Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA • Hacker News Board

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#111

Post by light_hue_1 » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:17 AM UTC

m463 wrote: post #104

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So we went from little to no sunscreen to ubiquity over a few decades, but over that time rates of skin cancer have increased per 100k UV exposure patterns have changed significantly. Long-distance vacation travel to sunny locations is much more common now. Tanning beds are much more common. Both holidays and deliberate tanning often take people from indoor office life to the opposite extreme of sun exposure. Peopl…

> Tanning beds are much more common. I think they were common, say 80's/90's, but I don't see them much anymore. I remember meeting a woman once - early 20's and very attractive - except her skin was extremely wrinkled. She told me her parents had owned a tanning salon and she used it all the time. and a bit later that's how things ended up.

> I think they were common, say 80's/90's, but I don't see them much anymore.

I think you might just have aged out of the group that uses them. Young people tend to use them a lot. Something like 1 in 5 people in their 20s have used one in the past year in many western countries.

The statistics are pretty horrific. Looks like you're increasing your lifetime risk of skin cancer by a good 20% by doing this.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#112

Post by copperx » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:21 AM UTC

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #65

jakub_g wrote: post #12

*in US. Honestly, I was expecting an article about some ingredients being harmful to coral reef hence disallowed, or similar. Instead, the issue is slow process of FDA. > The FDA hasn’t added a new active ingredient to its sunscreen monograph [...] in decades. Also, what makes this article interesting (a "man bites a dog" kind of story) is that the US is more strict than EU in this area; in 95% of cases for all kinds…

The other wild portion of this is that if you go to northern EU (Norway/Sweden/Finland) sunscreen is like, insanely expensive. Like at least triple the price of what you would pay in the states for the same product.

That's crazy, especially because sunscreen in the us is absurdly expensive. $30 for a 8oz tube is borderline criminal.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#113

Post by spaetzleesser » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:26 AM UTC

scifibestfi wrote: post #16

> At 36, I am just old enough to remember when sunscreen wasn’t a big deal. My mom, despite being among the palest people alive, does not remember bringing it on our earliest vacations, or hearing any mention of sun protection by our pediatrician. > Now SPF is ubiquitous. You can find it in lotions, sprays, gels, oils, powders, and implements that look like grade-school glue sticks, as well as infused into skin-care…

"Shouldn't rates have gone down? What explains this?"

I think with a lot of diseases it's better diagnosis so you get more cases. I feel the same is true for autism. When I grew up nobody knew about autism so the autism rate was basically zero. We just had weird people.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#114

Post by Semaphor » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:26 AM UTC

light_hue_1 wrote: post #111

m463 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tanning beds are much more common. I think they were common, say 80's/90's, but I don't see them much anymore. I remember meeting a woman once - early 20's and very attractive - except her skin was extremely wrinkled. She told me her parents had owned a tanning salon and she used it all the time. and a bit later that's how things ended up.

> I think they were common, say 80's/90's, but I don't see them much anymore. I think you might just have aged out of the group that uses them. Young people tend to use them a lot. Something like 1 in 5 people in their 20s have used one in the past year in many western countries. The statistics are pretty horrific. Looks like you're increasing your lifetime risk of skin cancer by a good 20% by doing this.

Where are those statistics from? I was wondering because using a tanning bed has always been a low-class thing and something to be ridiculed when I was in my early 20ies (I’m 36).

German Wikipedia [0] has it at its highest 80ies/90ies, the stats they mention are for 14-45 year olds: 2012: 14.6 %; 2015: 11 %; 2018: 8.8 %

[0]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarium

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#115

Post by copperx » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:27 AM UTC

kornhole wrote: post #24

Hack your own sunscreen: zinc powder, coconut oil, olive oil. I bought a lifetime supply of zinc for $10. It is edible and free of toxic endocrine disrupters. Goal is not to block everything since you need vitamin D.

> coconut oil, olive oil

That's what I would use if I was going to fry myself in the sun, just from the sound of it. Is it safe to use?

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#116

Post by copperx » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:29 AM UTC

jamal-kumar wrote: post #64

kornhole wrote: post #24

Hack your own sunscreen: zinc powder, coconut oil, olive oil. I bought a lifetime supply of zinc for $10. It is edible and free of toxic endocrine disrupters. Goal is not to block everything since you need vitamin D.

This is pretty popular with surfers in Central America. Zinc Oxide cream, like what you use for a baby's diaper rash, is WAY cheaper than sunscreen (Priced high for the tourists), and it's pretty much available at any pañalera (diaper store, if you can believe it, more like what you'd call a 'dollar store' up north with the other things they sell anyways - many small towns have one). It just makes you look like a gho…

> Zinc Oxide cream

I've wondered about creating my own sunscreen that way, but the internet discouraged me. From what I've read, Zinc Oxide for babies isn't a nanoparticle, it doesn't block the sun efficiently. I haven't had the chance to research it further.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#117

Post by copperx » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:37 AM UTC

safeimp wrote: post #49

rootsudo wrote: post #3

There is a small not so black market of distributors for these, notably Biore UV which is easily accessible on Amazon - as well as ebay and other ecomm channels. I fly frequently to Japan, and always stock up on Biore UV, and lately with the USD to JPY, it makes more sense too stock up more. :) Lots of items from amazon.co.jp also have free shipping to USA, it's nice. If you can't enter Japan, but still feel the need…

I'm always dubious purchasing things like this via Amazon. I'll buy tech gear there or miscellaneous accessories but for something that I'm ingesting or applying to my skin I'm reluctant, especially with it falling into a gray area. Am I being unreasonably paranoid?

> Am I being unreasonably paranoid?

No. I treat anything I buy on Amazon as a counterfeit until I can prove that it is not. Sometimes it takes a few days of research per product, intensive physical inspection, and contacting the manufacturer to check lot/serial numbers.

I'd love to delegate this onerous task. Perhaps it's a viable startup idea?

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#118

Post by fnordpiglet » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:43 AM UTC

No post body was provided.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#119

Post by jamal-kumar » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:54 AM UTC

metadat wrote: post #84

jamal-kumar wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty popular with surfers in Central America. Zinc Oxide cream, like what you use for a baby's diaper rash, is WAY cheaper than sunscreen (Priced high for the tourists), and it's pretty much available at any pañalera (diaper store, if you can believe it, more like what you'd call a 'dollar store' up north with the other things they sell anyways - many small towns have one). It just makes you look like a gho…

Surfing in the dark at 4am? Is this safe? In Hawaii I know there are a lot of sea urchins and sharp lava, so visibility is a good thing for safety.

Alot closer to the equator it's different for sure. The sun is fully up at about 6 tops every morning with more consistency and less variation.

Re: Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

#120

Post by jamal-kumar » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 4:55 AM UTC

copperx wrote: post #116

jamal-kumar wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty popular with surfers in Central America. Zinc Oxide cream, like what you use for a baby's diaper rash, is WAY cheaper than sunscreen (Priced high for the tourists), and it's pretty much available at any pañalera (diaper store, if you can believe it, more like what you'd call a 'dollar store' up north with the other things they sell anyways - many small towns have one). It just makes you look like a gho…

> Zinc Oxide cream I've wondered about creating my own sunscreen that way, but the internet discouraged me. From what I've read, Zinc Oxide for babies isn't a nanoparticle, it doesn't block the sun efficiently. I haven't had the chance to research it further.

I'm probably not as white as you, and we're all acclimatized to the sun out here enough to know when to avoid it and when to enjoy it - Hard to speak for your skin profile or nanoparticles or whatever but all I know is that what you're talking about is a huge factor in messing the reefs up around here.

A huge factor is timing. We call white people who get burned going out at peak sun hours 'camarones' - shrimp, because they go from white to red. Funny. Doesn't matter what your skin is, though, when the sun is literally right above you at noon, get under shade or inside and eat your lunch.