Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Shady Sunscreen Practices Eclipse Consumer Protection

By

When I saw the CNN report, I sat down with the collection I have of sunscreens and logged onto the Environmental Working Group (EWG) website. EWG gives a green light to products earning 0, 1 or 2, based on an evaluation considering broad spectrum protection from zinc or titanium, stability in sunlight, and few hazardous ingredients.

You can select the brand and type in key words to easily find a specific product in their system.  I found that three of the sunscreen products I had been using, including a Coppertone spray (rated a “7”) and a Neutrogena lotion (also a 7), fell into the “high hazard” category and were considered only marginally effective.  (Sprays are singled out for extra disapproval because they can introduce hazardous particles directly to the lungs.) Three others in my bag had earned a “3”.  I am most angry about a Lancome cosmetic – a little bottle of foundation that cost about $40 and is identified by EWG as containing hazardous chemicals.

In its “national brand buying guide,” the Environmental Working Group’s recommendation list, there is also a list at the bottom of brands without one reasonably safe or effective product. Bet you’re as surprised as I was that not one single Coppertone sunblock product is recommended.

It would be great if Oprah would do a show about this – that’s probably the best way to reach consumers, the FDA and (possibly) to get the manufacturers to start competing to have the safest and most effective product.  Until then, I recommend printing out the EWG National Brand Buying Guide or their low hazard/effective list and taking it along to the drug store to find a sunscreen that won’t turn you or your kids into fried bags of hazardous waste.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I just checked the sunscreen I have been using (a Neutrogena product), and it is rated poorly.  I will say that it is effective though in preventing a sunburn.  As a Melanoma survivor, all of this is maddening.  They should only offer sunscreens that protect skin from skin cancer; otherwise, what is the point?  And for the love of God, it shouldn’t CAUSE skin cancer!  Maybe I should just buy the SPF clothing after all.  Thanks for the info, but this will take more investigation & a chat with my dermatologist before I can determine what is what.  Sigh.

  2. He has been on the case for a while, but this seems to be a new development:

    <

    p>http://www.allamericanpatriots…

    <

    p>

    08/23/2007 — WASHINGTON – Senator John Kerry issued the following statement today in response to a new set of regulations proposed by the Food and Drug Administration. Kerry has been working with Senate colleagues to encourage the FDA to take strong steps to improve misleading labeling, a lack of standards and questions about toxicity in sunscreens.

    “Today’s proposal to create a useful rating system is a good step that is long overdue,” Kerry said. “Everyday parents buy sunscreen to protect their children from skin cancer and sun damage but we know very little about the impact or effectiveness of many lotions and sprays. I urge the FDA to finalize this rule quickly and provide consumers with the confidence that these products do what they claim.”

    More than a year ago, Congress approved new regulations calling for the FDA to set comprehensive, mandatory sunscreen safety standards. Kerry is working on a letter with colleagues urging the FDA to finalize the rule as soon as possible.

    <

    p>Dare we say, follow up is needed.

    • Thanks for this link.  Interesting that this August 2007 letter from Sen. Kerry mentions congressional authorization that occurred in 2006.  He was calling for quick action a year after Congress had recognized the problem.  Now TWO years have gone by.  I realize that federal agencies are slow to act, but this is nuts.  

      <

      p>Why is it that recalls can be issued for automobile safety or defective infant cribs or lead paint in toys, but these sunscreen products continue with carte blanche?  In the U.S., sunscreens are considered to be over-the-counter drugs, not cosmetics.  If a drug is ineffective and harmful, shouldn’t it be recalled?

      • This:

        <

        p>

        “Why is it that recalls can be issued for automobile safety or defective infant cribs or lead paint in toys, but these sunscreen products continue with carte blanche?  In the U.S., sunscreens are considered to be over-the-counter drugs, not cosmetics.  If a drug is ineffective and harmful, shouldn’t it be recalled?”

        <

        p>is a good point, well taken, and a good question, shack.  Thanks for bringing it up.  

  3. I just bought some of the recommended Walgreens sunscreen. It was hard to spot on the shelf because it comes in a very small tub rather than a bottle or tube like the others. That should make it easier to apply to a fidgety child!

Archives