So there’s been a bit of blogosphere buzz (say that 3 times fast) regarding sunscreen. In case you haven’t heard, the topic stems from a recent report from the Environmental Working Group.

The report found that 4 out of 5 sunscreens did not offer adequate protection from the sun, or contained harmful ingredients with “significant safety concerns.” So what’s the big deal? Well, it’s this New York Times article. The article questions the accuracy of the EWG’s report, stating that their rating system is “arbitrary and without basis in any accepted scientific standard.”

This morning the EWG posted a blog about the New York Times article that I think is worth reading.

I found this, from the NYT’s article, particularly interesting: “The group is especially concerned about the safety of a compound called oxybenzone, which is used in most popular sunscreens. But the research on oxybenzone is limited.”

EWG’s retort to this statement was that “Oxybenzone is a chemical to avoid because there’s clear evidence that it gets into our blood, and because there’s some data implicating it in hormone disruption and UV-related damage.”

Now to be honest, I don’t know whether or not there’s “clear evidence” or “limited research,” but I think EWG says it best when they say “There are sunscreens on the market that offer better protection without all those health risks. Why on earth wouldn’t we recommend them?” Sure, the research may be limited; there may be no conclusive evidence showing the harmful effects of oxybenzone. But if there’s a better option out there, why not try it? The author of the New York Times article even admits that the research is limited, so what’s wrong with an alternative?

What do you think? Is talking about sunscreen safety mere fear mongering? Will you be switching sunscreens this summer?

 PDF

Filed under: Green Living