Is ‘Reef Safe' Sunscreen Really Better?
Some products are marketed as 'reef safe' or friendly to aquatic life. But has that been proved? We talked to a dermatologist, several ecologists and toxicologists, and a chemical engineer to find out the best way to protect your skin and the environment, too.
Your sunscreen options
There are two kinds of UV filters in sunscreens on the market today.
Mineral sunscreens create a physical barrier on your skin that reflects UV rays like a mirror, while chemical sunscreens are absorbed into the skin and convert the UV radiation into harmless heat. (Chemical sunscreens are also sometimes labeled 'organic,' but that's a chemistry term, not a claim of environmental friendliness.)
Any sunscreen you apply will eventually end up in water. Researchers estimate that between 25 and 50 percent of sunscreen comes off during a dip. The rest goes down the drain when you shower or enters the wastewater system through the laundry when you wash your beach towels.
Most standard treatment plants aren't effective at removing trace levels of UV filters from wastewater, said Dunia Santiago, a chemical engineer at the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria in Spain who studies how treatment plants process contaminants. That means the chemicals are still in the water that flows out of the plant and into the world.
And, since many UV filters don't biodegrade well, levels can build up over time in the environment, floating around, settling into sediment and being eaten by animals, especially in shallow areas popular with swimmers.
What we know and don't know
There's a growing body of evidence that both chemical and mineral UV filters have the potential to harm wildlife, including coral reefs, at high concentrations. A 2016 study on the potential for a chemical UV filter called oxybenzone to make coral more vulnerable to bleaching made a particularly big splash in the public consciousness, increasing demand for gentler alternatives and leading some places to ban the sale of some chemical sunscreens.
In response, some manufacturers started marketing mineral sunscreens as 'reef safe.' But researchers generally agree you shouldn't put too much stock in these labels, which aren't regulated.
Calling one UV filter safer than another 'implies that we have information to make a comparison, which we do not have,' said Sandy Raimondo, an ecologist at the Environmental Protection Agency who studies chemical contaminants.
The science on UV-filter toxicity isn't rock-solid because the laboratory methods used to test them haven't been standardized, according to ecologists and toxicologists we interviewed.
One important issue is the 'stickiness' of chemical UV filters. They cling to the surface of the water, the sides of tanks and the inside of tools designed to measure their concentrations. When researchers can't be certain of the concentration of a chemical in water, Dr. Raimondo said, the resulting data isn't reliable.
While the data on mineral UV filters is more reliable, new formulations designed to minimize that ghostly white cast on the skin cause their own problems. Some manufacturers use so-called nano versions of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. These even-tinier particles can get embedded in the tissues of plants and animals in ways that scientists are only beginning to understand, Dr. Raimondo said.
Trying to fill in the blanks
The E.P.A. is currently funding studies to fill the gaps in our understanding of UV-filter toxicity. Top priorities include resolving measurement issues and developing standardized methods to make comparisons easier. But President Trump's plans for deep cuts at the agency have put the future of many environmental studies in doubt.
Even if those studies continue, they will probably take years to complete, and the agency could take several more years to conduct an official ecological risk assessment for any particular UV filter.
Some researchers say that, even with our incomplete knowledge of the impacts of UV filters, the existing evidence on certain chemical UV filters is damning enough for us to switch to alternatives that use non-nano mineral UV filters. Indeed, the stickiness of chemical UV filters may mean that existing research underestimates their environmental toxicity.
What you can do right now
Thankfully, you don't have to broil to help the environment. Dermatologists and toxicologists agree on the best form of sun protection. But it's not mineral or chemical sunscreen. It's clothing.
Sunscreen is an important component of protection, 'but it's not the only component,' said Dr. Henry Lim, a dermatologist at Henry Ford Health in Detroit and a former president of the American Academy of Dermatology. 'Staying in the shade, wearing photoprotective clothing, a wide-brimmed hat and sunglasses are very, very important.'
Cover as much real estate as you can with UPF rated clothing (that's the SPF equivalent for fabric). 'Sunscreen should be applied only in the areas that cannot be covered,' Dr. Lim said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
6 hours ago
- CNN
A toxicologist's guide to poison ivy's itch and bee stings' burning pain – 2 examples of nature's chemical warfare
Enjoying the outdoors carries the danger of running into nature's less-friendly side: toxic plants and animals. As toxicologists at the University of Virginia's Blue Ridge Poison Center, we see many patients each year suffering from itchy rashes from poison ivy and stings from wasps or bees. Plants and animals deploy toxins most often in order to defend themselves. Learning how they do that and what happens when the human body is exposed to these substances can offer insights on how to prevent or manage these encounters with nature. The goal is not to scare people away from the outdoors, but to equip them with the knowledge to appreciate these organisms' intricate self-preservation strategies and to protect themselves in return. Whether in a remote state park or on a city playground, most people have encountered poison ivy. This plant is recognizable by its characteristic arrangement of leaves growing in groups of three with edges that vary from smooth to jagged. It can take many forms: a single small plant, a mass of ground cover, a small bush, or a climbing vine reaching many feet up a tree or building. READ: The molecule that makes you itch also stops inflammation Poison ivy – its scientific name is Toxicodendron radicans – and its close relatives poison oak and poison sumac contain an oily substance called urushiol. This chemical is found in every part of the plant: the leaves, roots, stems and even the small white berries it produces in late summer. About 75% of people will develop an allergic reaction on contact with urushiol. Urushiol has antimicrobial properties, and scientists think its job in the poison ivy plant is to protect it from diseases. Because it is so oily, urushiol spreads easily. It can transfer from the plant to your skin, clothes, garden tools or even your pets. Direct plant contact isn't the only risk: If urushiol is on your clothing or a pet's fur and your skin later brushes against it, you can develop the same rash as you'd get from directly touching the plant. Urushiol triggers a delayed allergic reaction. When the oil touches your skin, it binds to skin cells, changing their shape. A molecule called CD1a then clocks urushiol as a foreign substance, prompting the immune system to mount an attack on the cells – hence the rash. READ: Are twins allergic to the same things? The symptoms do not appear instantly; the rash usually appears 12 to 48 hours after exposure. It often starts as redness and itching, then develops into small bumps or fluid-filled blisters. The reaction can be mild or severe, depending on how sensitive you are and how much urushiol got on your skin. The rash itself isn't contagious. Fluid from the blisters doesn't spread it. What spreads the rash to other areas of your body or to others is the urushiol lingering on your skin, clothing, tools or pets. Once the oil is adequately washed away, the rash can't spread to other people or to other areas of your body. If you have touched poison ivy, wash the area as soon as you can with soap and water and change your clothes if possible. After that, the rash will eventually resolve on its own. You can help alleviate symptoms by using a topical steroid or anti-itch cream on the rash. In severe cases, or if the face is affected, patients may require oral steroids to treat the symptoms. Bees and wasps are most active in the late summer. Because of this, we receive more frequent poison center calls about them during this season. Bees and wasps generally sting to defend their hives or nests or to protect themselves from perceived threats. They store venom in their abdominal sacs. When they sting, the venom flows through their stinger and is injected into their target's skin. This venom is a clear, slightly acidic liquid loaded with various active ingredients. For example, it contains enzymes such as phospholipase A2 that break down cell membranes, and peptides such as melittin that cause pain. The venom also contains natural chemicals such as histamine and epinephrine that affect blood vessels and the immune system. Unlike with poison ivy, where the immune system's reaction to the substance causes irritation, with bee and wasp stings it's primarily the substance itself that causes pain – although immune response can still play a role. As soon as the venom enters a person's skin, their body reacts. READ: Are you really allergic to penicillin? A sharp, burning pain comes first as the components of the venom begin to inflict damage, followed by redness and then swelling of the area. Symptoms commonly peak within a few hours and fade within a day. However, some people have stronger reactions with larger areas of swelling that can last for several days. This is because everyone's immune system is slightly different, and some people tend to have stronger reactions than others to foreign substances. In rare cases, the immune system overreacts, releasing large amounts of histamine and other chemicals all at once. Histamine is most often released in response to a foreign substance, causing symptoms of an allergic reaction. This can lead to anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction that can make breathing difficult, lower blood pressure and cause airway swelling, and which can quickly become life-threatening. READ: How to manage hay fever in your pets Getting stung multiple times at once can also be life-threatening due to the sheer amount of venom injected, even in people without a bee venom allergy. If you're stung and the stinger is stuck in the skin, it should be removed immediately by the quickest means available. Bee stingers are barbed and can continue to deliver venom for up to a minute. Most bee or wasp stings require only symptomatic treatment, such as an over-the-counter steroid cream or oral antihistamine to reduce itching and swelling. However, people who begin to develop more severe symptoms such as full body hives, vomiting or difficulty breathing should immediately seek emergency care. Anaphylactic reactions require rapid treatment with a medication called epinephrine and close monitoring in the hospital. Christopher P. Holstege is a professor of emergency medicine and pediatrics at University of Virginia. Sandra H. Nixon is a fellow in the Division of Medical Toxicology at University of Virginia.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Paleontologists Discover Weird ‘Pokémon' Ancestor of Modern Whales
Researchers have named a bizarre, prehistoric species of whale discovered on a beach in Australia. Janjucetus dullardi 'might have looked for all the world like some weird kind of mash-up between a whale, a seal, and a Pokémon,' according to Erich Fitzgerald, a senior paleontologist at Museums Victoria Research Institute who co-authored the paper on the discovery. Measuring less than ten feet and roaming the oceans around 25 million years ago, the underwater beasts would have boasted bulbous eyes the size of tennis balls, razor-sharp teeth, and a pointed snout. Fitzgerald adds they may also even have had 'tiny little nubbins of legs just projecting as stumps from the wall of the body.' The first specimen, comprising a partial skull with ear bones and teeth, was found in 2019 by amateur fossil hunter Ross Dullard, a school principal after whom the species has now been named. Dullard says he plans to host a fossil party to celebrate the naming over the weekend. 'That's taken my concentration for six years,' he said. 'I've had sleepless nights. I've dreamt about this whale.'
Forbes
18 hours ago
- Forbes
Dramatic Footage Captures Human Embryo Implanting In Real Time
In the mood for an action film? Try the one starring a human embryo implanting. It just dropped, and it's gripping. Scientists at the Institute for Bioengineering of Catalonia in Barcelona have recorded footage of a key stage of human development in real time, and in 3D, for the first time. In doing so, they witnessed a surprisingly invasive event. 'We have observed that human embryos burrow into the uterus, exerting considerable force during the process,' Samuel Ojosnegros, principal investigator of the IBEC's Bioengineering for Reproductive Health group, said in a statement. 'These forces are necessary because the embryos must be able to invade the uterine tissue, becoming completely integrated with it.' Ojosnegros is leader of a study published Friday in the journal Science Advances exploring how embryos overcome the maternal-tissue barrier. In their quest to implant, embryos release enzymes that break down the surrounding tissue. But while much implantation research focuses on the biochemical aspects of this complex and mysterious natural phenomenon, the IBEC team chose instead to examine the biomechanics. Embryo, Meet Lab-Grown Womb To investigate, they constructed an artificial uterine lining from a gel composed of collagen — a rigid protein abundant in fibrous uterine tissue — and other proteins needed for the embryo to develop. They then put dozens of human embryos left over from infertility treatments into the lab-made tissue matrix and used advanced high-resolution microscopy to capture them in action over time. Neither the matrix nor the embryo is naturally fluorescent, so the researchers had to rely on special techniques to visualize both. (The first half of the video below shows the process of cell compaction in the embryo. The second part shows the embryo invading the artificial uterine lining.) Past studies have observed tissue deformations that suggest cells apply force — when migrating and invading tumors, for example — and Ojosnegros and his team wanted to explore the hypothesis that this also happens in implantation. 'When we started placing embryos on fibrous matrixes, we noticed strong deformations in the material,' Ojosnegros said in an interview. 'That immediately suggested that mechanics play a crucial role in implantation, so we decided to explore this dimension more deeply.' Indeed, the footage of the cluster of cells meeting the uterus looks like a mini cosmic explosion. Many women experience abdominal pain and mild bleeding during implantation. 'We observe that the embryo pulls on the uterine matrix, moving and reorganizing it,' Amélie Godeau, a researcher in the Ojosnegros group and co-author of the study, said in a statement. 'It also reacts to external force cues. We hypothesize that contractions occurring in vivo may influence embryo implantation.' Barcelona's Dexeus University Hospital, home to a large women's health clinic, donated the embryos used in the study — all donor couples gave their signed informed consent and received information on the research project. Ayelet Lesman's biomedical engineering lab at Tel Aviv University quantified the force of the embryos on the faux womb. Eyes On Infertility Treatment The team hopes their research could lead to breakthroughs in infertility treatment, as failed implantation is a leading cause. 'Nobody really knows how frequent implantation failure occurs because we have no way of diagnosing it,' Dr. Norbert Gleicher, an infertility specialist with New York's Center for Human Reproduction, said in an interview. 'This diagnosis, therefore, can only be assumed, and such assumptions are reached if an infertile woman had 'X' number of good quality embryos transferred in IVF without pregnancy and no evidence of any other cause of infertility.' Gleciher was not part of the team that conducted the study. The researchers studied both mouse and human implantation to compare the mechanical differences. While the mouse embryo adheres to the uterine surface and then folds around it, essentially enveloping it, the human embryo is far more invasive. It completely penetrates the uterus and grows from the inside out by forming specialized tissues that connect to the mother's blood vessels. An 'Important First Observation' A number of reproductive scientists unaffiliated with the research out of IBEC have expressed excitement about it. Gleicher calls the new imagery an 'important first observation,' but stresses that it only represents one piece of the complex equation that determines whether an implantation will succeed. 'Implantation is not simply a mechanical process,' he said. 'It is a mechanical process, but at least in my opinion, it is first and foremost an immunological process' — one that determines whether the mother will tolerate the embryo or reject it. Still, the new footage sheds further light on a primordial burst hidden deep within the body, one we owe our very existence to.
