The ban on sunscreen to save coral could do more harm than good? | Fashion

TheIn the past year, Pacific Palau announced that, starting in 2020, it will ban sunscreens containing certain chemicals related to coral degradation. Tourists will be confiscated the offending sunscreens and anyone who imports them would be liable to a fine of $ 1,000. In addition, Hawaii's ban on sunscreens containing oxybenzone or octinoxate – the two most controversial chemicals – enters into force in 2021, and tourists swimming in certain tourist sites in Mexico are already banned from wear non-biodegradable sunscreens.

If all this sounds serious, it is because it is. Sunscreen is supposed to be a very good thing. It's been a holiday since we learned about the harmful effects of UVB – and, later, UVA rays – in the last century. It is therefore a matter of nostalgia, adventure and long-awaited fugues in warmer climates. The announcement that the coconut scented creams on which we have applied protection could be toxic to the environment is as welcome as a seven-day rainfall forecast. So where are we heading into the summer?

First, the basics. Sunscreens are divided into two categories. Chemical sunscreens (also called counter-intuitively "organic" counter-filters) absorb harmful UV rays. Mineral sunscreens (also called physical sunscreens) create a shield-like layer above the skin to deflect them.

The bans focus on some chemical sunscreens, including oxybenzone, one of the most commonly used ingredients, causing particular anger. Dr. Craig Downs, expert in 2015 on the impacts of sunscreens on marine life, suggested that the ingredient (an organic compound also called benzophenone-3) had a toxic effect on coral, even at an equivalent concentration to a drop of 6.5 Olympic Pools.

But not everyone agrees that there is a problem. Emma Meredith, executive director of the UK's Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (CTPA), is "disappointed" by the bans. She cites a lack of scientific evidence linking oxybenzone, octinoxate (a compound that absorbs UVB) and coral reef fading. She adds: "The cosmetic ingredients and their safety are the subject of constant scrutiny by the European Commission and the EU Member States."

L'Oréal, which sells chemical and mineral sunscreens, is working with the Monaco Scientific Center to study the effects of its UV filters on coral bleaching. The report, published this year, indicates that L'Oréal's five main organic filters do not adversely affect coral.

"Each solar filter provides a specific type of protection. That's why sunscreen products or day-to-day photoprotection products are usually composed of a combination of filters to provide the most appropriate protection, "said a spokesman for the company. Be subjected to a strict safety badessment for the man and the environment before being put on sale.

But consumers are taking things in hand, brands reacting in turn. Worldwide, Google's research on "reef-safe sunscreens" has more than quadrupled in the past five years. Brands such as Caudalie, Banana Boat and Badger have added "oxybenzone-free" or "reef-friendly" labels to the products concerned. Soltan Boots states that none of its sunscreens contain oxybenzone or octinoxate because "we are working hard to make sure we buy ingredients that protect environments to worldwide".

The French skin care brand Avene has never used oxybenzone, but took the "conscious decision" to remove octinoxate in 2010, according to Marine Dumas, its international product manager for sun care. The brand has now developed a patented UV filter system as part of its Skin Protect, Ocean Respect commitment, and has partnered with Pur Projet on a socio-environmental project for coral regeneration in Indonesia. Dumas welcomes the bans of Hawaii and Palau. "This will force cosmetic companies that still use these sunscreens to find other solutions," she says.

Nevertheless, there are concerns about what chemical sunscreens do to us in addition to protecting. Many advocates of "clean beauty" – those who avoid products containing suspected toxins – are already boycotting chemical sunscreens because of the possibility that they will be absorbed by the body. A recent study, published in the JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association, revealed that sunscreen chemicals can enter your bloodstream after just 24 hours of use, although there is still no data to determine if they have a negative effect. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has called for additional testing to determine the safety of ingredients for repeated use, while encouraging consumers to continue using sunscreens for protection.

At Look Fantastic, an online beauty seller, research on mineral sunscreens has increased by 314% year-over-year. So, should we all just switch to mineral sunscreens? There are pros and cons; not all with concerns about the environment or safety.

One of the advantages of chemical sunscreens over mineral filters is their ability to penetrate the skin in an invisible way and to be formulated into thinner, less oily creams and gels. Mineral particles are known to leave the skin with a chalky and revealing finish. They often become milky in contact with water or sweat, making them less popular in water resistant sun creams. The formulas have improved in recent years, but full reddit threads remain dedicated to finding mineral products that will not leave white marks, especially on darker skins.

Inevitably, mineral filters bring their own environmental controversies. Many formulas use nanoparticles of zinc oxide or titanium, which, according to some studies, could themselves damage the coral and be absorbed by other marine species. As a result, brands such as Ren and Coola have developed "non-nano" sunscreens (using particles larger than 100 nanometers).

Are you starting to feel the need for a chemistry degree to follow you? This is the danger. A lack of clarity around sun protection that could potentially prevent users from using it is the last thing health authorities – or the rest of us – need when issues are so important. In a report published in 2018 by Cancer Research UK, ultraviolet rays were the third largest contributor to the number of cancer cases in the UK, while a 2015 survey by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of 2000 British adults revealed that only 8% knew the true meaning of the SPF clbadification.

"CTPA is still concerned that unsubstantiated claims about the safety and effectiveness of sunscreen products undermine sunscreen products in general," Meredith said. "This could have serious health consequences if consumers chose to avoid the use of sunscreen because the confidence in them had diminished."

Professor Jörg Wiedenmann, head of the Coral Reef laboratory at the University of Southampton, said comparative studies were needed "to show that [oxybenzone and octinoxate] to have a less damaging effect on coral, while also protecting human beings ". In other words, protecting the environment from sunscreens is undeniably important, but protecting us from the sun can not escape us.

He adds that while oxybenzone seems to affect coral reefs, it is far from being the biggest threat they face.

"The degradation of coral reefs resulting from coral bleaching is a direct effect of temperature anomalies caused by climate change. Sunscreen compounds can contribute to background stress on corals, but so do other factors, such as nutrient pollution and overfishing, which have far greater effects. Sometimes there is a tendency to panic and to risk people coming to wrong conclusions and turning away from real difficulties. "

The most important thing is to wear sunscreen no matter what you do. If you stick to chemical sunscreens but want to avoid oxybenzone, Avene products (from £ 15) and Boots Soltan (from £ 3.50) use alternative organic filters. Or if you're heading to a reef and wish to try a non-mineral formula, the Badger's (16.99 £) zinc oxide and chamomile and calendula sunscreen is perfectly suitable, while the Clean Screen Mineral SPF 30's Ren Clean Screen is vegan -nano and comes in a recycled plastic tube, combining all your ecological quests into one.

Wiedenmann points out that in places like Hawaii, the closed bays in which many people swim near the corals are the most endangered; precautions therefore have a meaning. What about the rest of us? "If I was near a reef, I would avoid using a sunscreen containing oxybenzone," he says. "But what if I were in the UK, in my backyard? I do not think I would be too worried. "