Suntan Oil Hunt Can Get Under Your Skin
There’s no such thing anymore as a simple suntan lotion--something to slather on oneself and the kids for a day at the beach.
Nowadays, if one dares go to the beach at all, there’s sunscreen and sun block, waterproof, sweat-proof and PABA-free, with SPFs of 8, 15, even 50, broad spectrum protection against UVB, UVA, IR and Lord knows what other initials. Those who choose too casually accept terrible risks--from wrinkles to skin cancer.
In lieu of working through all the gobbledygook, one Los Angeles pool buff, seeking assurance of mildness, buys “the ones that have pictures of babies on them.” Another shrugs, “I just go for a high number and a nice smell.”
This is a field in which the advertising offers beautiful models or pseudo-science or both, the science is still emergent, the government authority is the slow-moving Food and Drug Administration, and the consumer market is oddly schizophrenic. Half of the sun-care products sold promote tanning, and the other half prevent it. And as the market grows, particularly the prevention side, new products are rushed out and new promises made so regularly that there are constantly new safety concerns.
In the good old days, there was just suntan lotion, generally oily stuff that aided tanning. Then it was discovered that sun actually harmed skin, speeding aging and increasing the risk, and incidence, of skin cancers and malignant melanomas.
Enter sunscreens. Some were physical screens (“sun blocks”), coating skin with opaque, almost impermeable goo. Some were chemical (“sunscreens”), absorbing certain ultraviolet, or UV, rays--particularly the UVB rays located in the middle of the ultraviolet spectrum, the ones considered the cause of burns.
UVB burn was combatted by a number of ingredients of various strengths expressed by a “sun protection factor” (or SPF)--the multiple by which one could increase exposure without burning. Someone who burns in 10 minutes, for example, can use an SPF15 and stay out 150 minutes or 2 1/2 hours. SPF15, in fact, was considered effective against most UVB rays.
The ensuing hoopla, heavy on claims, led the FDA to convene panels of experts to study the issue (slowly). They published their findings in an “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making” in August, 1978. That document, still the Bible on sunscreens because it was the last word handed down, described the known dangers of sun exposure, categorized ingredients as to safety and effectiveness, analyzed SPF numbers up to 15 and described appropriate tests for their effectiveness, and spelled out permissible labeling.
Alas, times change. Ultraviolet A rays, believed not to cause burns, turn out to be a problem as well, particularly in increasing the risk of cancer: “It’s clear UVA has several roles, but exactly how it acts is unknown,” says Los Angeles dermatologist Anita Highton, director of UCLA’s Dermatology and Phototherapy Center.
No matter. Sunscreens have begun to advertise UVA blocking, including, say FDA warnings, misleading “numerical claims similar to SPF factors.” Some advertise “broad spectrum” protection, implying protection that covers the full range of UVB and extends into the UVA range.
As it happens, the FDA hasn’t yet produced its sunscreen rule, a mere dozen years having passed since it was said to be coming. The agency will therefore add UVA to the consideration, rushing through a “tentative final monograph,” or proposed rule, by the end of this year, and anticipating a final final monograph by 1994.
Meantime, the FDA handles current claims and advertising with advisory letters saying that a company can advertise UVA protection if its product tests effective up to a given UVA wavelength. However, there are as yet no FDA-certified testing procedures for UVA sunscreens, so all such claims are “unsubstantiated” and “unacceptable.”
As if the issue weren’t confused enough, there are added complications. For starters, there is one product whose manufacturer has made UVA-protection claims that have FDA approval--Photoplex, from Herbert Laboratories, the dermatology division of Allergan, Inc. Instead of waiting for the general rules to come out, Herbert Laboratories filed a separate new-drug application for Photoplex’s UVA-screening ingredient. It was approved. The company will aim its marketing at doctors and pharmacists.
There’s also new disagreement about the optimal SPF. Sunscreen marketers, naturally assuming that if 15 is good, 30 or 50 is better, rushed into what detractors call an SPF “horsepower race” or “numbers game.” But there’s some question now whether an SPF above 15 adds much extra UVB screening. There also is a fear that it encourages people to linger in the sun, thus exposing themselves to more UVA, infrared rays and whatever else is next found harmful. Moreover, even if a higher SPF further protects the skin from sun, it also irritates it more with chemicals.
Finally, several ingredients are already revealed to be serious allergens and one a possible carcinogen. Those not currently suspect may surface some years hence as causing bladder cancer in rats. It’s that kind of product.
Let’s get real. These are only sunburn lotions, for most people purely recreational aids, and scarcely the only protection available. There are also hats, close-weave T-shirts, loose pants. “If someone’s extremely sensitive and burns immediately,” says Highton, “they should avoid the sun instead of trying to increase the amount of time they can stay in it.”
Everyone else awaiting the definitive word can just go for a high number and a nice smell.
