How Sunscreens and Conventional Homes are Similar

I first started thinking about healthy homes in earnest in 2007.  That was the year that by happenstance I came across the Environmental Working Group’s (EWGs) annual guide to Sunscreens during its first year of publication—generally published each May just prior to the Memorial Day holiday.  I was shocked to learn how non-transparent the whole sunscreen industry was and how potentially harmful most sunscreens actually were.  

I recall thinking then that if sunscreens of all products—items marketed as substances that help make us safe and keep us safe—were full of toxins and substances that can indeed damage public health, how about all the other personal care products we use at home?  Moreover I realized that even if I were to ever develop healthy homes someday, there could be no guarantee of an occupant’s health if occupants did not make healthy choices for food, for water, for landscape and gardening, and for personal and body care.  (Fluoride anyone?….a topic for a future blog post).

Finally I remember thinking, if sunscreens weren’t particularly healthy, I knew I’d have to be very careful about the choices I would be making about the safety and healthfulness of the hundreds of building materials that would go into one of my homes.  And that realization actually led to my development of the Quality Standards my homes are built to.

Anyway, fourteen years after the publication of EWG’s first Sunscreen Guide, there is still a lack of transparency in this business, and based on the questions I get during my natural store supplement gig, there remains plenty of consumer confusion about what to buy and what to avoid in the sunscreen category.  With so much to know about this topic, this post concentrates on helping to educate you on sunscreens and skin care based primarily on what I have gleaned over the years from my multiple readings of the EWG website.  My next post on the other hand, describes how this discussion on sunscreens actually reminds me of some of the same issues surrounding today’s conventionally-built homes.

The Environmental Working Group

First things first, to discuss sunscreens I need to make everyone aware of the EWG.  The Environmental Working Group was founded in 1993, and as their website states:

At EWG, we’ve spent decades working to get toxic chemicals out of the food we eat, the water we drink, the clothing we wear and the goods we purchase.  From arsenic to asbestos, pesticides to phthalates – the list of chemicals that have been found in our homes, in our bodies and in the environment is endless.   

Enough is enough.  

We deserve to know what toxic chemicals are present in our food, water and everyday products. We’re here to make sure you get the information you need to help protect yourself and your loved ones from these chemicals.

EWG is a phenomenal group with areas of focus on topics such as Toxic Chemicals, Household & Personal Care Products, and Farming & Agriculture.  Their annual guide to sunscreens—as well as their guides on organic produce (their so-called  “Dirty Dozen” report) are must-have reference sources for your personal library.

EWG Annual Sunscreens Guide

With that said, their annual guide to safer sunscreens helps clarify a very muddled issue.  Again from their website:

Asbestos. Formaldehyde. Lead. Not exactly the words you think of when you’re purchasing your favorite personal care products.  Sadly, toxic chemicals in our cosmetics, sunscreens and skin care products have gone unregulated as far back as the Great Depression. While other countries have taken action to protect their citizens from chemicals linked to cancer and reproductive harm, the Food and Drug Administration doesn’t even require the basic safety testing of ingredients in personal care products before they’re used.  Do you know what you’re putting on your skin? We can help you find out.

The confusion with sunscreens begins with the very thing that makes shopping for them so seemingly easy and straight-forward—their Sun Protection Factor or SPF.  This year, as in years past, because of inadequate regulations governing the safety and efficacy of sunscreens and the lack of safety testing needed to approve new and more effective ingredients for use in sunscreen formulations, store shelves will include sunscreen products that either offer inadequate production or use potentially hazardous ingredients, or both.  This lack of progress toward safer sunscreens flies in the face of mounting scientific evidence linking sunscreen ingredients to negative health impacts and increased understanding about the significant harms associated with exposure to ultraviolet A, or UVA, radiation.

You got to know that according to EWG, SPF values can be an unreliable measure of the effectiveness of sunscreens.  A good sunscreen will provide equal broad-spectrum protection against both UVA and UVB rays. However, the SPF value reflects only how well a product will protect from UVB rays—the main cause of sunburn and non-melanoma skin cancers. SPF values do not reflect a product’s ability to protect from other harmful UV rays, such as UVA, which penetrate the skin more deeply and are associated with skin aging and cancer.

Furthermore, EWG says SPF values are unreliable because the test method companies are required to use to determine a product’s SPF value is imprecise. The test methods require someone to determine a change in the skin redness of a small handful of human participants exposed to UV light in a lab. These results may differ based on the evaluator, testing instrumentation or participant skin type. And SPF testing conditions used for labeling significantly overestimate the protection provided in actual use outdoors.  

Finally, there are some ingredients in sunscreen formulations that EWG states very clearly consumers should avoid.   EWG notes in its Guide that, “just about three quarters of the more than 1,800 products we evaluated for this year’s guide did not provide adequate sun protection or included ingredients linked to harm.”

In 2019, when the federal Food and Drug Administration – the agency that governs sunscreen safety – proposed its most recent updates to sunscreen regulations, (which were last updated in 2011), it found that only two ingredients, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, could be classified as safe and effective, based on the currently available information. But in the past year, numerous new studies have raised new concerns about endocrine-disrupting effects from three other ingredients: homosalate, avobenzone and oxybenzone.

Higher Is Not Better

The FDA has long contended that SPF higher than 50 is “inherently misleading”. Australian authorities cap SPF values at 30, European and Japanese regulators at 50 and Canada at 50+.

Products with SPF values greater than 50+ also tend to give users a false sense of security. High SPF sunscreens not only overpromise protection but, according to the Food and Drug Administration, may also overexpose consumers to UVA rays and raise their risk of cancer. Many studies have found that people are more likely to use high-SPF products improperly and, as a result, may expose themselves to more harmful ultraviolet radiation than do people who rely on products with lower SPF values.

Bottom Line

My bottom line for all this is to go to EWGs website and get as well versed as you can on this topic.  When you come across a sunscreen you like or you think meets your needs particularly well, look it up in EWGs database and see how it compares.