• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

picking a better sunscreen?


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#1 embean

  • Guest
  • 21 posts
  • 0

Posted 06 April 2010 - 06:37 PM


So I have another thread along these same lines but I've read some older stuff on here and am researching some better sunscreens. The following links are from an online Canadian drug store which is pretty representative of any drug store here:

Cetaphil SPF 50-
http://well.ca/produ...-spf_12810.html

Dermaglow SPF 70-
http://well.ca/produ...ream_13659.html this is probably the most I'm willing to spend (for 50ml)

LRP Anthelios XL SPF 60-
http://well.ca/produ...cream_3698.html

Neutrogena Ultra Sheer SPF 60-
http://well.ca/produ...face_25045.html

Ombrelle SPF 60-
http://well.ca/produ...pf-60_3701.html

Ombrelle "Milk" SPF 60-
http://well.ca/produ...pf-60_6460.html

I've also seen Avene around, we have Sephora too but not sure if that means anything. I'm also willing to buy online. Right now I'm using a neutrogena spf 15.

#2 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,362 posts
  • 257

Posted 06 April 2010 - 11:49 PM

Don't spend alot of money when you don't have to.

I gave a bad review to Neutrogena dry touch sunscreen which might have been premature. When in fact what was irritating my skin back then was a combination of actives not suitable for combined usage. Try the neutrogena dry touch spf 100 for a non-oily finish or if you feel you need a european sunscreen with mexoryl use Garnier Ambre Solaire UV sensitive spf 50 which is cheap AND effective and nowhere near as oily a finish as many other european sunscreens. Don't fall for the hype of the super expensive ones.

Edited by TheFountain, 06 April 2010 - 11:50 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for AGELESS LOOKS to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 NDM

  • Guest
  • 343 posts
  • 7
  • Location:North America

Posted 07 April 2010 - 02:00 AM

Ombrelle 60 is a disaster...my face is shiny and milky in a disgusting way when applying this item.

#4 embean

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 21 posts
  • 0

Posted 07 April 2010 - 01:24 PM

I noticed that the LRP has mexoryl:



Avobenzone

3.50 %

Drometrizole Trisiloxane

3.00 %

Octocrylene

10.00 %

Terephthalylidene Dicamphor Sulfonic Acid

3.00 %

Titanium Dioxide

4.15 %

I have had a bad experience with Ombrelle too, but I assumed it was because I was using non-face sunscreen on my face. It was a big mess.
I did not consider the neutrogena "dry touch" because of bad reviews on here, but I like the neutrogena I use now, even if it is just SPF 15 meant for under makeup.

What is the difference between mexoryl and helioplex? Mexoryl seems more credible.
The neutrogena says it is PABA free while the LRP does not. Is this a big deal? I have no idea if I'm sensitive to it or not.

#5 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 07 April 2010 - 06:18 PM

I noticed that the LRP has mexoryl:



Avobenzone

3.50 %

Drometrizole Trisiloxane

3.00 %

Octocrylene

10.00 %

Terephthalylidene Dicamphor Sulfonic Acid

3.00 %

Titanium Dioxide

4.15 %

I have had a bad experience with Ombrelle too, but I assumed it was because I was using non-face sunscreen on my face. It was a big mess.
I did not consider the neutrogena "dry touch" because of bad reviews on here, but I like the neutrogena I use now, even if it is just SPF 15 meant for under makeup.

What is the difference between mexoryl and helioplex? Mexoryl seems more credible.
The neutrogena says it is PABA free while the LRP does not. Is this a big deal? I have no idea if I'm sensitive to it or not.


In the EU very few producers use PABA due to the broader choice of approved UV filters. Hence there is no need to state "PABA-free" like many US co. do.
LRP and all other L'Oreal brand sunscreens marketed in the EU are fully PABA free.

The biggest difference between Helioplex and Mexoryl is that Mexoryl is much more photostable. But Mexoryl XL is not allowed in the US while Mexoryl SX is only allowed in some sonscreens marketed in the US.
In the EU both Mexoryl filters are fully approved (since 1982 and 1987!).
Mexoryl filters are exclusive to L'Oreal group.
There are other excellent photostable UV filters with excellent and fully photostable UVA protection: Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M and Uvinul A. None of these filters are allowed in the US, although all of them are fully approved in the EU (Tinosorb S is used by Nivea EU, AU range; Avene sunscreens (sold in the EU) along with Tinosorb M).

If you currently live in the US there are other good choices: like sunscreens with a high content of ZnO.

#6 embean

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 21 posts
  • 0

Posted 07 April 2010 - 06:31 PM

I noticed that the LRP has mexoryl:



Avobenzone

3.50 %

Drometrizole Trisiloxane

3.00 %

Octocrylene

10.00 %

Terephthalylidene Dicamphor Sulfonic Acid

3.00 %

Titanium Dioxide

4.15 %

I have had a bad experience with Ombrelle too, but I assumed it was because I was using non-face sunscreen on my face. It was a big mess.
I did not consider the neutrogena "dry touch" because of bad reviews on here, but I like the neutrogena I use now, even if it is just SPF 15 meant for under makeup.

What is the difference between mexoryl and helioplex? Mexoryl seems more credible.
The neutrogena says it is PABA free while the LRP does not. Is this a big deal? I have no idea if I'm sensitive to it or not.


In the EU very few producers use PABA due to the broader choice of approved UV filters. Hence there is no need to state "PABA-free" like many US co. do.
LRP and all other L'Oreal brand sunscreens marketed in the EU are fully PABA free.

The biggest difference between Helioplex and Mexoryl is that Mexoryl is much more photostable. But Mexoryl XL is not allowed in the US while Mexoryl SX is only allowed in some sonscreens marketed in the US.
In the EU both Mexoryl filters are fully approved (since 1982 and 1987!).
Mexoryl filters are exclusive to L'Oreal group.
There are other excellent photostable UV filters with excellent and fully photostable UVA protection: Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M and Uvinul A. None of these filters are allowed in the US, although all of them are fully approved in the EU (Tinosorb S is used by Nivea EU, AU range; Avene sunscreens (sold in the EU) along with Tinosorb M).

If you currently live in the US there are other good choices: like sunscreens with a high content of ZnO.


Is LRP part of the Loreal group?
I live in Canada so I'm guessing it's common for a lot more european brands to be sold. For example, I saw LRP w/ mexoryl XL being sold in a drug store this morning.

#7 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 08 April 2010 - 05:20 AM

Don't know about the Dermaglow but I wouldn't use any of those sunscreens, they all contain Titanium Dioxide.

Go down to a Wallmart and grab some Aveeno Active Naturals SPF60, inexpensive and light, won't irritate either.

#8 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 08 April 2010 - 03:59 PM

I noticed that the LRP has mexoryl:



Avobenzone

3.50 %

Drometrizole Trisiloxane

3.00 %

Octocrylene

10.00 %

Terephthalylidene Dicamphor Sulfonic Acid

3.00 %

Titanium Dioxide

4.15 %

I have had a bad experience with Ombrelle too, but I assumed it was because I was using non-face sunscreen on my face. It was a big mess.
I did not consider the neutrogena "dry touch" because of bad reviews on here, but I like the neutrogena I use now, even if it is just SPF 15 meant for under makeup.

What is the difference between mexoryl and helioplex? Mexoryl seems more credible.
The neutrogena says it is PABA free while the LRP does not. Is this a big deal? I have no idea if I'm sensitive to it or not.


In the EU very few producers use PABA due to the broader choice of approved UV filters. Hence there is no need to state "PABA-free" like many US co. do.
LRP and all other L'Oreal brand sunscreens marketed in the EU are fully PABA free.

The biggest difference between Helioplex and Mexoryl is that Mexoryl is much more photostable. But Mexoryl XL is not allowed in the US while Mexoryl SX is only allowed in some sonscreens marketed in the US.
In the EU both Mexoryl filters are fully approved (since 1982 and 1987!).
Mexoryl filters are exclusive to L'Oreal group.
There are other excellent photostable UV filters with excellent and fully photostable UVA protection: Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M and Uvinul A. None of these filters are allowed in the US, although all of them are fully approved in the EU (Tinosorb S is used by Nivea EU, AU range; Avene sunscreens (sold in the EU) along with Tinosorb M).

If you currently live in the US there are other good choices: like sunscreens with a high content of ZnO.


Is LRP part of the Loreal group?
I live in Canada so I'm guessing it's common for a lot more european brands to be sold. For example, I saw LRP w/ mexoryl XL being sold in a drug store this morning.


LRP is a part of L'Oreal group indeed.

#9 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:02 PM

Don't know about the Dermaglow but I wouldn't use any of those sunscreens, they all contain Titanium Dioxide.

Go down to a Wallmart and grab some Aveeno Active Naturals SPF60, inexpensive and light, won't irritate either.


What is wrong with TiO2?
It is an inherently photo-stable and safe filter with excellent UVB and UVAI protection. It is also non-irritating since it cannot penetrate into the skin like chemical filters do. (As long as it is not nano size of course).

#10 embean

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 21 posts
  • 0

Posted 09 April 2010 - 12:55 PM

I was going to go for the neutrogena but there was a special on LRP at the drug store... 100ml for $28 and 50ml free... making it almost equal price to the neutrogena so I thought I'd try it. Thanks for all the advice!

#11 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 12 April 2010 - 06:26 AM

Don't know about the Dermaglow but I wouldn't use any of those sunscreens, they all contain Titanium Dioxide.

Go down to a Wallmart and grab some Aveeno Active Naturals SPF60, inexpensive and light, won't irritate either.


What is wrong with TiO2?
It is an inherently photo-stable and safe filter with excellent UVB and UVAI protection. It is also non-irritating since it cannot penetrate into the skin like chemical filters do. (As long as it is not nano size of course).


Since you mention the nano particles I assume you read that study about the dangers of TiO2....

I assume that the TiO2 would have to be nano sized in order to do what they are meant to; am I wrong to do so?

What do you think about the safety of Avobenzone? It's said to be able to penetrate the skin and is a powerful free radical generator.

Your input on the safety of sunscreens would be appreciated.

#12 Sebastian

  • Guest
  • 45 posts
  • 0

Posted 12 April 2010 - 10:38 AM

Alba Botanica, Sun Sport Sunscreen SPF 30+

Octinoxate 7.5%, Oxybenzone 6.0%, Homosalate 5.0%, Octisalate 5.0%, Avobenzone 3.0%

Alba Botanica, Facial Sunscreen SPF 20

Octinoxate 7.5%, Oxybenzone 5.0%, Octisalate 4.0%, Avobenzone 1.5%.


Used both of these on my trip to Northern Africa/Sahara a few weeks ago, and for the first time in my life I didn't burn!!
Though now looking at the ingredients.. They're kinda questionable :S

#13 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 12 April 2010 - 05:28 PM

Don't know about the Dermaglow but I wouldn't use any of those sunscreens, they all contain Titanium Dioxide.

Go down to a Wallmart and grab some Aveeno Active Naturals SPF60, inexpensive and light, won't irritate either.


What is wrong with TiO2?
It is an inherently photo-stable and safe filter with excellent UVB and UVAI protection. It is also non-irritating since it cannot penetrate into the skin like chemical filters do. (As long as it is not nano size of course).


Since you mention the nano particles I assume you read that study about the dangers of TiO2....

I assume that the TiO2 would have to be nano sized in order to do what they are meant to; am I wrong to do so?

What do you think about the safety of Avobenzone? It's said to be able to penetrate the skin and is a powerful free radical generator.

Your input on the safety of sunscreens would be appreciated.


TiO2 does not have to be nano-size to be an excellent UVB and UVA II filter. Far from it! the only difference is that nano particles have higher input pr percent active needed to achieve the desired SPF of a product. Which means less costs and easier dispersation.
But when it comes to ZnO (which is primarily a UVA II and I filter) in nano-size form it can easily become a very good UVB filter (but much less UVA II and basically non-existent UVA I filter).

AVO is a very fashionable UVA filter. Extremely photo-unstable esp. in the presence of OMC. Have to be stabilized. Photo-unstable means it generates free-radicals in the presence of UVR.
It indeed penetrates the skin along with all chemical (organic) sunscreens. It is a potential skin irritant even though its producers would never admit this.

On safety of sunscreens generally I can only say that we use far too much chemicals on our skin and some of them are clearly not beneficial.
The future of developing sunscreens will change towards using less organic filters and more photo-stable filters (like Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M) that also protect in a broader UV range.
They will have to be formulated also that they do form a film on the surface of the skin that stays there for the whole day without penetrating into the skin. Hence providing greater protection much longer.
Sunscreens of the future will have to be cosmetically elegant lacking the oiliness of even today's sunscreens in order to that more people will use them.

The paradox of this is that all this actually does exist today but manufacturers still want to cut costs instead of using more ingredients than strictly necessary to achieve this.

But there are good photostable sunscreens out there with minimum use of chemicals and no AVO in them like Avene's sunscreens (EU marketed). they do not reach above PPD 20 (SPF50+), but they are extremely photo-stable with the use of Tinosorb S and Tinosorb M while still cosmetically very elegant. (Esp. the Emulsion). PPD 20 still filters 96% of UVA rays; while PPD 35 (Bioderma) filters 97% of UVA rays.

#14 chiaberry

  • Guest
  • 23 posts
  • 0

Posted 12 April 2010 - 11:21 PM

I am afraid that Avene have reformulated the emulsion as of 2010 and the new version contains AVO and Octocrylene whilst retaining Tinosorb M and S. It is a pity that they have to do that since the emulsion was so photostable and now it could potentially be less photostable.

#15 Mia K.

  • Guest
  • 176 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Tropical SoFla. US

Posted 13 April 2010 - 12:57 AM

I am afraid that Avene have reformulated the emulsion as of 2010 and the new version contains AVO and Octocrylene whilst retaining Tinosorb M and S. It is a pity that they have to do that since the emulsion was so photostable and now it could potentially be less photostable.


Yes, sadly this is true, and a blow to those of us sensitive to Avobenzone.  I am very glad I picked up four(4) tubes of the previous formula in February.  


  ~MK.

Edited by Mia K., 13 April 2010 - 12:58 AM.


#16 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 13 April 2010 - 06:57 AM

TiO2 does not have to be nano-size to be an excellent UVB and UVA II filter. Far from it! the only difference is that nano particles have higher input pr percent active needed to achieve the desired SPF of a product. Which means less costs and easier dispersation.
But when it comes to ZnO (which is primarily a UVA II and I filter) in nano-size form it can easily become a very good UVB filter (but much less UVA II and basically non-existent UVA I filter).

AVO is a very fashionable UVA filter. Extremely photo-unstable esp. in the presence of OMC. Have to be stabilized. Photo-unstable means it generates free-radicals in the presence of UVR.
It indeed penetrates the skin along with all chemical (organic) sunscreens. It is a potential skin irritant even though its producers would never admit this.

On safety of sunscreens generally I can only say that we use far too much chemicals on our skin and some of them are clearly not beneficial.
The future of developing sunscreens will change towards using less organic filters and more photo-stable filters (like Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M) that also protect in a broader UV range.
They will have to be formulated also that they do form a film on the surface of the skin that stays there for the whole day without penetrating into the skin. Hence providing greater protection much longer.
Sunscreens of the future will have to be cosmetically elegant lacking the oiliness of even today's sunscreens in order to that more people will use them.

The paradox of this is that all this actually does exist today but manufacturers still want to cut costs instead of using more ingredients than strictly necessary to achieve this.

But there are good photostable sunscreens out there with minimum use of chemicals and no AVO in them like Avene's sunscreens (EU marketed). they do not reach above PPD 20 (SPF50+), but they are extremely photo-stable with the use of Tinosorb S and Tinosorb M while still cosmetically very elegant. (Esp. the Emulsion). PPD 20 still filters 96% of UVA rays; while PPD 35 (Bioderma) filters 97% of UVA rays.


So in your opinion, what chemical filters would you recommend I avoid? (given that I am a person who cares more about health and especially long term health as opposed to looking pretty)

#17 chiaberry

  • Guest
  • 23 posts
  • 0

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:21 AM

This is the new formulation for Avene emulsion:

Ingredients New Formula 2010
Avène Thermal Spring Water (Avene Aqua), Octocrylene, C-12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Butylene Glycol, Dimethicone, Disopropyl Adipate, Methylene Bis-BenzotriazolylTetramethylbutylphenol (Tinosorb M), Cyclomethicone, Water (Aqua), Titanium Dioxide, Butyl Methoxydibenzoylmethane, Bis-Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenyl Triazine (Tinsorob S), Glyceryl Stearate, PEG-100 Stearate, Potassium Cetyl Phosphate, PVP/Eicosene Copolymer, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Caprylyl Glycol, Cucurbita Pepo (Pumpkin) Seed Oil (Curcubita Pepo), Decyl Glucoside, Dimethiconol, Disodium EDTA, Fragance (Parfum), Glyceryl Behenate, Glyceryl Dibehenate, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Isohexadecane, Polysorbate 60, Propylene Glycol, Silica, Sorbic Acid, Sorbitan Isostearate, Stearyl Alcohol, Tocopheryl Glucoside, Tribehenin, Xanthan Gum.

Removed.
Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate, PTFE, Cetearyl Alcohol, C-20-22 Alkyl Phosphate, Polymethyl Methacrylate, C-20-22 Alcohols, Chlorphenesin, Coco-Glucoside, Phenoxyethanol, Squalane, Triethanolamine, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Trimethoxycaprylylsilane, , Zinc Oxide.

#18 N.T.M.

  • Guest
  • 640 posts
  • 120
  • Location:Reno, NV

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:37 AM

Be sure that it's non-toxic. It's kind of ironic using poisonous substances to protect yourself.

#19 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 14 April 2010 - 01:18 PM

TiO2 does not have to be nano-size to be an excellent UVB and UVA II filter. Far from it! the only difference is that nano particles have higher input pr percent active needed to achieve the desired SPF of a product. Which means less costs and easier dispersation.
But when it comes to ZnO (which is primarily a UVA II and I filter) in nano-size form it can easily become a very good UVB filter (but much less UVA II and basically non-existent UVA I filter).

AVO is a very fashionable UVA filter. Extremely photo-unstable esp. in the presence of OMC. Have to be stabilized. Photo-unstable means it generates free-radicals in the presence of UVR.
It indeed penetrates the skin along with all chemical (organic) sunscreens. It is a potential skin irritant even though its producers would never admit this.

On safety of sunscreens generally I can only say that we use far too much chemicals on our skin and some of them are clearly not beneficial.
The future of developing sunscreens will change towards using less organic filters and more photo-stable filters (like Tinosorb S, Tinosorb M) that also protect in a broader UV range.
They will have to be formulated also that they do form a film on the surface of the skin that stays there for the whole day without penetrating into the skin. Hence providing greater protection much longer.
Sunscreens of the future will have to be cosmetically elegant lacking the oiliness of even today's sunscreens in order to that more people will use them.

The paradox of this is that all this actually does exist today but manufacturers still want to cut costs instead of using more ingredients than strictly necessary to achieve this.

But there are good photostable sunscreens out there with minimum use of chemicals and no AVO in them like Avene's sunscreens (EU marketed). they do not reach above PPD 20 (SPF50+), but they are extremely photo-stable with the use of Tinosorb S and Tinosorb M while still cosmetically very elegant. (Esp. the Emulsion). PPD 20 still filters 96% of UVA rays; while PPD 35 (Bioderma) filters 97% of UVA rays.


So in your opinion, what chemical filters would you recommend I avoid? (given that I am a person who cares more about health and especially long term health as opposed to looking pretty)


then I would avoid almost all organic filters except Tinosorb M and look for physical sunscreens. These sunscreens contain TiO2, ZnO (non-nano).

#20 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 14 April 2010 - 01:23 PM

This is the new formulation for Avene emulsion:

Ingredients New Formula 2010
Avène Thermal Spring Water (Avene Aqua), Octocrylene, C-12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Butylene Glycol, Dimethicone, Disopropyl Adipate, Methylene Bis-BenzotriazolylTetramethylbutylphenol (Tinosorb M), Cyclomethicone, Water (Aqua), Titanium Dioxide, Butyl Methoxydibenzoylmethane, Bis-Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenyl Triazine (Tinsorob S), Glyceryl Stearate, PEG-100 Stearate, Potassium Cetyl Phosphate, PVP/Eicosene Copolymer, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Caprylyl Glycol, Cucurbita Pepo (Pumpkin) Seed Oil (Curcubita Pepo), Decyl Glucoside, Dimethiconol, Disodium EDTA, Fragance (Parfum), Glyceryl Behenate, Glyceryl Dibehenate, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Isohexadecane, Polysorbate 60, Propylene Glycol, Silica, Sorbic Acid, Sorbitan Isostearate, Stearyl Alcohol, Tocopheryl Glucoside, Tribehenin, Xanthan Gum.

Removed.
Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate, PTFE, Cetearyl Alcohol, C-20-22 Alkyl Phosphate, Polymethyl Methacrylate, C-20-22 Alcohols, Chlorphenesin, Coco-Glucoside, Phenoxyethanol, Squalane, Triethanolamine, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Trimethoxycaprylylsilane, , Zinc Oxide.


I can understand why some companies replace OMC with OCR and add AVO to their formulations but removing a harmless but very effective filmformer (PTFE) and Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Trimethoxycaprylylsilane (SPF booster and filter stabilizer) is beyond comprehension! Unless of course the new formula contain more oil. But then why remove Polymethyl Methacrylate that would give a more pleasing sensory profile for consumers with oilier skin (Polymethyl Methacrylate)? After all this sunscreen is ment for younger, oilier skin!

#21 chiaberry

  • Guest
  • 23 posts
  • 0

Posted 14 April 2010 - 11:45 PM

This is the ingredient list for Uriage Hyseac SPF50 which is meant for oily and combination skin. It has a pleasant texture (quite fluid) but the minus point is that the fragrance is quite strong:

Aqua (water), dicaprylyl carbonate, uriage thermal spring water, Tinosorb M, avobenzone, ethylhexyl triazone, octocrylene, nylon-12, glycerin, cyclopentasiloxane, butylene glycol, decyl glucoside, C20-22 alkyl phosphate, cyclohexasiloxane, C20-22 alcohols, phenoxyethanol, brassica campestris (rapeseed) sterols, xanthan gum, parfum, benzoic acid, tetrasodium EDTA, tocopherol acetate, tricotanyl PVP, o-cymen-5-ol, propylene glycol, citric acid, sodium hydroxide, polyquarternium-51, lecithin, hydrolyzed wheat protein, caprylyl glycol, hexylene glycol, epilobium angustifolium flower/leaf/stem extract, sodium metabisulfite.

#22 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 16 April 2010 - 07:06 AM

then I would avoid almost all organic filters except Tinosorb M and look for physical sunscreens. These sunscreens contain TiO2, ZnO (non-nano).


Serious question: can I safely assume that the TiO2 in sunscreens is not nano sized or do I have to do further research about the brand, product, etc...?

Sorry for all these questions; lately, I've been thinking more and more about whether I'm ok covering my self with what I believe to be poisons, just to keep a few years off of my face, for a little while.

#23 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:12 PM

then I would avoid almost all organic filters except Tinosorb M and look for physical sunscreens. These sunscreens contain TiO2, ZnO (non-nano).


Serious question: can I safely assume that the TiO2 in sunscreens is not nano sized or do I have to do further research about the brand, product, etc...?

Sorry for all these questions; lately, I've been thinking more and more about whether I'm ok covering my self with what I believe to be poisons, just to keep a few years off of my face, for a little while.


No, unfortunately you cannot be sure. In the USA and AU it is allowed to use nano-particles in finished products.
In the EU it will be stated on the label but at this moment you cannot know unless you know what raw material the company uses. There is no guarantee that you will get this info from a company.

I would recommend that you go for a product that contains ZnO as well (for better UVA protection).

Which product do you have in mind that you would like to use?

#24 Mia K.

  • Guest
  • 176 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Tropical SoFla. US

Posted 17 April 2010 - 03:40 PM

Would you please give your opinion of this physical-only sunscreen, Eva?  Thanks ;)  Always on the lookout you know.

Cliniderm Gentle Protective Lotion spf45:

Medicinal Ingredients (w/w): Titanium Dioxide USP 6.6%, Zinc Oxide USP 6.1%
Non-Medicinal Ingredients: Aqua, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Alumina, Methicone, Polyhydroxystearic Acid, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Polyhydroxystearic Acid, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Silica, Propylene Glycol Dicaprylate/Dicaprate, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Cetearyl Alcohol, Ceteareth-20, Mauritia Flexuosa Fruit Oil, Phospholipids, Silica, Glycerin, Dehydroacetic Acid, Benzyl Alcohol, Cetyl Dimethicone, Ceteareth-12, Cetyl Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Capryloyl Glycine, Tocopherol, Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Dehydroxanthan Gum, Rosemary Officinalis (Rosemary) Leaf Extract
********************************
CLINIDERM products are free of parabens, dyes, perfumes, lanolin, formaldehyde and proteins.


I believe it is a Canadian product.


Regards, Mia

#25 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 17 April 2010 - 05:35 PM

No, unfortunately you cannot be sure. In the USA and AU it is allowed to use nano-particles in finished products.
In the EU it will be stated on the label but at this moment you cannot know unless you know what raw material the company uses. There is no guarantee that you will get this info from a company.

I would recommend that you go for a product that contains ZnO as well (for better UVA protection).

Which product do you have in mind that you would like to use?


I see.

I don't have anything particular in mind at all but it would be great if I could buy a sunscreen locally(Canada). Either way, what would you recommend? What about the one Mia K. just posted, Cliniderm?

Thanks

#26 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 17 April 2010 - 06:02 PM

Would you please give your opinion of this physical-only sunscreen, Eva? Thanks ;) Always on the lookout you know.

Cliniderm Gentle Protective Lotion spf45:

Medicinal Ingredients (w/w): Titanium Dioxide USP 6.6%, Zinc Oxide USP 6.1%
Non-Medicinal Ingredients: Aqua, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Alumina, Methicone, Polyhydroxystearic Acid, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Polyhydroxystearic Acid, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Silica, Propylene Glycol Dicaprylate/Dicaprate, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Cetearyl Alcohol, Ceteareth-20, Mauritia Flexuosa Fruit Oil, Phospholipids, Silica, Glycerin, Dehydroacetic Acid, Benzyl Alcohol, Cetyl Dimethicone, Ceteareth-12, Cetyl Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Capryloyl Glycine, Tocopherol, Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Dehydroxanthan Gum, Rosemary Officinalis (Rosemary) Leaf Extract
********************************
CLINIDERM products are free of parabens, dyes, perfumes, lanolin, formaldehyde and proteins.


I believe it is a Canadian product.


Regards, Mia


Cliniderm is Swedish from Aco Nordic Group: http://www.aconordic.no/ :)
It looks a good sunscreen to me though the ZnO content could be higher for better UVA protection.

#27 Eva Victoria

  • Guest
  • 887 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Norway

Posted 17 April 2010 - 06:05 PM

No, unfortunately you cannot be sure. In the USA and AU it is allowed to use nano-particles in finished products.
In the EU it will be stated on the label but at this moment you cannot know unless you know what raw material the company uses. There is no guarantee that you will get this info from a company.

I would recommend that you go for a product that contains ZnO as well (for better UVA protection).

Which product do you have in mind that you would like to use?


I see.

I don't have anything particular in mind at all but it would be great if I could buy a sunscreen locally(Canada). Either way, what would you recommend? What about the one Mia K. just posted, Cliniderm?

Thanks


You can buy L'Oreal sunscreens with Mexoryl filters or if you would prefer something with ZnO I am sure you can find plenty of good sunscreens with high content of ZnO in Canada.

#28 Mia K.

  • Guest
  • 176 posts
  • 15
  • Location:Tropical SoFla. US

Posted 18 April 2010 - 03:22 PM

Cliniderm is Swedish from Aco Nordic Group: http://www.aconordic.no/ ;)
It looks a good sunscreen to me though the ZnO content could be higher for better UVA protection.


Very good, thanks for your time & the link.  ~Mia

#29 rollo

  • Guest
  • 205 posts
  • -6

Posted 22 April 2010 - 03:24 AM

You can buy L'Oreal sunscreens with Mexoryl filters or if you would prefer something with ZnO I am sure you can find plenty of good sunscreens with high content of ZnO in Canada.


What should the ZnO % be for a sunscreen to do an adequate job?

Can you through out names of any mineral suncreens that you like, the only one I can think of is the Bioderma.

Thanks

#30 Yelena

  • Guest
  • 18 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New Jersey, USA

Posted 26 April 2010 - 09:31 AM

Dear Eva,

I am new on these forums (been lurking for the past few days), but I have already learned a lot, thanks to your generous advice.
I'm very impressed with your expertise in skin care and sunscreens, and I have a question.

I've never used sunscreen in my life, I am 30, and I have sun damage on my face.
After all the reasons you gave here, I am finally ready to start using sunscreen on my face.
I've read a few threads here on choosing sunscreens, and I am overwhelmed. I am new to all this,
and my head is spinning from all the chemical names...

Can you please list the top 3-5 sunscreens you recommend (best sunscreens ever in your opinion),
maybe with a short note next to each one, explaining why or describing it, or what type of skin it is best for, etc?

I live in the US, but I don't mind ordering online.

thank you!

Yelena

P.S. Do I still have to use sunscreen if I buy and wear a wide-brimmed hat when outside?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users