to think that smearing chemicals on my children every day would do them more damage than the sun?

[morningpaper]

I feel terrible smearing chemicals all over my children and then terrible sending them into the sun with no sunscreen on.

Which is worse? I seem to go through phases of using creams and watching them spend days covered in rashes and itching like mad, and then weeks when I do nothing and feel guilty about that instead.

I've tried lots of brands and really can't afford to keep trying them and finding them useless after a day because they sting the children or make them half-blind with allergies and itching.

I didn't say wearing sunscreen raises the risk of cancer - I said the lack of vitamin D caused by wearing sunscreen all the time has links to cancer.

the importance of vitamin D here

Bonsoir Anna previously posted that sunscreens contained "known carcinogens". While studies suggest that they may cause cancer in rodents, there is no suggestion that they do so in humans.

I always had this problem with ds2 as soon as the sun starts to shine. He has red hair and sensitive, very pale skin. As soon as we started to use sunscreen he had a nasty eczeme flareup, yet if his skin was exposed to the sun, even for a short while, he started to go pink

As a result, he doesn't use sunscreen - instead he just covers up. When he was small I used to favour linen 'grandad' type shirts and bermudas - now he's older he's (thankfully!) adopted the 'surfer / skater' type look with baggy long shorts and huge t-shirts so he's still covered - and he never leaves the house without a hat (again, thankfully - his choice!) As a consequence, he has never had sunburn......

I do sometimes worry that he's not lathered with cream, but what are the options? Suncream is stupidly expensive so the 'trial and error' approach to trying creams out is not always an option - and not only that, for every cream you try that doesn't agree with their skin, they have a nasty eczema breakout to deal with (which is't fun in hot weather!)

I agree op which is why I've never put chemical sunscreen on my 3 only natural organic brands and they're now 5,5 and 4 and never been sunburnt or had a reaction so they clearly work. Chemicals aside I prefer them because they work immediately there is no wait involved.

One of my dc had eczema I used to use Lavera-fab never had a reaction. Now switched to the Jason one somebody linked to as it's 46 factor and lighter-it's fan-bloody tastic!!!!!!

The chemicals in sunscreens can also effect hormone development. One of the chemicals is one scientists aren't allowed to handle(in vast quantities). I read all this a while ago so obviously can't vouch for correctness today but the fact is the chemical ones contain such a vast list of things I've never heard of I haven't got the time to go and research each and every one. As they're similar in price I play safe.

Also yes we expose ourselves to some chemicals but they wash off, sunscreen is designed to sink in.

I also don't think it's necessary to smother a child in either. I always keep mine reasonably covered,wet suits on the beach,big floppy hats and they don't spend hours sitting in the sun. As a result I only put a bit on on face lower legs and arms, a bottle lasts for ages.

I have to say it makes me laugh I have a friend who once commented whilst I fed my twins their bottles that she could never feed her baby formula as she didn't know what was in it but was quite happy slapping god knows what all over her 6 month's old body. I did bite my lip and managed not to reply. I don't understand why so much airplay is given to what we put into babies but nothing about what we put on them.

I tend to have had to use a trial and error approach wrt sunscreen as a load of them make me itch. I currently use a titanium dioxide one which is a very high factor, however it does not make me look tanned at all (mind you, I could probably soak for 80 hours in a vat of St Tropez and I wouldn't look tanned), it is rather like smearing myself in Sudocrem, very difficult to rub in. However I am pretty rigid about applying sunscreen as I had a mailignant melanoma last year, so I personally have suffered from years of repeated sunburn as a child.

So, I do recommend titanium dioxide - I can't remember the make of it (I bought it in America, oh how useful I am to this thread ) but it is not easy to use really.

RedWarMoth - in answer to your question about how we managed before we had sunscreen - isn't it true to say that we didn't have holes in the ozone layer then, so that gave more protection from the sun than it does now?

And sunburn is an actual burn - surely it's a good thing to stop actual burns happening?

As a paled skinned redhead, with a mini-me dd, you need to cover them in something. Apart from the skin cancer risk, there is the serious pain of sunburnt skin, which I remember so well from childhood that am determined to protect dd as far as I can!

Second vote for ultra sun, it works well for us (with sensitive skins). John Lewis sell it online, it's expensive, but only a one-a-day application which is great. P20 is similiar, but much sticker to put on.

Try Antihelios by La Roche. It costs a bomb I admit, but you only need a little. I have extremely sensitive skin and this actually seems to improve my skin rather than irritate it.

Skin cancer is real, my father died of skin cancer I will (and do) take my chances with the chemicals anyday.

But stayingsunny, how much extra threat is there from the post-ozone-hole sunshine, compared with the pre-ozone-hole-sunshine? By how much has the safe-exposure period dropped? Because I don't imagine that it is a huge amount stronger: I imagine that the difference is far less significant than, say, the differences arising from different summer-clothing styles, and from sittin under a tanning machine. In other words, I don't imagine that it is great enough for us suddenly to require sunblock every time we go into the sun.

I never use suncream in Britain. My DSs did when they were tiny but not now (at 10 and 13). If they were going to be out all day in summer sunshine I would slap a bit on. Not otherwise. They have never had sunburn.

Message withdrawn

the ozone layer has been fixed

it isn't thinning any more

My dh burns if he stays out in the sun in Britain for too long. Bright red, sore and peeling, so he's actually damaged the skin.

I'm sure that there are studies that show how UVA and UVB exposure have changed with the breakdown of the ozone layer, but I don't have them to hand at the moment.

It's your decision, and your dc's decision whether or not to use suncream. I probably wouldn't use it myself in the UK, unless I was planning a long day in the sun, but dh and ds2 have much fairer skin than I do, and they do burn if out for too long without protection, so I'd rather they used suncream.

Message withdrawn

I am thinking the very same. When DD1 was born I went down the natural cream, then when mainstream (for some unknown reason) a couple of years later.

DD's are nearly 6 & 3 & I am now looking at trying to find a stockist for Badger which another MN/s did a quite considerable amount of research into.

Although no allergies, I avoid chemicals as much as poss & don't drink diet anything !

BTW they do need sun for vitamin & agree that hats with a good stiff brim & the uv suits are a help.

Morloth - sorry about your dad, but taking your chance with chemicals (which are likely to be carcigenic) isn't really the way to go..

Message withdrawn

The genetic element to the propensity for skin cancer must mean that it would be more foolish for Morloth to ignore the risks of the sun than to ignore the possible and unproven (in humans) risk of suncream, ICBI40.

bonsoirAnna - the wash you recommmend contains SLS, which, generally is very harsh on skin. The oil cleansing method is much better.

Morningpaper - uv suits are very reasonable in sainsburys - so you have one near you ? They also have the matching hats & my dd's (similar age) are quite happy in them.

hmmm likely to be carcinogenic vs. absolutely known to be carcinogenic - yeah a bit of a no brainer as far as I am concerned. I have had suspicious moles removed. This will not be happening to DS while it is my responsibility.

Already posted on the other thread, that first line of defence is clothing (my MIL posts us stuff from the Cancer Council stores in OZ), then a legionnaire style hat and then Antihelio's Kids 50+ suncream.

I do have a Sainsbury's near me - I may pay a visit

hi morning paper

i think you are totally right to be concerned about the chemicals

I am very concerned abot the chemicals used for suncreams and childresn toiletries, even the so called natural products can have loads of chemicals. It's not an allergy thing with me but i like my children to have a natural a diet as possible and as natural skincare as poss.

U se the green people organic cream or lavera; expensive though but the most natural i can find. I do get very worried about the sun esp as one is blonde. If i didn't have suncream i would put long sleeves on and try to stay out of sn beween 12 and 3 etc. Obviously sun hat, badger is very natural but low spf

We used to use Dr Hauschka children's sun cream, which was very good on my very sun-sensitive, red-headed DS1. But they've stopped making sunscreen, their reasons below (quite interesting in regard to this topic):

In developing sun care products Dr.Hauschka decided to go for the mineral-based sunscreen option because mineral sunscreens work on the surface of the skin and are extremely well tolerated.

The Dr.Hauschka Sun Care products use the so-called Australian Standard to measure their UVA protection performance. This guarantees that a minimum of 90 percent of all UVA rays striking the skin are filtered. Until the new EU recommendation this was the most common method of measuring the UVA protection offered by sun care products world wide. Now the EU Commission on Standards has issued a recommendation which all sun protection products are supposed to meet by the summer of 2009. This requires that sun protection products in the EU must offer uniform minimum protection against UVA radiation and have a ratio of at least 1:3 UVA to UVB protection.

When chemical sun protection factors are used it is not difficult to achieve the required 1:3 ratio. For Dr.Hauschka however, using chemical sun protection factors is out of the question. For this reason Dr.Hauschka sunscreen products will no longer be available from June 2009. We are very pleased to be able to say that Dr.Hauschka After Sun Lotion, will continue to be available.

"They seem to be like me, although they are pale they don't tend to burn or go red"

ahhh yes that was me, until one particularly humid, but drizzly and grey day - not a spot of blue sky for the entire day, in SA many years ago. I skipped the sun cream that day (as I had done many other days because I rarely seemed to burn/go red) ........and my goodness did I know about it the next day.

My face looked like someone had poured chemicals over it, blistered and peeling and absolute agony.

sorry slightly off topic - but basically if it's hot but covered in cloud - please still be careful

Where there's an itchy reaction, are you sure it's to the suncream and not to the sun itself?

I have a condition called urticaria solar which causes an itchy rash when I'm exposed to the sun unprotected.

It was very severe when I was younger, and only either clothes or a 'total block' titanium dioxide formulation would do anything at all, which was basically like being covered in white paint. Normal suncream didn't seem to do anything at all.