIHW, 2005.
5. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) & Australasian Association of Cancer Registries (AACR). Cancer in Australia 2001. Cancer Series Number 28. Canberra: AIHW, 2004.
6. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Australasian Association of Cancer Registries. _Cancer survival in A_


----------



## Divinity (Jan 25, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *Lissa* 

 
_Me too. I put mine on in the morning under makeup, and I can't keep putting it on again over the makeup throughout the day. Can anyone suggest any of these advanced sunscreens?_

 

I went to Sephora the other day looking for a better moisturizer and I got talking to this wonderful Lily gal.  She asked about my use of a daily sunscreen and when I stared at the floor, she smiled and introduced me to...
Peter Thomas Roth mineral sunscreen spf 30!  I love the concept and was skeptical, but she swears by it so I figured 'what the heck'.  Well I tried it today and am excited to note progress.  I'll probably be able to tell more in the summer, but at least I don't have to go out and buy a frickin' cream to re-apply every 2 hours.  Just pop this in my purse to reapply over my make up as needed with no greasy mess and lack of much needed make up for those breakout days.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Active Ingredients: Titanium Dioxide 15%, Zinc Oxide 10%. Inactive Ingredients: Mica, Silica, Zea Mays (Corn) Starch, Tocopheryl Acetate (Vitamin E), Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C), Retinyl Palmitate (Vitamin A), Salix Alba (Willow) Bark Extract, Iron Oxides.


----------



## athena123 (Jan 25, 2008)

I've heard great reviews about Peter Thomas Roth mineral sunscreen! Never tried it but I sure did want to, lovely ingredients! I think it was the $$ that stopped me. I was afraid that with a really spendy sunblock, I'd try to "hoard" it and not use enough of it to be effective. I think the correct amount to use on the face is approx. a nickel sized amount over face and neck to offer the fullest protection.


----------



## Dreamergirl3 (Jan 25, 2008)

What about powder suncreens? There are some that come in click pens, that you dust on. I'm sure using one of those would be easier to reapply throughout the day, esp over makeup.
for ex, Colorescience Sunforgettable, and the aforementioned peter thomas roth. the cheapest powder sunblock i found was this one
Zinc Oxide, Titanium Dioxide, All Natural Sunscreen Mineral from Premium Minerals


----------



## asprettydoes (Apr 19, 2009)

What a great thread!!  I've been using MAC Prep & Prime spf 50 for the last 2 weeks & love the way it wears (applied over moisturizer & under foundation).  $38/oz _but_ a very small amount smooths on easily over my whole face & I'm using cheaper stuff on my throat.  Liquid foundation with a 188 brush on top of this is giving me even, matte, long-lasting coverage for every day. P&Pspf50 has zinc oxide & octinoxate listed as active ingredients but I'll definately be comparing it to the info you've given above to see how it stacks up.  Do you have an opinion on this product?


----------



## User38 (Apr 19, 2009)

I always use a powder sunscreen when I am out and walking around -- Peter Thomas Roth is excellent and so are the BE brush on sunscreens.


----------



## Austrian_Babe (Apr 20, 2009)

Soo I´m looking for a good physical sunscreen that I can purchase in stores, I really don´t want to spend a lot of money and/or order online. Since I´m in Europe I can go to the pharamacy to buy one, I always hear how we supposably have really good sunscreens. 

What about this one:

La Roche Posay Anthelios XL 50+ Fluide Extreme:
filters: Mexoryl XL, Mexoryl SX, Parsol 1789, Uvinul N 539, Uvinul T 150, Tinosorb S, titanium oxide

Since titanium oxide is the last in the list, that means it is the ingredient with the least amount, right? I don´t know what Uvinul and Tinosorb is though. And the UVA protection is 28 PPD.


Or this one:
Avene mineral sunscreen SPF 50. Not a lot of general info on the Avene website, other than "contains no chemical filters"

Ingredients:AVENE AQUA. CYCLOMETHICONE. TITANIUM DIOXIDE. GLYCERIN. C12-15 ALKYL BENZOATE. ISODODECANE. POLYDECENE. ZINC OXIDE. C30-45 ALKYL METHICONE. PEG-45 DODECYL GLYCOL COPOLYMER. SODIUM CHLORIDE. PEG/PPG-18/18 DIMETHICONE. PEG-30 DIPOLYHYDROXYSTEARATE. BUTYLPARABEN. CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE. DISODIUM EDTA. ETHYLPARABEN. CI 77492. CI 77491. ISOBUTYLPARABEN. METHYLPARABEN. OCTYLDODECANOL. o-CYMEN-5-OL. PHENOXYETHANOL. PROPYLPARABEN. SODIUM MYRISTOYL GLUTAMATE. TOCOPHERYL GLUCOSIDE. TRIETHOXYCAPRYLYLSILANE. TRIMETHOXYCAPRYLYLSILANE. XANTHAN GUM.


----------



## asprettydoes (Apr 23, 2009)

Hey Austrian_Babe,
I saw a positive mention of La Roche Posay Anthelios SX on the NYTimes website but I haven't had a chance to compare it to the research Kuuipo has posted above.  Hope this link will click through for you. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/04/fashion/04skin.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=cosmetics%20restriction%  20diet&st=cse 
If not search "cosmetics restriction diet" which is basically a summary review of some high end vs. low end skin care products. Have also been considering DDF Enhancing Sun Protection spf30 which has good reviews on sephora for performing well under foundation.  Would be interested to hear what you decide to buy :>


----------



## aggrolounge (Apr 23, 2009)

I also would love to know what sunscreens are acceptable that I can purchase in a drugstore! I really can't afford anything outrageous.


----------



## Pizzicata (May 21, 2009)

Thanks for this thread!!  This is very important to me because of where I live.

I am going to try NIA24.  The reviews seem so positive.  I would even try the moisturizer if I can afford it.


----------

