The best sunscreens dermatologists recommend — and use themselves — in 2025
No matter the time of year, if you're going out in the sun, using the best sunscreen you can find is a no-brainer. But, in the summer, experts advise applying a potent sunscreen several times a day to avoid exposing your skin to potentially harmful rays, which can lead to long-term skin damage and even more serious conditions like skin cancer. With new developments in sun protection, there's now a sunscreen stick, spray sunscreens or tinted sunscreen-skin care hybrids, suitable for every person, no matter what their skin type.
Read more: The best sunscreens for your face in 2025, recommended by dermatologists
Not only can using a powerful SPF cream decrease your chance of developing skin cancer, it can also help prevent unwanted sun damage and signs of premature aging. To find out more, we tapped dermatologists Dr. Joshua Zeichner, Dr. Cynthia Bailey, founder of Dr. Bailey Skin Care, board-certified facial plastic surgeon Dr. Kay Durairaj and Dr. Gary Goldenberg, assistant clinical professor of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, to find out everything from how often you should use to how to shop for the best options.
Still not sure where to start? Below, we've rounded up the seven best sunscreens dermatologists not only recommend, but actually use themselves. We've got something in the mix for every skin type, whether you have acne-prone, oily skin; dry, sensitive skin or something in-between.
Best sunscreens of 2025
How we chose
Factors to consider when choosing a sunscreen
FAQs
Meet our experts
Update, April 25, 2025: We checked all product prices and availability and added a section on our methodology. Our picks for the best sunscreens remain unchanged.
(back to top)
In addition to our team's personal experiences with sunscreen, we reached out to some of the leading skin-care experts in the country, who collectively see hundreds of patients a year and asked them which sun protection is best.
SPF (Sun Protection Factor) : "In general, it's a good idea to look for a sunscreen that's at least SPF 30 or higher and has the words 'broad spectrum' on the label," says Bailey.
Broad spectrum: The term indicates that it will protect you against both UVA rays, which cause premature aging and the development of skin cancers, and UVB rays, which cause sunburn.
Type (i.e. stick, spray, lotion): This is mainly about personal preference: 'Whether it's a lotion or gel, stick or spray, the best sunscreen is ultimately the one you are actually using on your skin,' Zeichner says.
(back to top)
According to Los Angeles facial plastic surgeon Dr. Kay Durairaj, the most effective sequence for working sunscreen into your morning skin care routine is as follows:
Cleansing: Begin with a gentle cleanser. [Durairaj recommends her own KD Skin Glycolic Cream Wash] to "help skin glow by removing overnight dull skin buildup and oils. For mature skin," she says, "a hydrating cleanser can help maintain the skin's natural moisture barrier."
Serums: "Apply any serums next," Durairaj explains. "Antioxidant-rich serums, such as those containing vitamin C, are particularly beneficial for mature skin, offering protection against free radicals and promoting collagen production."
Moisturizer: Follow with a moisturizer suited to mature skin types. "Products that contain ingredients like hyaluronic acid, peptides and ceramides can provide deep hydration, support skin structure, and improve texture," Durairaj says.
Sunscreen: "After allowing the moisturizer to absorb fully, apply a broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or higher," Durairaj advises. "For mature skin, a sunscreen that includes moisturizing ingredients and is formulated for sensitive skin may offer additional benefits without causing irritation."
Makeup: According to Durairaj, if makeup is part of your routine, it should be applied after the sunscreen has been fully absorbed. She also recommends using mineral-based products that can further protect the skin from the sun.
The lotion vs. spray sunscreen question largely comes down to your personal preference. Many prefer spray sunscreen because it's easier and faster to apply without rubbing in, but some say it's harder to achieve full coverage with a spray bottle if you're applying it yourself. With lotion, it's sometimes easier to both apply by hand and to see which spots you've missed.
Believe it or not, more is not always better when it comes to SPF in sunscreen. Some lotions with higher SPF ratings use chemicals that are harmful to reefs and ocean wildlife and can also trigger sensitive skin. Aside from that, a more likely concern is that those using higher SPF lotions often have a false sense of security. Just because your lotion is high in SPF doesn't mean you don't need to reapply or that you're immune to damaging effects from the sun. Keep this in mind when opting for a higher SPF. Finally, you might find that lotions with higher SPF ratings are more expensive.
You've heard it before: You should wear sunscreen often, ideally every day, to protect against the sun's rays. Dermatologists don't just talk about the importance of wearing sunscreen — they practice what they preach. 'I wear it every day, 365 days a year,' Goldenberg. (His top pick for daily wear is EltaMD's Sunscreen Sport Lotion.) "Even in winter, you still get some UV that can cause skin damage."
And they make it easy to remember: 'I actually incorporate sunscreen into my daily grooming routine and apply it right after shaving,' Zeichner tells Yahoo Life. Even if you are diligent about applying sunblock every morning, don't forget to reapply throughout the day — especially if you are spending a lot of time in the sun.
(back to top)
Dr. Joshua Zeichner, a dermatologist based in New York City
Dr. Cynthia Bailey, dermatologist and founder of Dr. Bailey Skin Care
Dr. Gary Goldenberg, assistant clinical professor of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine in New York City
Dr. Kay Durairaj, facial plastic surgeon based in Los Angeles
(back to top)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
'Problematic' MAHA report minimizes success of lifesaving asthma medicines, doctors say
Jun. 6—Medical experts are dismayed over a federal report's claim that kids are overprescribed asthma medications, saying it minimizes how many lives the drugs save. Safe treatment protocols for asthma management have been carefully studied over the years, said Dr. Perry Sheffield, a pediatrician and professor at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. "The federal government actually has some really beautiful and clear guidelines and strategies, and things that are vetted by and carefully edited by many experts in the field," said Sheffield, who co-directs a region of the federally funded Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units that serves New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Asthma affects more than 4.6 million American children, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It's one of the most common long-term diseases in U.S. children. The Make America Healthy Again Commission report released in late May, parts of which have been widely criticized, alleges that American children are on too much medication of various kinds, including asthma treatments. Experts worry that the administration will set policy based on the assessment that would dissuade insurers from covering asthma prescriptions. They also say that the report's assertions could worsen disparities that affect children's access to those medications and undermine years of research around the drugs. The MAHA commission has until August to release a strategy based on the findings in the report. Black and Indigenous children as well as those living in inner cities or in lower-income households are among those with the highest rates of asthma. Pollution disproportionately shrouds communities of color and can be a trigger that exacerbates the disease. The report's message could heighten those disparities, said Dr. Elizabeth Matsui, a University of Texas at Austin professor and a past chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics' Section on Allergy and Immunology. "One thing that has been very clear is that kids of color are less likely to be appropriately managed in terms of their asthma medication management," she said. "So a message of overprescription that is simply not supported by the evidence also could potentially exacerbate already-existing racial and ethnic disparities in asthma that we have really not made much headway on." The commission's claims The report touches on childhood prediabetes, obesity and mental health. However, firearm injuries — the leading cause of death for children and teens in 2020 and 2021, according to the CDC — weren't mentioned. The 70-page report from the commission, chaired by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., claims four main issues are the drivers behind childhood chronic disease: poor diet, aggregation of environmental chemicals, lack of physical activity and chronic stress, and "overmedicalization." Matsui and other experts said the report's use of that word is "problematic." "The implication could be, unfortunately, that when a child has asthma — so, they have coughing, chest tightness, wheezing — that that is not really a disease," said Matsui. "We know for a fact that that's a disease, and we know that it is quite treatable, quite controllable, and that it has profound impacts on the child's day-to-day life." Other scientists have similarly criticized the report, saying it makes sweeping and misleading generalizations about children's health without sufficient evidence. The White House corrected the report after nonprofit news outlet NOTUS found that it cited studies that didn't exist. In an emailed statement to Stateline, Health and Human Services press secretary Emily Hilliard wrote: "The MAHA report discusses concerns about the potential overprescription of asthma medications—particularly in mild cases—not to question their importance, but to encourage evidence-based prescribing." When it comes to asthma, the report says, "Asthma controller prescriptions increased 30% from 1999-2008." That sentence originally cited a broken link to a study from 2011; the link was later replaced. Controller meds include inhalers. The MAHA report also claims that "There is evidence of overprescription of oral corticosteroids for mild cases of asthma." The original version of the report listed estimated percentages of oral corticosteroids overuse, citing a nonexistent study. The wording was changed and the citation was later replaced with a link to a 2017 study by pediatric pulmonologist Dr. Harold Farber. The study was not a randomized controlled trial, which increases reliability. Farber told NOTUS that the report made an "overgeneralization" of his research. Stateline also reached out to Farber, whose public relations team declined an interview request. The implication could be, unfortunately, that when a child has asthma ... that that is not really a disease. We know for a fact that that's a disease. — Dr. Elizabeth Matsui, University of Texas at Austin professor Oral corticosteroids are liquid or tablet medications used to reduce inflammation for conditions including allergies, asthma, arthritis and Crohn's disease. For asthma, they're used to treat severe flare-up episodes. The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America says the medications have been shown to reduce emergency room visits and hospitalizations, and that while they do come with risk of side effects, they're mostly used in acute flare-ups. And while rare, asthma-related deaths in kids do occur, and are often preventable. "Asthma medications, including oral steroids, are lifesaving," said Dr. Elizabeth Friedman, a pediatrician at Children's Mercy Kansas City. "I believe that physicians, not politicians, are best equipped and most effectively trained to make the determination of whether or not these medications are needed for our patients." Friedman worries that federal characterizations of asthma meds will affect how state Medicaid agencies cover the drugs. When Medicaid coverage changed for a common prescribed inhaler last year, many of her Missouri Medicaid patients were suddenly without the drug. They ended up hospitalized, she said. Friedman directs Region 7 of the Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units, a network of experts that works to address reproductive and children's environmental health issues. Region 7 provides outreach and education in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska. She also said she's concerned that the report is "making a broad, sweeping statement based on one epidemiologic study from one state." Increased use An increase in inhaler prescriptions is not necessarily a bad thing, experts say. It's a sign that kids are getting their medication. There has been an increase in inhaler prescriptions, along with a corresponding decrease in the oral corticosteroids, which is what experts would want to see, said Chelsea Langer, bureau chief of the New Mexico Department of Health's Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau. She said that means kids are "following their asthma action plans and taking the controller medications to prevent needing the relief or treatment [oral] meds." Asthma prevalence has increased over the years, meaning more people need medication, noted Dr. Alan Baptist, division head of Allergy and Clinical Immunology at Henry Ford Health in Michigan. He said that because steroid tablets come with risk of side effects, it is best to limit them. But for kids without access to a regular pediatric provider or to health insurance that covers an inhaler, cost can be an obstacle, he said. Fluticasone propionate, an FDA-approved medicine for people 4 and older, costs on average $200 or more for one inhaler without insurance. "What often happens with kids, and especially kids who are in Medicaid, or who are in an underserved or disadvantaged population, they are not given appropriate asthma controller medication," said Baptist, who helped write federal guidelines for asthma treatment best practices as part of a National Institutes of Health committee. Baptist noted that while he was glad to see pollution mentioned in the report as a danger for kids, it's at odds with the recent cuts to environmental health grants that aimed to address such asthma triggers. "They're somewhat cherry-picking some of the data that they're putting down," he said. "It says the U.S. government is 'committed to fostering radical transparency and gold-standard science' to better understand the potential cumulative impacts of environmental exposure. If that's what they're saying, then they should be funding even greater studies that look at the effects." Dr. Priya Bansal, an Illinois pediatric allergist and immunologist and past president of the Illinois Society of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, said she's concerned the report doesn't define mild, moderate or severe asthma to differentiate the different best-practice treatment plans. Bansal also said she worries that federal officials' characterization of an FDA-approved drug will lead to insurance companies refusing to cover inhalers or oral steroids for her patients who rely on them. "I'm going to be worried about coverage for my asthmatics," she said. "The question is, what's the next move that they're going to make? If they think that, are they going to now say, 'Hey, we're not going to cover inhalers for mild asthmatics'?" Editor's note: This story has been updated with a response from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at [email protected]. YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
Medscape
2 days ago
- Medscape
Experimental MS Drug Nearly Eliminates Disease Activity
PHOENIX — Frexalimab, a second-generation anti-CD40 ligand monoclonal antibody provides extended tight control of multiple sclerosis (MS) whether measured by relapse or brain imaging at 2-year follow-up, results of an open-label extension (OLE) of a phase 2 trial showed. 'At week 96, there was almost complete suppression of new gadolinium-enhancing lesions with very similar pattern seen with new or enhancing T2 lesions,' said study investigator Stephen Krieger, MD, professor of neurology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City. Two phase 3 international studies with this drug are already enrolling. 'Part of the interest in frexalimab and anti-CD40 therapies is the idea that one can modulate both B- and T-cell activity without cell depletion,' explained Krieger, who presented the long-term open-label data on May 29 at the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC) 2025 Annual Meeting. Near Complete Disease Suppression The latest data suggest frexalimab is fulfilling its promise. Over follow-up to date, there has been nearly complete suppression of gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) lesions on MRI among those taking the dose now being tested in the phase 3 trials. At 2 years, with an annualized relapse rate of 0.08%, 92% of patients were relapse-free. The randomized portion of this phase 2 trial attracted attention when it was published a year ago in The New England Journal of Medicine , but the 2-year results showed that the efficacy and safety observed at 12 weeks persist. In the controlled trial, 129 patients with relapsing MS were randomized to 300-mg, 400-mg, 600-mg, or 1200-mg frexalimab or matching placebos. Suppression of Gd+ lesions was the primary endpoint. At 12 weeks, the adjusted mean of new Gd+ lesions was 1.4 in the combined placebo groups but 0.3 in the 300-mg frexalimab group and 0.2 in the 1200-mg group. Of those who participated in the randomized portion of the phase 2 trial, 97% continued into the long-term OLE. The OLE consisted of two arms: 1200-mg frexalimab administered intravenously every 4 weeks or 300-mg frexalimab administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks. At the end of 2 years, when 82% of those enrolled in the OLE were still on medication, the adjusted mean for new T1-weighted Gd+ lesions ranged from 0.1 to 0.3 across study arms whether on continuous frexalimab or switched from placebo to frexalimab. For those who were initiated on the 1200-mg dose in the controlled portion of the trial and remained on this dose for the OLE, the mean was 0.1. For the secondary endpoint of new or enlarging T2 lesions, the suppression at 2 years was almost the same. Again, the adjusted mean for new lesions across all arms ranged from 0.1 to 0.3. For those receiving the 1200-mg dose, the mean was 0.2. Mean T2 lesion volume increased in the placebo arm but not in the treatment arms during the randomized phase. After entering the OLE, T2 lesion volume fell in placebo patients now on active therapy. In the 1200-mg arm, the fall in lesion volume during the randomized phase continued into the first 24 weeks of the OLE. After 24 weeks, the lesion volume remained suppressed with no return toward baseline. Those initiated on placebo never caught up after switching to frexalimab. Relapse Rare — 2% at 96 Weeks On the 1200-mg dose of frexalimab, only 8% had any relapse recorded over the extended follow-up. In half, there was a single relapse. Only 2% had three or more relapses. While the Expanded Disability Status Scale score declined slightly among placebo patients once started on active therapy, there was no change from baseline through 96 weeks in patients started on any active therapy. As postulated by earlier preclinical and clinical studies, frexalimab had no effect on lymphocyte counts over time. Over the 96-week follow-up, levels of immunoglobulins remained unchanged, according to Krieger who showed graphs with straight lines for these values over the course of the OLE. Due to the potential of suppressing activation of both T and B cells over time, anti-CD40 therapies have long been considered a promising mechanism for control of MS. However, clinical development of first-generation drugs was abandoned because of an association with thromboembolism. 'Frexalimab has been engineered to avoid these events through a change in the Fc receptors with reduces downstream inflammatory events,' said Krieger. The long-term data support this premise. Over 2 years, there was one pulmonary embolism, but this exception was observed in a patient with a viral illness and a genetic predisposition for an inflammatory response, according to Krieger. When surveying other adverse events, 'nothing jumps out' in the OLE relative to the randomized phase. One potential exception is a rise in liver function tests observed in two (4%) patients on the 1200-mg dose. Only one of these patients discontinued therapy, and the levels returned to normal over time in both. The effects of the anti-CD40 mechanism on both the adaptive and innate immune systems suggest frexalimab might offer efficacy for both progressive and relapsing MS. In the ongoing phase 3 program, one of the trials (FREXALT) is enrolling patients with relapsing MS. The other (FREVIVA) is enrolling patients with progressive disease. Fulfilling its Promise Commenting on the results, Amit Bar-Or, MD, Chief of the Multiple Sclerosis Division, the Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, described frexalimab as 'a very interesting drug.' He agreed that the CD40 ligand is a promising target in MS but cautioned that these phase 2 data cannot answer the most interesting questions. This includes the more robust evidence of safety and efficacy from phase 3 trials, but it remains unclear whether the benefits extend beyond controlling relapsing disease. 'I think there is particular interest in whether it will also show extended benefit in progressive MS, and this will be a major focus of interest from the next set of studies,' Bar-Or said.
Wall Street Journal
5 days ago
- Wall Street Journal
How ‘Inflammaging' Drives Cancer—and Points to New Treatments
People are more likely to get cancer as they age. Dr. Miriam Merad has an unconventional idea of how that might be reversed: using allergy drugs and other seemingly unlikely medications to damp a condition known as 'inflammaging.' The immunologist and oncologist has spent years examining malignant tumors to learn why people over age 50 account for nine in 10 cancer diagnoses in the U.S. She and her research team at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City have homed in on an answer: the aging immune system. Their studies of individual immune cells in human lung tumors, as well as in old mice, have revealed how chronic, or pathogenic, inflammation in older people—dubbed inflammaging—interferes with the immune system and fuels cancer growth.
