|
Summary – Best, easier to find sunscreens:
These are some of the best of 1609 sunscreens EWG evaluated in 2009.
Blue Lizard “Face”, “Baby”, or “Sensitive”
California Baby Any of their sunscreens
CVS “Sport Sunstick”
Coppertone Water BABIES “Pure & Simple”
Earth’s Best “Mineral Based”
Jason Natural, “Mineral Based”
Mission Skincare “Face Stick”
Mustela “Sun Cream” or “Sun Lotion, Babe”
Neutrogena “Pure & Free” or “Sensitive Skin”
Solar Sense “Clear Zinc Sport Stick”
Background
Most sunscreens protect from UVB, or sunburn radiation. Far fewer brands contain ingredients that block UVA radiation. This is even though a growing number of studies show that UVA is more harmful than UVB radiation! UVA radiation hastens the progression of skin cancer, suppresses the immune system, and ages the skin over time. Despite the increased use of UVA filters, 1 in 9 products confers dangerously low levels of UVA protection. Consumers are left guessing which among the many products on store shelves will give them the UVA protection they need.
Sunscreens with SPF 50-100+ might tempt you to stay out longer in the sun. However, they only block about 1-2% more sunburn than an SPF 30 sunscreen - and are not required to block UVA. Compared to an SPF 30 sunscreen, they also require 2-3 times more active ingredients, many of which absorb into the body. Some break down well before the day's end.
Less dramatic but still significant, a 19% drop in the use of oxybenzone, a hormone disruptor approved as an active ingredient in sunscreens, signals the industry's shift to safer ingredients. In laboratory tests, oxybenzone been shown to disrupt the endocrine system and release reactive oxygen species that could contribute to skin cancer. Up to 9% of oxybenzone applied to the skin absorbs into living tissues and blood vessels below the surface. EWG recommends that consumers avoid sunscreens with oxybenzone!
Summary of 2009 Sunscreen Analysis
In an analysis of 1,609 name-brand sunscreens on the market in summer 2009, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) found that 3 out of 5 sunscreen products offer inadequate protection from the sun, or contain ingredients with significant safety concerns. Leading brands were some of the worst offenders! None of market leader Coppertone's 43 sunscreen products met EWG's criteria for safety and effectiveness. Only 2 of 152 products from Banana Boat and Neutrogena, the 2nd and 3rd largest manufacturers, are recommended by EWG.
This problem is aggravated by the fact that FDA has not finalized comprehensive sunscreen safety standards they began drafting 30 years ago. Overall we identified 91 products that offer very good sun protection with ingredients that present minimal health risks to users.
More Americans than ever are using sunscreen to protect from sunburn and guard against skin cancer. Top choices include products with high SPF ratings, and that are waterproof or that advertise "broad spectrum" protection. Most people trust that the claims on the bottle will ensure that the product truly protects their health and their families. Nothing could be less certain.
Problems:
1. Only 6% of 1,609 products analyzed met EWG's criteria for safety and effectiveness,
• Blocking both UVA and UVB radiation,
• Remaining stable in sunlight, and
• Containing few if any ingredients with significant known or suspected health hazards.
2. Many products lack UVA protection. Our analysis found that 5% of high SPF sunscreens (SPF of at least 30) protect only from sunburn (UVB radiation). They do not contain ingredient combinations known to protect from UVA, the sun rays linked to skin damage and aging, immune system problems, and potentially skin cancer. FDA does not require that sunscreens guard against UVA radiation.
3. Sunscreens break down in the sun. Paradoxically, many sunscreen ingredients break down in the sun, in a matter of minutes or hours, and then let UV radiation through to the skin. Our analyses show that 41% of products on the market contain ingredients that may be unstable alone or in combination. This raises questions about whether these products last as long as the label says. FDA has not proposed requirements for sunscreen stability.
4. Questionable product claims are widespread. Many products on the market bear claims that are considered "unacceptable" or misleading under FDA's draft sunscreen safety standards. Claims like "all day protection" - "mild as water" - "blocks all harmful rays" are not true, yet are found on bottles.
5. Many sunscreens contain nano-scale ingredients that raise potential concerns. Micronized and nano-scale zinc oxide and titanium dioxide in sunscreen provide strong UVA protection. They are contained in many of our top-rated products. Repeated studies have found that these ingredients do not penetrate healthy skin, indicating that consumers' exposures would be minimal. Powder and spray sunscreens with nano-scale ingredients raise greater concerns, since particles might absorb more easily through the lungs than the skin. Studies of other nano-scale materials have raised concerns about their unique, toxic properties. FDA has failed to approve effective UVA filters available in Europe that, if approved here, could replace nano-scale ingredients.
6. The U.S. lags behind other countries when it comes to products that work and are safe. FDA has approved just 17 sunscreen chemicals for use in the U.S. At least 29 are approved for use in the E.U. FDA has approved only 4 chemicals effective in the UVA range for use in the U.S. It has failed to approve new, more effective UVA filters available in the E.U. and Asia.
7. Some sunscreens absorb into the blood and raise safety concerns. Our review of the technical literature shows that some sunscreen ingredients absorb into the blood, and some are linked to toxic effects. Some release skin-damaging free radicals in sunlight. Some could disrupt hormone systems. Several are strongly linked to allergic reactions and others may build up in the body or the environment. FDA has not established rigorous safety standards for sunscreen ingredients that fully examine these effects.
After 30 years of debate, the government has failed to set mandatory sunscreen safety standards. Companies are free to make their own decisions on everything from advertising claims to product quality. FDA now stands in direct violation of a Congressional mandate requiring the agency to finalize sunscreen safety standards by May 2006, flouting not only Congress but also consumers, who are reliant on sunscreen to protect their health.
Study Methodology
EWG's analysis of sunscreens is based on a unique, in-house compilation of standard industry, government and academic data sources and models. We have constructed these over the past 5 years, and on an extensive review of the technical literature for sunscreen. We have built product ratings into our popular Skin Deep personal care product safety assessment guide, an online consumer tool that garners about 1 million searches a month.
For this sunscreen analysis we obtained ingredient listings for sunscreens primarily from online retailers. We constructed health hazard ratings for each product based on our analysis of information from our in-house database comprising nearly 60 standard industry, academic, and government regulatory and toxicity databases. We rated products for overall effectiveness in sun protection considering 3 factors:
• UVB protection (using SPF rating as the indicator of effectiveness);
• UVA protection (using a standard industry absorbance model to compute two standard
UVA protection factors); and
• Stability (using a customized database compiled from a review of industry and peer-reviewed studies
of how quickly different sunscreen ingredients break down in the sun).
Overall, the methods and content of our analysis are based on our review of the technical sunscreen literature, including nearly 400 industry and peer-reviewed studies. We compiled the results of our analyses in an online interactive sunscreen guide, launched in tandem with this report. Our analyses show that products vary widely, both in their ability to protect from the sun's harmful UV radiation, and in the inherent safety of the ingredients themselves. FDA has set no mandatory standards for any of these factors, and manufacturers are free to make products that may not protect consumers from the sun and that may not be safe when slathered on the skin.
Customized rating for 1,609 products includes:
• Sun hazard (effectiveness)
• Rratings for UVA protection,
• UVB protection, and
• stability in sun
• Health hazard (safety) ratings for all ingredients
Ingredients evaluated in these sunscreens:
• 14 of 17 active ingredients approved in the U.S. (the ones found in products)
• 2 active ingredients approved in other countries (listed as "inactive" ingredients in U.S. sunscreen)
• 2,138 other ingredients (not sunscreen)
With no mandatory, comprehensive sunscreen standards in place, products vary widely in safety and effectiveness. With that, EWG has grouped sunscreens into the following catagories:
Recommended: 91 products
Caution: 1,188 products
Avoid: 330 products
Because FDA has failed to set UVA standards, many high SPF sunscreens provide only half the protection you need. People buy high-SPF sunscreens in advance of beach vacations or long days at the pool, assuming they've purchased products that maximize sun protection. High SPF ("Sun Protection Factor") products do protect you from sunburn, the well-known skin cancer precursor caused by the sun's UVB rays. But these products don't necessarily block UVA rays, the more deeply penetrating radiation linked to skin aging and wrinkling, immune system suppression, and possibly skin cancer.
FDA does not require companies to provide UVA protection in sunscreen, and our analyses show that despite high SPF ratings and "broad spectrum" marketing claims, only a fraction of products provide strong UVA protection. We found poor UVA protection in 5% of high SPF products (30 and higher); in 9% of the 647 products marketed as having "broad spectrum" protection; and in 11% of sunscreens overall.
Of the 17 "active ingredients" that FDA has approved for use as sunscreens in the U.S., at least 4 of them break down significantly when they are exposed to sunlight. They lose their ability to absorb the sun's harmful rays, and stop working effectively in as little as 30 minutes, ranging up to several hours. They require stabilizing chemicals to remain effective.
An ideal sunscreen would be stable in the sun. Instead, nearly every active ingredient (all but zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) works by first absorbing the sun's energy so it doesn't penetrate our skin, and then releasing that captured energy by breaking apart, reacting with other chemicals in the sunscreen, or even kicking off free radicals. Some active ingredients are more stable than others, but nearly all break down to some extent in the sun.
We scoured industry studies and the peer-reviewed literature to compile information on breakdown rates of active ingredients in the sun, combinations of ingredients that accelerate breakdown, and, conversely, chemical additives that can stabilize active ingredients and make them effective longer.
Our analysis of this data against ingredients in 1,609 sunscreens shows that 41% of sunscreens contain ingredients known to break down individually or in combination, with no known stabilizing ingredients in the formulation.
Manufacturers are not required to produce stable products. The test used to establish a product's UVB rating accounts for stability in part, since it tests the product in simulated sunlight on human volunteers over the time needed to produce a sunburn. A product's UVA protection, however, is not subject to testing and rating, and the filters that contribute to UVA protection in a product may or may not be stable.
657 products contain sunscreens that break down in the sun,
with insufficient stabilizing chemicals.
Our analysis of products showed that fully 46% of sunscreens were labeled with one or more terms that FDA has said are indicative of a misbranded product, terms that are "unacceptable," or terms that could "mislead consumers by inducing a false sense of security".
These include "chemical-free," "non-chemical," "help prevent skin damage," as well as terms like "sunblock," "reflects," "shields," "protects," "filters," "screens," "sun's rays," "sun's harmful rays," and all SPF designations greater than 50.
In addition to claims specifically targeted by FDA, we found many more that would also mislead consumers, including claims of "sand-proof," "all day" protection, "instant protection" or "as mild as water," none of which is possibly true. Without labeling restrictions, consumers are left wondering what is true. Consumers can be fooled into buying products that don't deliver what they sell.
| 
