Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

valisure.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 309 posts

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#201

Post by piercebot »

sergiomattei wrote: post #90
rchiba wrote: post #15

I found this article through a friend of my wife's who is a skincare expert. Check your cabinets. I actually found the Neutrogena lotion that we use in the table of affected products! List of affected products: https://www.valisure.com/wp-content/uploads/Valisure-Citizen... List of unaffected products: https://www.valisure.com/wp-content/uploads/Attachment-A-Tab...

Yikes. Had a bit of a scare: living in Puerto Rico, I regularly use Walgreens SPF50, Neutrogena sunblock and After Sun gel. The closest UPC was the After Sun, but mine was a couple of digits off. Makes you think what stuff you're putting on that you don't know about!

How are things in PR these days? I can't imagine what it must be like to deal with a pandemic while simultaneously trying to rebuild basic infrastructure.

Have you been able to get back to some semblance of normalcy yet?

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#202

Post by dcolkitt »

anoraca wrote: post #192
dcolkitt wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna make a radical suggestion. Maybe just try ditching sunscreen altogether. Yes, it's probably true that exposure to the sun increases the risk of skin cancer. But in the US skin cancer accounts for fewer than 1% of all deaths. In contrast the quintile of people with the highest exposure to the sun have half the all-cause mortality as the quintile with the lowest sun exposure.[1] In particular sunbathers enjoy…

Why do you feel qualified to offer medical advice like this? Are you a medical doctor?

Medical doctors are no more trained to digest scientific evidence than anyone else. Especially when it comes to population epidemiology.

Statistical illiteracy is widespread among medical doctors.[1] There's no reason to trust a doctor to interpret a p-value. For these types of questions you're much better off listening to a data scientist because they have actual training in interpretative statistics.

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693708/

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#203

Post by alsetmusic »

TheManInThePub wrote: post #194
njovin wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the parent comment's link: > A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to di…

> sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos And the question I have asked is where is the evidence that such small quantities are a risk? The UK links I have posted suggest otherwise. This is why I am asking. I'm puzzled... are the US courts are saying "OMG Asbestos" rather than looking at safe levels? What if the same courts said "OMG 5G" ! This is why I am asking a genuine question.

If this gets another “shame on you” edit, I’d reflect on we people are downvoting you. Fwiw, I haven’t voted on your comments either way.

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#204

Post by kens »

soheil wrote: post #45
Robotbeat wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sarcasm. After driving electric for a while (used are affordable... at least until the last couple months when the price of used cars went through the roof), the smell of gasoline seems especially pungent.

Funny you say that because I specially like the smell of gasoline, kind of like smell of glue or diesel exhaust. I know, kind of weird but I know a lot of other people who are in the same boat.

There's a relevant line from the book "Generation X" about gasoline: "Isn't the smell of gasoline great? Close your eyes and inhale. So clean. It smells like the future."

(The 1991 book "Generation X" is what popularized the term "Generation X", for those who didn't know there was a book.)

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#205

Post by piercebot »

anoraca wrote: post #192
dcolkitt wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna make a radical suggestion. Maybe just try ditching sunscreen altogether. Yes, it's probably true that exposure to the sun increases the risk of skin cancer. But in the US skin cancer accounts for fewer than 1% of all deaths. In contrast the quintile of people with the highest exposure to the sun have half the all-cause mortality as the quintile with the lowest sun exposure.[1] In particular sunbathers enjoy…

Why do you feel qualified to offer medical advice like this? Are you a medical doctor?

They linked a study from a medical journal. Are you asking for additional qualifications? Should there be restrictions on who is allowed to share scholarly articles?

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#206

Post by rkk3 »

TheManInThePub wrote: post #194
njovin wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the parent comment's link: > A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to di…

> sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos And the question I have asked is where is the evidence that such small quantities are a risk? The UK links I have posted suggest otherwise. This is why I am asking. I'm puzzled... are the US courts are saying "OMG Asbestos" rather than looking at safe levels? What if the same courts said "OMG 5G" ! This is why I am asking a genuine question.

Because there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos.

From the above Reuters article "The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later."

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/johnsona...

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#207

Post by telchar »

foerbert wrote: post #184
TheManInThePub wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems that most talc doesn't cause cancer -- but some talc has "rather high" amounts of asbestos in it -- which we know causes cancer. So no evidence, just suspicion? I must be blunt and say this has left me more puzzled why the US courts have ruled the way they have. EDIT: Down votes again for asking a question? Explain yourselves. Are people defending something without evidence?

Can't even downvote myself, but my guess is that it's related to the extremity of your position. It sounds a lot like you're saying since we know cyanide is poisonous by itself, it's very strange to be able to win a lawsuit if you find significant amounts of cyanide in your bread. Most bread is fine, right? So merely finding cyanide in it should only count as suspicion of a problem and not count as evidence... seems…

That's an interesting example to choose, because almonds have a small amount of cyanide naturally. I think that highlights that quantity matters

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#208

Post by chabes »

asdff wrote: post #139
chabes wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have very fair skin and used to burn easily, but now I don’t wear sunscreen 99% of the time I would have in the past. I just make sure to go outside regularly (starting in the winter months, here in the northern hemisphere) and expose my body to the sun, all year, and not just during vacation months. UV intensity changes with the seasons. Expose your skin to the sun when UVs are lower and your skin will adjust to t…

The idea that you simply need to tan or lay out in the sun to become resistant to skin cancer is a fallacy. That's not how your body works. There is chemical damage to your DNA taking place that your body is actively repairing, but your repair mechanism isn't perfect. There is an inherent error rate. Increase exposure to sun, you are more likely to roll the dice and have a damaged cell that evades detection by your r…

Not saying fair skin people need a tan. I’m still fair skinned, even though I am outside often.

Nor am I calling for simply increasing exposure to sunlight.

All good things in moderation. There’s a balance to be found between adequate sun exposure and overexposure.

The best way is intermittent exposure. A little here and a little there. Hang out in the shade of trees in the heat of the day, out of direct light, but exposed to healthy amounts of ambient UV. Early and late hours of the day have lower UV levels as well. Just need to be more conscious about factors like that.

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#210

Post by TheManInThePub »

foerbert wrote: post #184
TheManInThePub wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems that most talc doesn't cause cancer -- but some talc has "rather high" amounts of asbestos in it -- which we know causes cancer. So no evidence, just suspicion? I must be blunt and say this has left me more puzzled why the US courts have ruled the way they have. EDIT: Down votes again for asking a question? Explain yourselves. Are people defending something without evidence?

Can't even downvote myself, but my guess is that it's related to the extremity of your position. It sounds a lot like you're saying since we know cyanide is poisonous by itself, it's very strange to be able to win a lawsuit if you find significant amounts of cyanide in your bread. Most bread is fine, right? So merely finding cyanide in it should only count as suspicion of a problem and not count as evidence... seems…

Cyanide occurs naturally in apple cores. It is the dose that makes the poison.

The UK links I have cited say the low levels are not an issue. I've genuinely asked what evidence the US courts are using and I appear to have come up against group think. I did not expect this on HN.

I'd genuinely appreciate it if somebody can provide evidence citing the risk is other than negligible.

Post reply on HN