Live data from Hacker News

European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

ms.now

41–50 of 101 posts

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#42
post #35

The FDA did (3 days ago!) finally approve a new ingredient: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-expa... My personal hot take is that we should all be using zinc (or titanium) oxide sunscreen which AFAICT maxes out both effectiveness and chemical safety. (And is the best for the fish?) Interestingly, these are the only ingredients that the FDA currently deems both safe and effective.

Sunscreens that use zinc/titanium dioxide as active ingredients are often so unpleasant to use that people don't apply enough of them or refuse to use them. The "nicer" sunscreens that use these ingredients often sneak in SPF boosters which are actually derivatives of other chemical sunscreens but are treated differently on the ingredients label, pretty much cheating the system.

SPF boosters: https://labmuffin.com/100-mineral-sunscreens-using-unregulat...

The coral-safe sunscreen claims don't have a lot of evidence behind them:

https://labmuffin.com/is-your-sunscreen-killing-coral-the-sc...

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#43
post #16

> A peer-approval system would work both ways. Europe would also take into account FDA decisions This doesn't seem like a given at all. Just because the FDA accepts EMA approvals wouldn't mean the EMA would accept FDA ones and as a European, I wouldn't want it to. I have a lot more trust in the EMA than the FDA.

Peer approval schemes are usually implemented as trade efficiency measures. A one sided peer approval would make it easier to import, while not making it easier to export, causing a delta trade deficit.

This isn't about trade efficiency though, it's about bypassing an inefficient bureaucracy by allowing for approval by a more efficient one as an option.

We have no intention of dropping our standards to US ones, but they are welcome to follow our lead. (Or don't! It's up to you, just don't make it our problem!)

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#44
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peer approval schemes are usually implemented as trade efficiency measures. A one sided peer approval would make it easier to import, while not making it easier to export, causing a delta trade deficit.

Why is a trade deficit something to worry about? After all, my local grocery store buys nothing from me, but we both benefit from the exchange of goods and currency.

Furthermore, even if the trade deficit was something to worry about, why should the food and drug safety bureaucracies be the ones to determine that kind of economic policy?

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#45
post #16

> A peer-approval system would work both ways. Europe would also take into account FDA decisions This doesn't seem like a given at all. Just because the FDA accepts EMA approvals wouldn't mean the EMA would accept FDA ones and as a European, I wouldn't want it to. I have a lot more trust in the EMA than the FDA.

The FDA’s big claim to fame is not approving thalidomide when European regulators did, preventing a bunch of birth defects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#46
post #16

> A peer-approval system would work both ways. Europe would also take into account FDA decisions This doesn't seem like a given at all. Just because the FDA accepts EMA approvals wouldn't mean the EMA would accept FDA ones and as a European, I wouldn't want it to. I have a lot more trust in the EMA than the FDA.

The FDA’s big claim to fame is not approving thalidomide when European regulators did, preventing a bunch of birth defects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

This was also an entire lifetime ago.

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#47
I've no opinion whatsoever on the topic, but why can't economists refrain from writing opinion pieces in newspaper about topics they have no qualification on?

I'm sure there's enough dermatologists and pharmaceutical engineers to give their informed opinion on such a topic, instead of having economists speaking as everythingologists on every damn subject…

(I know why they do that, the author is merely a polical activist, but I wish editors would just close the door to such pieces).

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flipside of this is that companies put dangerous chemicals into food, cookware, etc. Not convinced things would be better on net.

Except you can check the differences easily. China doesn't have the same strict regulations, and yet when we compare life expectancy the difference isn't particularly big. Thought terminating cliches like "Better safe than sorry" simply don't stand up to scrutiny once you actually check the numbers. No, eating brasilian beef isn't going to kill you, and stopping imports from there is going to do a whole lot more to m…

> Except you can check the differences easily.

Have you forgotten the origins of these laws? Around the turn of the 20th century, it was muckraker journalists that alerted the public to the deceptive and unsafe practices that food and drug companies were using at the time. People didn't know -- that's, eh, how deception works.

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#49
post #47

I've no opinion whatsoever on the topic, but why can't economists refrain from writing opinion pieces in newspaper about topics they have no qualification on? I'm sure there's enough dermatologists and pharmaceutical engineers to give their informed opinion on such a topic, instead of having economists speaking as everythingologists on every damn subject… (I know why they do that, the author is merely a polical activ…

Frankly, the field of dermatology is so captured by corporations that my confidence is hardly raised when I see a degree in that field.

Is there a term for regulatory capture but for academia? Like "academic capture"?

Re: European sunscreens are safer than American (2024)

#50
post #49
post #47

I've no opinion whatsoever on the topic, but why can't economists refrain from writing opinion pieces in newspaper about topics they have no qualification on? I'm sure there's enough dermatologists and pharmaceutical engineers to give their informed opinion on such a topic, instead of having economists speaking as everythingologists on every damn subject… (I know why they do that, the author is merely a polical activ…

Frankly, the field of dermatology is so captured by corporations that my confidence is hardly raised when I see a degree in that field. Is there a term for regulatory capture but for academia? Like "academic capture"?

I'd say dermatology, nutrition/dietetics, and phytopathology are 3 of the worst fields in this regard. I don't think we're fully over the sugar lobby's stranglehold on relevant science and I think the glyphosate lobby's hold is even stronger than that was. How many times are we gonna go through these crises and not reform the way we do and fund science?
Post reply on HN