Live data from Hacker News

Newer, better sunscreens have not been approved by the FDA

theatlantic.com

131–140 of 201 posts

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

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Maybe part of that is that there's not much sun there so sunscreen is a niche product not a staple?

The opposite actually. Having a high latitude, summers are more intense.

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

#132
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same FDA which made it all-but-impossible to test for SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020? I'd believe it. https://twitter.com/random_eddie/status/1232075455295037440

Kind of startling that people didn't hear about this and are doubting the veracity of the claims... I thought this story was well known by now. https://www.science.org/content/article/united-states-badly-...

I thought this was common knowledge and a common complaint a cross the political spectrum.

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

#133
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same FDA which made it all-but-impossible to test for SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020? I'd believe it. https://twitter.com/random_eddie/status/1232075455295037440

Quoted post unavailable.

What on earth are you talking about... He's interpreting a thread that he is quote-tweeting. The thread is from _the then-Commissioner of the FDA_. If you think Eddie's description is wrong, you can read the thread he's describing!

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

#134
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same FDA which made it all-but-impossible to test for SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020? I'd believe it. https://twitter.com/random_eddie/status/1232075455295037440

Quoted post unavailable.

I'd posit that certain lobes were already shut off if you're unable to read a thread by the then-Commissioner of the FDA because it happens to be on Twitter. It's the 2020s, agency heads make official statements on Twitter all the time.

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

#135

> 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…

At 42 I remember the pre-sunscreen days as well. At the beginning of summer we would all go to the pool and get a nasty burn. Within a week we were at the pool all day every day and would not have a burn again until the next year. On average we would be getting around 3 painful but not serious burns per year (one at the start of summer, one when we went to the amusement park, one when we went out on a boat or somethi…

I'm not sure where you guys grew up, but I'm 46 and remember putting on sunscreen as a kid, as did most of my friends. Even with sunscreens (which sometimes you forget to refresh...) you occasionally would get a nasty sunburn.

On the other hand i remember being in Australia and all the British tourists would follow the strategy you layed out. So after the first day on a boat trip they all looked like xcooked lobsters. While all the other nationalities would just put on sunscreen and be fine. You would also still get a significant tan even with 30+ sunscreen.

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

#136
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Argentina.

Actually Australia had it the worst. I remember estimates that the MAJORITY of Australians will have had skin cancer in their lifetimes

Excuse you. NZ and Pacific islands had it the worst.

Aussie sun is a joke compared to NZ sun.

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

#137
post #104

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.

> early 20's > extremely wrinkled

Do you know if she also smoked cigarettes? In the past I have noticed early twenty’s with abnormally wrinkled skin from years of smoking.

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

#139

Vitamin D deficiency is far riskier for sedatory indoor people then skin cancer is. I wouldn’t be surprised if we look back at this time and laugh at how we were blocking too many UV rays.

One of those seems far more dangerous. And not treatable with I single pill.
Post reply on HN