I'm not convinced about sunscreen

[DownatHeel]

Or more specifically the need to reapply frequently/every 2 hours.

I am very careful with my skin, it's very fair and can burn within minutes in strong sun.

However, I find a decent high factor sunscreen, applied thoroughly in the morning protects me all day. For example, I'm just back from a sunny outdoor activity holiday. Out in the sunshine from 9am-6pm for 6 days.

I did my water resistant factor 30 suncream before breakfast every day, whilst getting dressed. Then nothing else all day. The activities involved getting hot and sweaty but not going in water. (I would reapply after swimming).

Anyway, I had a great time and my skin is exactly the same colour as it was before. I don't even have the faintest mark where my watch was.

Suncream is essential, I wouldn't dream of being outside without it in summer, but the need to reappply so frequently is driven by scientific research funded by the industry itself and more in their interests than ours?

I am forever lecturing my dad
He's a redhead like me and still of the "tan is healthy" age and "I've caught the sun nicely" means he's luminous red

Honestly I'm surprised he hasn't had a skin cancer yet. Managed to get him to wear SPF on his head by telling him about a friends dad that had one removed and has a chunk out of his head

Ok. I haven’t read your full thread but what makes you think you know more about skin cancer than this lot https://www.cancer.org.au/cancer-information/causes-and-prevention/sun-safety?

My government has spent a kings ransom on trying to treat skin cancer patients until they died. It’s not pretty and not a “good” death. So, they funded research. Yes, chemical companies have used that research but, last I looked, governments don’t produce consumer products or cancer chemotherapy treatments.

Imagine that's better than the feeling of having cancer and any associated treatment...

Did you see the tests under UV light they did a few years ago? They took various creams and photos then the individuals did various activities according to their work. All showed significant areas where the cream had worn away....worse on the reapplication varieties but even the once a day had patches where people had sweated or wiped face and neck. They talked about how it did underlying skin damage even if it didn't burn. ....think it was a watchdog programme or another BBC one.

I’m South Asian, so I’m brown and I do not burn in the sun, however the sun still causes hyperpigmentation, premature aging and skin cancer. I apply spf 50 daily, I re-apply on days where the uv levels are over 3. I also apply properly, not a tiny smudge for my whole face.

Black and brown people get skin cancer, premature aging and hyperpigmentation due to sun damage. We don’t burn, but even if we did, waiting until we literally have radiation burns before we decide to protect our skin would be stupid.

My husband is white, he didn’t start using suncream until well into adulthood as his parents thought all you needed was a tiny thin smear on the end of your nose. He is 30, he has visible signs of sun damage on his shoulders and ears, he has also had some skin cancers removed. He now wears factor 50 everyday and on his derms advice re-applies every two hours if the UV is above three and also uses physical protection such as long sleeves and hats.

Surely it depends. I have lived in 50c countries, not likely to get cancer due to skin tone, have also burned in the UK. As an HSE professional, exposure is so much about burning once, whether on a ski holiday or an outside cleaner in saudi

Of course I wouldn't go out in full Australian sun without being covered up- (ideally with clothes and hats, but failing that regularly reapplied sunscreen).

I wouldn't go out in an Alaskan winter without carefully chosen boots and socks either but that doesn't mean I can't do my Christmas shopping on Oxford Street in trainers.

Australian sun strength isn't the same as the British, and my skin colour is different to that of native Australians for a reason.

I apply it two or three times a day, and always once I've dried off a bit after swimming.

I generally also prefer to sit in the shade and I always wear my sun hat. I'm just not keen on the feeling of actually baking to a crisp under strong sun so don't spend much time directly in it. Quite often I also put on a baggy old t-shirt to cover up some.

My Dad had ginger hair and a fair skin and was always seeking a tan that was just never going to happen for him. He just went lobster red. He didn't use enough suncream and in later life had to have so many moles removed. He also got cancer in/on the outer part of one of his ears which kept coming back whenever it had been removed.

I am not a red or ginger head and don't appear to have the same sort of skin but I want to reduce the risks he took as much as I can.

My DH has also been a bit of a risk taker when it comes to the sun, but had a cancer scare a few years ago when he had to have a basal cell carcinoma removed from his nose. He was shocked by that and is now somewhat more sensible. He uses and regularly reapplies suncream (SPF 30 - 50, like me) and wears a decent sunhat.

I think it is worth reapplying several times a day and always after a swim. Not being able to see or feel damage doesn't mean that there isn't any.

I do have a question for you, if you don't mind. Are you deficient in vit d? I would think if you apply 50 every day, even on uv3 days, you are literally getting no natural vit d at all, which is really bad for general health.

The use of suncream does not cause vitamin D deficiency or reduce vitamin D production.

I think people's skin differs massively. It also depends where you are in the world you are surely? All heat is different.

Some people get heat rash others don't. It doesn't mean that sun cream doesn't need applying often

@KnittedCardi I get very little natural vitamin d
For a start I work FT inside an office with no external windows
Then I'm a redhead so I avoid the sun anyway
Majority of people don't get enough so should supplement anyway. I can't be in the sun for long enough to get vitamin D without spf

It depends on the temperature and exposure to direct sunlight. If you live where I do in Spain and are at the beach/pool, you should apply more than every two hours or you will burn. If you're walking around in the U.K. in 23 degrees, you'll probably be ok, even with pale skin. If you're sunbathing in a park in the U.K. or sitting in a pub garden in a heatwave, then you'll need to apply frequently. Guidelines can't specify for all eventualities.

But isn’t the explosion in sunscreen causing a reduction in vit D in kids?

I never use it in U.K. But l don’t tend to burn. I never sent my children to school covered in it. They’re both fine. One has quite fair skin.

How's your blood pressure?

@WakeMeUpWhenGoodOmensIsBack fine
I have full bloods, and BP done every 12 weeks
Usually around 110/75 (I'm 40)

Should add I take 4000IU vitamin D daily (I usually forget at the weekends so the dose is still ok!)

I can’t take vit D. It gives me bloody insomnia.

I cycle a lot, its just not possible to apply sunscreen during a 5 or 6 hour bike ride, so i apply before i ride, pro bike riders are at no more risk of skin cancer than non riders.

The Sun cream industry also say their products dont work after a year or two, funny that, i use cream that is many years old and it works just fine.

Its a bit like the sports drink industry saying i have to drink a litre of their very expensive energy/hydration drink every hour or i will die, yet i don't and i'm stilll here!

Very fair - I cover up, then choose where to get some sun and cover up again before burning. Cotton shirts over a vest top, etc. Haven't had a burn with this approach. Used to always get a burn somehow with sunscreen - washed off, wasn't as effective as it said on the packet, missed a bit, etc.

@DownatHeel crack on and don’t reapply it then. 🤷‍♀️

The point I was making is that the research is conducted by cancer research organisations. What do you think happens? That they are in cahoots with commercial firms and are deliberately telling everyone that they are at risk of developing skin cancer in the sun unless they use sunscreen, but in fact it is a lie?

These research bodies have to get their funding from somewhere, and they don't get it from the government, which does not have money tree. There's only so much money from public donations, so what are they supposed to do? Where do you suggest they get their funding from instead?

“When I said ‘suncream companies don’t fund cancer research’ which a sarcastic emoji, what I really meant was ‘of course suncream companies fund cancer research, duh! Who else would, governments?!’”

Makes total sense…

No, as suncream doesn’t have an impact on vitmain D.

If you are not burning when not reapplying, then you are lucky to not have skin prone to burning easily. Those of us who do burn easily know that failing to reapply generous amounts over every single inch of skin is not optional.