Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

134 replies

morningpaper · 02/06/2009 09:14

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.

OP posts:
Morloth · 02/06/2009 13:18

Queenoftheharpies I have this, but I didn't know the name for it. Thanks!

I suck down antihistamines like they are sweets in the summer.

One of the reasons I quite enjoy living in England as opposed to Australia is how much easier it is on my skin and how I don't have to take so many!

hmc · 02/06/2009 13:18

"(Oh and have you tried the P20 stuff? DD came out in a rash from all the supermarket 'own brands' I bought, and a Nivea one but hsnt had any reaction to P20)"

I'd like to add a cautionary note against P20. Having used it for the first time yesterday, ds returned from school with a beetroot red itchy face, neck and arms - a clear reaction to it. His sister was unaffected - but then he always has been the one with sensitive skin

morningpaper · 02/06/2009 13:20

rash is definitely to suncream - I rarely put it on DD1 because of this and she is fine in the sun alone. But sun-cream and sometimes she really SWELLS, especially her eyes. It's horrid

OP posts:
IcantbelieveImForty · 02/06/2009 13:34

I used to get the itchy heat rash, prickly heat on the tops of my arms & on my chest. Using piz buin allergy solves this.

Again, I didn't get it when I wasn't using anything. off to order the Jason Natural sunscreen - thanks ladies.

Morningpapar, let us know how you get on at Sainsburys - I am off there later, so if you get stuck could buy & post some off to you.

Queenoftheharpies · 02/06/2009 13:36

Morloth

I'm not sure if I've got less allergic as I've got older, or that my skin has aged and toughened a bit, but I now find that Boots own-brand all day sunscreen in factor 50 works fantastically well. I'm now on my 3rd summer of not being miserable, itchy and grumpy.

Interestingly, P20 doesn't work for me because it only filters on UVA which causes burning and not UVB which causes tanning and skin ageing, but the Boots version has UVA and UVB protection.

Ultrasun and Piz Buin also do all-day formulations but they're a lot more expensive.

Morloth · 02/06/2009 13:42

The Antihelios is the only stuff that I have found that reduces the swelling and stops my skin itching (in combination with the Antihistamines, another product I have sent to me as the active ingredient is not available over the counter here).

Great stuff, previously only been able to find it in Europe (so when in Oz have reverse shipping arrangements!) but have recently spotted in a Chemist nearby, was far too excited by this and clearly need to get out more!

Oliveoil · 02/06/2009 13:43

hats, long sleeves and shade a must

running around naked in the garden is a huge no-no tbh, can you set up some sort of cover like tent/umbrella etc?

I used to this in our tiny garden and shoved the sandpit/pool under it

the sun burns and causes cancer FACT so to umm and ahhh over 'possible' chemicals which 'may' be harmful is nonsense. Cream them or cover them up surely?

morningpaper · 02/06/2009 13:47

running around naked in the garden in and out of the sprinkler is surely one of the lovely things about childhood?

The garden is big, I can't shade it all.

I just can't get my head around the practicalities of it. One thing I'm not sure about is that surely as soon as children get their UV-clothes WET, they want to strip off? Don't they run from the pool to the sandpit? Do you cover then in cream each time? Don't they turn into enormous, sticky monsters, with sodding wet clothing and sticky skin covered with sand?

OP posts:
IcantbelieveImForty · 02/06/2009 13:51

no, we are lucky that we have a massive tree in our south facing back garden. Although DH usually puts the paddling pool in the sun for warmth..

They are in & out of the water, wet suit is like a wet swimsuit - very light. What about one of the kiddies gazeboes ? we have one from woolies for our previous scorching garden. Or else a cheapie one from Tesco ?
Then they can play tents...even more fun

Oliveoil · 02/06/2009 13:51

well since we moved here I have become a sun expert () and my two don't move without a hat or long sleeves

on the beach they wear 'rashies' (long sleeved swimwear) and huge hats which are designed to get wet (obviously as you are erm, in the ocean)

I do remember running around with hosepipes and water fights in the garden as a child but the sun it wasn't as much of a deal then

I do strongly feel that is is important though

mine also wear dh's t-shirts and run around in them, is that a possibility?

MmeLindt · 02/06/2009 13:57

DD reacts to Nivea and other well known brands. There are a few good German brands, the best one I found to be Ladival Not sure if it is available in UK.

It is very easy to apply, soaks right into the skin and does not leave a greasy film on the DC's skin or my hands.

Otherwise Eucerin do a suncream that DD is ok with.

I don't put cream on them unless they are going to be out in the sun for hours on end. Even today DS was at the beach in his lunch break (2 hours) without sun cream on. He has slowly built up a light tan that offers protection from the sun. If we are going to be out longer then they have sun cream on.

I feel that always smothering the DC with sun cream makes them more vulnerable as they have no natural protection. If for whatever reason they are then out without cream they would immediately have sun burn.

We have to distinguish between sun burn and sun tan.

Morloth · 02/06/2009 14:15

"We have to distinguish between sun burn and sun tan."

There is no difference, a tan is the skin's response to a burn. You do not obtain natural protection by getting a tan, you just don't.

Probably because I am Australian I just cannot get my head around this, I just don't understand. This is not a conversation that happens there. Mad foreigner I know but wow.

Running around under the sprinkler in a rashie is just as much fun as running around naked.

They are your kids and obviously it is your choice, but I think you are mad to not protect them. This isn't 30 years ago, the sun is more intense now.

Yes it is a PITA to keep them covered/creamed up, but it is important.

I. JUST. DO. NOT. GET. IT.

FAQinglovely · 02/06/2009 14:19

"I feel that always smothering the DC with sun cream makes them more vulnerable as they have no natural protection. "

natural protection - tan = skin burning.

Perhaps if you'd known people who were born and bred in a sunny country - with no sun protection used and seen how they were in their final weeks before dying from skin cancer you may feel differently. Especially if they develop secondary tumours on their face as well as happened to a colleague of mine.

Skin cancer is real and it's not pleasant.

Hasakane · 02/06/2009 14:19

Message withdrawn

Morloth · 02/06/2009 14:22

On the upside, this thread just reminded me that I have forgotten to put sunscreen on my feet again!

noonar · 02/06/2009 14:22

but mme, dont we still have to shield ourselves from harmful rays even if they arent actually burning us?

Morloth · 02/06/2009 14:25

My Nigerian neighbours in Sydney always use sunscreen, skin cancer is not unheard of in Africa and black people burn as well. So I can't imagine why if black skin is not immune to skin cancer, a light tan would help?

noonar · 02/06/2009 14:28

a question re suntans being sun damage ...

my dd 1 is 7 and has beautiful olive skin. on holiday, she gets a deep tan even with factor 25 plus . she tans very easily and never goes red ever. does this mean that her skin is less healthy than someone who remained pale skinned but who had similar sun protection?

wasabipeas · 02/06/2009 14:30

I buy all my and my DCs toiletries from here
www.purenuffstuff.co.uk/
They do high factor suncream which is free from nasty chemicals
(the fake tan is also great, if you are that way inclined )

MmeLindt · 02/06/2009 14:38

My DD have never been red and peeling. I do not believe that I have put them at risk of sun cancer by allowing them to have a bit of colour. They have sun cream on if we are going to be out all day, but not for the 15 mins a day that they are out at playtime.

MmeLindt · 02/06/2009 14:40

FAQ
We are in a sunny country, ok it is not Africa or Australia but we are used to +30°C+temperatures in Switzerland and Germany.

FAQinglovely · 02/06/2009 14:44

I'm talking a country much closer to the equator where the sun is known (and has known for a long time) to be stronger in intensity.

I'd never been red and peeling before the incident I posted about below - and it wasn't even sunny on that day - just hot!

Rhubarb · 02/06/2009 14:45

I'd love to get some child-friendly sun cream but unfortunately cannot afford those prices. I do know about the hormone dangers lurking in those bottles and when dd was a baby I did try, and failed, to get her some natural suncream.

I now tend to cover them both up. But for school they wear short sleeved polos or, for dd, short sleeved dresses. Obv I can't let them get their arms burnt. So I tend to put SPF 50 on first thing in the morning and let that do all day. Also I apply it sparingly.

If anyone knows where I could get some freebie samples of natural suncream however I would be very grateful.

smee · 02/06/2009 15:01

Thing is if you put SPF50 on, don't you block out the Vitamin D that they need from the sun? Not sure what the answer is though.

Queenoftheharpies · 02/06/2009 15:03

"natural" in the context of cosmetics is pretty much a made-up marketing term. It's so poorly regulated as to be meaningless, and even if it wasn't, just because something is natural / plant based doesn't mean that it's good for your skin or effective.

There's a good article about it here

Swipe left for the next trending thread