this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
65 points (100.0% liked)

Public Health

1069 readers
89 users here now

For issues concerning:


🩺 This community has a broader scope so please feel free to discuss. When it may not be clear, leave a comment talking about why something is important.



Related Communities

See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link (!medicine@lemmy.world)


Rules

Given the inherent intersection that these topics have with politics, we encourage thoughtful discussions while also adhering to the mander.xyz instance guidelines.

Try to focus on the scientific aspects and refrain from making overly partisan or inflammatory content

Our aim is to foster a respectful environment where we can delve into the scientific foundations of these topics. Thank you!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 30 points 2 months ago (12 children)

I had no idea that people were spreading a conspiracy that sunscreen itself was causing skin cancer. Of course, how could you possily think it's the giant flaming ball in the sky, which you can literally feel burning your skin from dozens of millions of kilometres away.

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (11 children)
[–] GlennMagusHarvey@mander.xyz 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (9 children)

thinks back to college chem lab classes and MSDSes why would anyone put benzene in sunscreen

Anyway, for reference here's the paragraph from the article about the harmful substance:

When people say chemical sunscreens are unsafe or “toxic,” they generally point to a 2001 study that found some risks associated with oxybenzone after scientists put high levels of the ingredient in drinking water for rats. But a followup study in 2016 found that for humans to get to similar risky exposure levels they’d have to apply full-body daily sunscreen for 227 years.

Meanwhile, I've noticed that mineral sunscreens (zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) are reportedly considered "reef safe": https://savethereef.org/about-reef-save-sunscreen.html

And they aren't the substances that are cited for toxicity/carcinogenicity. So, based on the available information (correct me if I'm wrong, of course!), it seems that they're the best choice.

Also I've heard that mineral sunscreens work by reflecting sunlight rather than absorbing it and dissipating it as a different form of energy (I forget whether that's heat or chemical change) so that might also be useful in other ways. But I am not an expert.

EDIT: see later replies to this post for more information to consider

[–] rockstarmode@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Agreed, especially on the mineral sunscreens. Usually when you buy the version of sunscreen for babies (at least in the US) they're only of the mineral variety.

I spend a lot of time in the sun and have a chronic skin condition. During the summer I used to get really deep pimples and cysts that took months to go away. Ever since I switched to mineral sunscreens I haven't had issues. It's a personal anecdote, but I'm happy with the change, even if mineral sunscreens are a bit harder to apply.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)