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

291–300 of 309 posts

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#291

Post by Google234 »

craftinator wrote: post #216
TheManInThePub wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Asbestos -> Cancer. Safe amount = 0.

Radiation also -> cancer. Should we ban windows that allow sun light into our lives??

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#292

Post by Google234 »

rkk3 wrote: post #213
ceejayoz wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One molecule of benzene will guarantee a cancer case?

You aren't guaranteed to die from being shot in the head either. However there are things which the medical community recognizes have no safe level of exposure. From the original article: "The toxicity of benzene in humans has been well established for over 120 years. The hematotoxicity of benzene has been described as early as 1897. A study from 1939 on benzene stated that “exposure over a long period of time to any…

It just takes one UV ray hit one strand of dna and lead to cancer.

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#293

Post by totalZero »

kar5pt wrote: post #274
NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means our government prioritizes spending on war over two orders of magnitude more than the safety of its own citizens.

No it doesn't. I spend more on coffee than I do on water. That doesn't mean I "prioritize coffee over water". It means that I don't need to spend as much on water to get what I need.

If you spend over a hundred times as much on coffee than on water every month, and you find yourself chronically under-hydrated, then you may indeed prioritize coffee over water.

Coffee contains water, which makes this a strange analogy. Just saying.

The observation that you are trying to refute is that the FDA falls short of accomplishing its mission and receives remarkably less funding than other agencies of the government that also intend to ensure the safety and well-being of Americans.

In fact, about half of the FDA's funding comes from drug companies. That seems strange considering how the FDA is supposed to regulate those very companies.

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#294

Post by shoto_io »

float4 wrote: post #243
shoto_io wrote: post #103

A friend of mine developed a shit free sunscreen. It’s pretty good: https://new-layer.com/collections/sunscreen

Your friend's SPF 50 ingredients list[0]: Aqua, Diethylhexyl Adipate, Ethylhexyl Salicylate, Pentylene Glycol, Decyl Oleate, Diethylamino Hydroxybenzoyl Hexyl Benzoate, Polyglyceryl-4 Diisostearate/Polyhydroxystearate/Sebacate, Undecane, Bis-Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenyl Triazine, Glycerin, Diethylhexyl Butamido Triazone, Tridecane, Fructooligosaccharides, Phenylbenzimidazole Sulfonic Acid, Magnesium Sulfate, Zin…

There is actually an app that translates those cryptic ingredients into “good” and “bad”, in Germany at least:

https://www.codecheck.info

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#295

Post by throwawaysea »

rkk3 wrote: post #206
TheManInThePub wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

Interestingly some uses of asbestos aren’t actually banned, which is very surprising to me: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-epa-allowing-asbestos-p...

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#297

Post by totalZero »

ineedasername wrote: post #279
azinman2 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A contextless number doesn’t mean much. Maybe that’s enough? Too much? Too little? The FDA doesn’t need to buy billion dollar aircraft carriers, they need to pay people salaries and equip them to investigate, test, read papers, and set standards.

You make a strong argument for the FDA to get its own fleet of aircraft carriers and probably ground support as well. I bet they'd have many fewer enforcement issues. Then again the optics of the FDA sending a nuke to a company that is non-compliant in it's handling of medical grade radioactive isotopes might be a little bad.

We have serious problems with pharmaceutical pricing, access, and regulation in the United States. Let's not pretend that we have saturated the costs of all necessary pharmaceutical regulation, nor that all of our aircraft carriers are necessary.

Here's a list of words to google next to "FDA" as a search term if you want to know where some of the deficiencies lie:

  Sackler
  Epi-pen
  Insulin
  Shkreli
  Kickbacks
  Vioxx
  Lobbying

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#298

Post by swiley »

mr_toad wrote: post #284
rkk3 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't guaranteed to die from being shot in the head either. However there are things which the medical community recognizes have no safe level of exposure. From the original article: "The toxicity of benzene in humans has been well established for over 120 years. The hematotoxicity of benzene has been described as early as 1897. A study from 1939 on benzene stated that “exposure over a long period of time to any…

Yeah and you literally can’t breathe without risking being exposed to benzene. It’s in many adhesives, paints and petrol. If you want to adopt a zero tolerance policy for benzene then you’d need to ban petrol. Or stop breathing.

I'm certainly not going to rub petrol on my skin.

Re: Benzene detected in many sunscreen products

#299

Post by netizen-936824 »

rsfern wrote: post #272
netizen-936824 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does volatility imply constituents? A quick search shows that oxybenzone is a compound containing two carbon rings.

Volatility is more about vapor pressure, so how much a compound likes to evaporate, rather than structural components per se. I couldn’t find any vapor pressure data online , but the boiling temp of oxybenzone is about 70C higher than for benzene, so it’s probably somewhat less volatile. Oxybenzone: https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C131577&Mask=4 Benzene: https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C71432&Mask…

Yes I am aware, I am implying that the original poster is not. Volatility does not imply constituents. The benzene could easily come from so many places, but the poster decided to pick out volatility as a qualifier? For reasons?
Post reply on HN