New online trend to say it's better not to wear sunscreen

I'm the same. Allergic to most moisturisers and have never found a suncream that my skin agrees with. I do use it sometimes (and did use it on my dc when little) but I now tend to sit in the shade, wear a hat and sunglasses and I don't sunbathe. The sun is actually one of the best cures for my eczema-prone skin.

And are the people saying this milk bottle white redheads who burned every year as a child and have a parent who's had skin cancer several times? If not, I'm not going to be listening.

Sun cancer usually takes time to catch up, I was the youngest by about 20/30 years getting treated for skin cancer at the hospital most were 50 60 and above so the “it didn’t do us harm” is yet to be seen for some people.

God I hate the sun cream debate. Especially when you don’t protect kids.

skin cancer is horrendous. I’ve witnessed it twice in family members; one dead, one still having chunks of flesh cut out of them every few months in a bid to fight it. Both got it on their head/face; both big time sun-sitters that tanned really well and never wore sun block because they never burned, just tanned to the most golden brown I’ve ever seen.

after witnessing them get skin cancer I will never not send my kids or myself out without it on between March-October. The risk isn’t worth it, even if there are some non-natural slightly nasties in the cream. No different to what’s being pumped into the ham sandwiches you feed your kids, or the chicken nuggets you allow them to have; the diet soft drinks ect. Pick your battles; sun screen is important.

We use sunscreen but I'm quite lazy about reapplying, definitely not as often as the bottles say as it's a pain to get the kids still enough and they are fairly well covered/in shade. I don't think it's enough to avoid the sun at midday though - on a day like today the UV index is high until 2pm and then medium until 4pm, which is enough to burn without sunscreen.

I remember watching a documentary many years ago about a study that had apparently shown that sunscreen takes the suns dangerous rays deeper into the skin layers. I never researched this further.

I don’t usually pull the “it didn’t do us any harm when we were kids” argument 😂 as it’s usually nonsense but parents rarely put sunscreen on children in the UK when I was a child, even in the heatwave of 1976. We spent a lot more time playing outside than the average DC now.

I absolutely agree that everyone needs sun protection but there are other ways to do that effectively in the UK most of the year - sun hats, long sleeves, rash vests etc. We never got sunburnt or even tanned. We always seemed to be under a parasol/sunshade for shade at picnics, barbecues, on the beach etc.

TBH, dressing for the weather/staying out of the sun is probably far healthier than slathering yourself in chemicals and possibly more effective. Nor is there any risk that the sunscreen has been washed or rubbed off.

Edited to clarify that I don’t mean that the sun didn’t harm us, I mean that we were able to protect ourselves in other ways than using sunscreen.

My friend told me this yesterday. What I find strange is that she believes in every conspiracy theory. There no "I'm anti vax and think covid was man made but the twin towers was terrorism" she buys into EVERY theory. It's a bit tedious when I have a biology degree to told the sun doesn't cause cancer because no one had skin cancer 100 years ago. She's got no gcses but I'm the thick one.

People piss all over science now it seems. Some dick on the Web un does years of research. People want and need a happy answer more than they need facts right now. Get stage 4 cancer and you can be sold a happy dream that there's a cure. Don't wear sunscreen and you won't get cancer. People don't want to randomly blow you to pieces - it's a planned out by the government. Whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

Critical thinking is a rapidly dieing skill.

Agreed. Plus most people don't have the chemistry knowledge to understand the list of ingredients let alone the purpose of each one.
Many people in this country don't go outdoors much in autumn, winter and spring (which would help a little with the vitamin d) and then go mad during their two weeks in Spain, turkey or Greece by roasting on the beach after a performance application of sunscreen to their partner🤢.

It's not a new trend, it's always been well known. Were you not advised by the midwife to not put sunscreen on a baby until 6 months old? did you not think there's a reason for that?

I don´t know about sunscreen being carcinogenic, however malignant skin tumors definitely are. So if you don't want to use sunscreen, your only alternative is to fully cover up, especially near the water as the reflection of the sun in the water increased risk of sunburn which increases the risk of melanoma.

By the way, are these the same people who will slather on carcinogenic makeup products, but draw the line at unproven claims against sunscreen? Are these our new anti-vaxers?

"Sunscreen" does not entirely block the sun. In theory the number represents how long you can go as a multiple of 'without sunscreen' before burning - so with factor 50, you would burn at the rate of 1 minute per 50 minutes in the sun.

Common sense is needed - you won't become vitamin D deficient wearing Factor 50 in direct sunlight in June. You should, however, ensure you're getting vitamin D year round whether from the sun or by using a supplement.

I was raised in a hot country and I must say I am shocked every summer at how terrible we are in this country with sun safety. Everyone is out and about in midday sun, no hat, no shade and just slathers on sun cream.

I put sunscreen on when necessary but that is extremely rare in the UK. It's much much better to wear loose clothing, stay in the shade, wear a hat and don't go out in midday sun.

Just let them deal with the consequences. You can't teach stupid.

Well that's part of the point, that suncream isn't a suitable substitute for other sun safety measures

I don’t use much sunscreen for a number of reasons. One is I hate the feel, second is I burn so easily I still have to be really careful.

so generally I prefer to cover up. Rash vests, hats, sarongs that double up as shoulder/head scarves, long loose trousers/skirts/dresses. Plus sitting in the shade as much as possible. I do use sunscreen on exposed areas if I’m out in the sun for longer periods.

However I don’t buy into the conspiracy that it’s carcinogenic, harmful, not necessary etc. cover OR sunscreen.

but then i saw yesterday on a news article on that poor woman from Barnsley that the whole Rabies thing is a ploy to push more vaccines on us. Big Pharma, government tracking etc etc.

idiots.

I use sun cream as needed but I also cover up. I only use it when I have to, and I allow my children to be outside without wearing any for at least 20 mins each day.
I never use factor 50 - only a max of 30 as there is a concern for me about the levels of vitamin d that can’t get through with block

It's probably because people are not going outside enough coupled with living at a latitude where there isn't enough sun year round for vitamin d production rather than sunscreen use. Most people don't use enough sunscreen and don't reapply regularly so people are still getting some sun exposure.

I was literally coming here to type the same, we can slap on factor 50 and still burn to a crisp. I put a UV suit on my LO on holiday but mainly because I cba chasing after him and reapplying suncream and I also don’t want to keep him trapped in the shade.

Why would it be a ‘mad health belief’ to notice the long list of chemical ingredients in sun screen and consider that might not be an ideal thing to put on a child’s skin? @Goodideaornot

Because solely using the length of the ingredient list to decide it is bad is daft.

I give you the chemical composition of a lemon.

People talking about the increased use of sunscreen in products - that’s partly because it’s only in the last few years that we have understood the role of UVA rays ( the ones that are there all day whether the sun is shining or not, whether it’s rainy, cloud etc..) in premature skin ageing and wrinkles.

I use SPF 50 everyday on my face, neck & hands, I have done for years. Plus I use tretinoin. It’s part of my self care routine.

A friend of mine never uses sunscreen, doesn’t believe in it etc. which is her choice. I have noticed however that now we are in our early 40’s, the difference in our skin is quite noticable. I’ll keep using it for cosmetic reasons.

She had eczema too, which didn't help.

It's also key to remember people have different skin.

I very rarely put suncream on my son (we do also live in North Scotland!) and my husband never uses it.

I need it and so does my daughter. We burn more easily.

I do prefer covering up as well but there's clearly a balance to be struck between applying factor 50 every 10 minutes and nothing and judging one against the other is always going to be skewed.

The sensible middle line seems to apply here.

And partly because I had always understood that the order of sun safety was

1. stay out of the sun
2. cover up /stay in the shade
3. use suncream

Not "just spend all day outside in blazing sun assuming you are fine because you've popped some cream on"

I mean it replaces the vitamin d just as you can replace iron etc
mood is another thing but I find sitting in the shade when it’s sunny is good for me

but then if people say don’t wear SPF because we need the vitamin d but stay in the shade you’re still not getting enough

if you go to work in the morning, come home in the evening and are inside a building all day avoiding the midday sun you’re not going to get enough and definitely October - March, the majority of people are deficient
i can’t get enough from the sun without burning as a redhead so I have to replace it