Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that sunscreen is toxic?

199 replies

Pitbull · 27/04/2017 20:33

Some women proudly say they wear sunscreen every day even in the winter. But isn't it kind of toxic? If you think about it sunscreen is loaded with chemicals. The ingredient list is full of long, unpronounceable names. Why would you wear it on your face all the time? When I put spf on my face when it's really hot and sunny I obviously avoid the eye and mouth area. Yet, within about twenty minutes my eyes start watering, and I feel a toxic chemical taste in my mouth. Which means it seeps through my pores deeper into the skin and some of it gets into the bloodstream, and via the blood vessels they go everywhere. Yuk. Why would you wear a toxic mix on your face every day?

OP posts:
Rainbunny · 29/04/2017 21:42

The whole "Vitamin D - everyone is deficient- disease link" thing is by no means set science. here is a good article about it:

www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/health/vitamin-d-deficiency-supplements.html

MarmotMorning · 29/04/2017 22:00

Absolutely it is not set science, but it is a valid topic for further research. As the report says, there are current trials.

Zafodbeeblbrox10 · 29/04/2017 22:13

I'm sure some poor little rabbit has been made to wear it for prolonged periods. And I hope if it is hazardous that it would be labelled as such. I do share your concern about the chemicals though OP

kiwipie · 29/04/2017 22:21

It's full of horrible chemicals, you can find really awesome ones without the nasty chemicals. Some people don't think, I've also tried to stop wearing nail varnish, there's a few really toxic ones in there too. I've read a few times it can be linked to infertility. I don't get why the OP has had so many sarcy replies, if people actually did some research, would you want these on your skin?

Just an example I found online:
Paraben Preservatives Associated with both acute and chronic side effects, parabens (butyl-, ethyl-, methyl-, and propyl-) can induce allergic reactions, hormone disruption, developmental and reproductive toxicity. While butylparaben was reported to be non-carcinogenic in rats and mice, but it has been previously suspected that parabens and other chemicals in underarm cosmetics may contribute to the rising incidence of breast cancer.

witsender · 29/04/2017 22:26

People don't hesitate same Google searches you do and come to different conclusions. And for many, the risks of UV exposure outweigh the unproven risks of some chemicals.

UserSPF15 · 29/04/2017 23:05

Name changed but am a regular.

I used to work in a nursery that looked after the children of the scientists researching all SPF/suncream/radioactivity protection stuff. The official advice was go for as high a factor as possible, but for their own children is was not higher than factor 15. Protection of up to 15 is really easy to make apparently, but above that you need all kinds of harsh chemicals.

Also, on a very high UV day you could burn in 20 minutes in this country. Factor 15 still gives you 5 hours of protection in the middle of the day, which is plenty. (Reapply cream, have breaks from sun, avoid 11-3, etc)

Voice0fReason · 29/04/2017 23:12

I know there are some studies that show that regular application of some of the chemicals actually cause skin cancer, but I darent read them!
You haven't read them but you know they exist?
You prefer to be scared than educated then!

most high street suncreams are toxic - they are listed as such
Listed where?
I'd love to know where there are lists of nice chemicals and nasty chemicals.

olderthanyouthink · 29/04/2017 23:12

Ohhhh scary long chemical names...

N-(4-Hydroxyphenyl)ethanamide or paracetamol

(RS)-4-methyl-1-phenylpropan-2-amine or methamphetamine

1,3,7-Trimethylpurine-2,6-dione or caffeine

Which sounds worse?

Mercury is a nice short friendly chemical name, so does lead and radium.

This is like the E number thing, fucking salt has an E number and a chemical name.

Not everything can be absorbed through your skin if it were that easy I wouldn't have to suffer the barbarity that is injections. Imagine staving someone with a needle if you could just slap a patch on them!

Those products/facials that rave about how good gold is for your skin and how it gets right in there are BS, gold particles are too big to get in. So are a lot of things, just because nicotine and some hormones manage it doesn't mean they all do.

olderthanyouthink · 29/04/2017 23:14

Is not does

Stabbing to staving

And whatever other mistakes there are

wickedgamestoplay · 29/04/2017 23:20

Nope I wear SPF50 every single day because I am very much aware that any sort of UV rays cause photoaging and cancer.

ILostItInTheEarlyNineties · 29/04/2017 23:22

Completely agree, Older

It's only a matter of time before these scientists who design and rigorously test sun protection are revealed as lizards hell bent on destroying mankind. Hmm

EddieHitler · 29/04/2017 23:46

To me, the benefits outweigh the risks. The possible effects of the toxic chemicals in suntan lotion are far preferable to the toxic chemicals (and their horrific side effects) which are currently being suffered by a friend fighting stage 4 malignant melanoma.

coconuttella · 30/04/2017 06:38

Nope I wear SPF50 every single day because I am very much aware that any sort of UV rays cause photoaging and cancer.

I get UV can cause melanoma, but to insist on wearing SPF50 on a grey day in December in the U.K because you might get cancer is neurotic to say the least! It's like refusing to eat a gram of sugar in case you get diabetes.

BoomBoomsCousin · 30/04/2017 06:50

I love this idea that you can tell how toxic something is by the length and pronounceability of its name!

I don't like to completely disregard concerns about things we suddenly start using a lot of when we haven't before. It may be there are some negatives about the long term use of some of the chemicals currently used in some sunscreens. It can take a generation or two for the true effect on a population to be realised. We are still discovering the impact of smoking for instance. Nevertheless, it really isn't how easily the name of the ingredients will slip of your tongue that tells you anything at all about the toxic nature of something. And skin cancer is a deadly impact of too much sun that is killing people in the UK at alarming rates.

ChristopherWren · 30/04/2017 07:01

I'm very fair and have freckles and burn very easily. I was often sunburnt as a child as suncream wasn't as affordable as it is now. It has changed my life as I can now be out in the sun if I wear a high factor cream. I'd rather put chemicals on my skin than endure the agony of sunburn - I once ended up in hospital!

I don't wear it in the winter in the uk but do wear a face cream with an spf.

JaxingJump · 30/04/2017 07:06

I avoid it as much as possible. Basically only use it on the beach. If you look at baby sunscreens the majority say not suitable for babies under 1. The reason is that their skin is so absorbent and some of the chemicals in sunscreen as known to cause cancer so are banned from use for babies. When I was researching the ingredients a few yrs ago I remember discovering many were linked (not fully proven) with cancer and some were already banned in other countries but our regulatory body hadn't banned them yet. So basically I avoid as much nody products as possible but I do remember sunscreen stood out as particularly bad. A necessary evil yes, but people use it when they don't need it. Most of this products are approved for use but what kind of use is the testing based on I always wonder.

JaxingJump · 30/04/2017 07:11

What I mean is most chemicals used in the production of these products are approved based on an acceptable exposure level. Normal usage. But what do the companies claim as normal use for the products.

Collaborate · 30/04/2017 08:05

Four things I take from this thread:

  1. You can't cure stupid.
  2. As a previous poster has mentioned, natural selection (or survival of the least idiotic) will see off the conspiracy theorists, and no more is that abundantly obvious than the context of this thread.
  3. It's only a matter of time before @mumsnetmadmess gets hold of this thread.
  4. The real scandal is that some impressionable mumsnetters may e taken in by all this and reduce or cease use of sunscreens with catastrophic results. What a sorry state of affairs that this discussion is even tolerated here.
BeyondThePage · 30/04/2017 08:24

The real scandal is that some impressionable mumsnetters may e taken in by all this and reduce or cease use of sunscreens with catastrophic results. What a sorry state of affairs that this discussion is even tolerated here

Rubbish. Some of us don't use sunscreens and have no catastrophic results because we stay out of the sun and never get burned or go brown - which is just as good advice.

Sunscreen lulls people into a false sense of security.

People do not use enough of it to provide the protection it claims, they do not reapply it often enough, especially in hot climes where sweat washes away the protection frequently. Often see people slathering on the sunscreen, but not even wearing a hat - leaving their - most vulnerable - top of the head exposed.

coconuttella · 30/04/2017 08:42

Often see people slathering on the sunscreen, but not even wearing a hat - leaving their - most vulnerable - top of the head exposed.

I'm probably one of those people... yet I've never been burnt on my head because it's not exposed... i have a thick head of hair.

Collaborate · 30/04/2017 09:25

BeyondThePage You can avoid the need to use sunscreen, which is OK. Or you can choose not to use any when you should. Which is not OK

BeyondUser24601 · 30/04/2017 09:40

Argh!! Oxidane, people - dihydrogen monoxide is inaccurate Grin

BeyondUser24601 · 30/04/2017 09:43

User - anything higher than a 15 irritates my skin, so that's interesting to know.

Gwenhwyfar · 30/04/2017 09:43

"Often see people slathering on the sunscreen, but not even wearing a hat - leaving their - most vulnerable - top of the head exposed."

I rarely feel the need to wear a hat in this country, only when it's VERY hot and I think I'm at risk of sun stroke otherwise.

BeyondThePage · 30/04/2017 09:44

I'm probably one of those people... yet I've never been burnt on my head because it's not exposed... i have a thick head of hair

you are lucky - I see people slap tons of suncream on their face but forget about their parting or other (albeit small) areas of exposed scalp at the crown etc. Skin cancer is not that discerning. My hair is thinner and does not provide as much protection as a hat, so I always wear one when out and about.