Sunscreen and coral

[AptaMer]

Sunscreens can be toxic to coral reefs, particularly ones containing the molecule oxybenzone, which is a very popular additive. It is not the only substance in sunscreens that make coral polyps sick, though.

Those interested in the science might be interested in this article

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-015-0227-7

DAN has issued a bulletin about it

http://www.alertdiver.com/Sunscreen-Pollution

As has NOAA

http://cdhc.noaa.gov/_docs/Site%20Bulletin_Sunscreen_final.pdf

I was surprised to find out just how much sunscreen gets emitted by swimmers in the water every year.

So what can a pale, sunburnable mer do to help?

Well, the alerts do make suggestions for "less unfriendly" sunscreens, but you may find yourself scrutinizing some pretty strange looking ingredient lists trying to figure out what could be harmful. Also, the impact of releasing large amounts of metal such as zinc & titanium into reef waters isn't exactly known yet either. It's clear, though, that there are some real baddies like oxybenzone that you shouldn't even buy.

There is the alternative of building up resistance to sun exposure rather than relying on sunscreens.

In particular, one can avoid buying sunscreens with massive amounts of active ingredients making SPF claims of 30, 50 and even 100.

A chemist I know worked for a cosmetics company early in his career, and he said any claims of Sun Protection Factor higher than 8 are BS. You might find this article interesting

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/08/what-spf-does-and-doesnt-tell-you-about-your-sunscreen/261180/

Sunscreen-free is possible other ways, though. Wearing a wetsuit, even a very thin one, removes the need to wear sunscreen. One way to go when diving in warm water without a wetsuit is to wear those sun- and jellyfish-protective lycra suits instead of wearing a bathing suit and slathering yourself with sunscreen all over.

LOL- just had to add a photo of my all-time favourite protective suit. (Anybody know where you can buy these?)

http://cache1.asset-cache.net/gc/148870682-young-boy-snorkelling-in-nemo-stinger-suit-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=PThCJHGgNZBC7Og28hL88iGYXsh8HZk7unKXNixjhylK5keX AQJT7VW7%2BfrqchVQ

So maybe other mers can suggest ideas for reducing sunscreen pollution?

[Echidna]

Dat suit! :swoon:
Why can't they make more ocean life themed suits?

I'm quite pale, but I never wear sunscreen.
Instead, I'm careful and cover up.
In fact, I had a few bad burns, but not from the sun, from chlorine!

The face remains a critical point for me. A snorkel can help there, although I've also worn my fullbody dragon costume when there was no shade at all.

ps. there are hints that sunscreen (and its ingredients) are carcinogenic.
I wouldn't trust a study claiming the contrary, as there is a gigantic business behind this.

[Mermaid Wesley]

I have worries about skin cancer, as melanoma runs in my family. So I won't forgo Sunscreen for that reason. ( I also don't buy into blanket statements like sunscreen causes cancer. Give me ingredient names and then sure, but sunscreen is not a chemical and not uniformly formulated get me?)

I really like that suit! Cool thing about mermaids is that you don't actually have to sunscreen the bottom half of your body!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeaGlass Siren]

I burn from the sun :0 I still don't wear sunscreen.
i guess you could say that I, too, like to live dangerously. :P

[AptaMer]

Ha ha, I know where you're coming from, SeaGlass. I never used sunscreen for years until I found this Hawaiian Tropic SPF 4 thing that has a luscious coconut scent (I'm a coconut addict-LOL)

Then when my chemist colleague told me about the SPF number scam, 2 years ago I decided to so a little experimenting. So I got some (Hawaiian Tropic) SPF 8, SPF 15 and SPF 30 and tested them on sequential days out in the sun for the same amount of time, and also with different sunscreens in different places.

I didn't get very far with the SPF 30. It made me get itchy, so I gave it away to someone.

I really couldn't see or feel any difference between the effects of the SPF 8 and the SPF 15, so my informal, qualitative test of the two would confirm what some are saying about high SPF numbers being BS. I would say that the SPF 8 and the SPF 15 gave noticeably longer protection from getting red than the SPF 4 did- but not twice as long or 3.75 times as long.

So last year I decided to try 2 things.

First I did a series of staged sun exposures, without sunscreen and slowly building up the time from 20 minutes to a few hours. It worked pretty good. Even though nobody noticed it, I think I actually became (possibly?) a little bit brown and didn't get sunburned during the whole process. A lifetime first! Much better than my usual switching between white and red. Also, I got blonde highlights in my usually boring brown hair. Woo hoo.

So then one of my dance partners told me about coconut oil being a good sunburn preventive, so of course I had to try that one out. Will describe my preliminary results in a later post.

[AptaMer]

Also, tossing this science article out here in case some find it helpful

www.jabfm.org/content/24/6/735.full.pdf (http://www.jabfm.org/content/24/6/735.full.pdf)

Takehome messages:

Most sunscreens that focus on UVB radiation are probably counterproductive, not providing real protection against melanoma "there is no convincing evidence that sunscreen use protects against CMM. Several studies show either no difference in CMM rates between sunscreen users and nonusers or a slight increased risk of CMM in sunscreen users among certain populations"
Some studies indicate that consistent use of full-spectrum sunscreens is protective
Some studies indicate that cumulative, progressive and consistent sunlight exposure can build up protection (so my experiment was on the right track) compared to the usual summertime "go out in the sun & come in when you get burned" behavior (my paraphrase)

[AptaMer]

there are hints that sunscreen (and its ingredients) are carcinogenic.


Hi Echidna,

As the above-linked paper indicates, there are studies out there that have actually found a higher incidence of melanoma in sunscreen users. This may not be because the ingredients are carcinogenic, though.

It's possible that because the manufacturers and media writers oversell the protective ability of these products, in particular giving people the idea that products with massive SPF numbers like 30, 50 & 100 can allow them to be out in direct sun for multiple hours. So people slather themselves with sunscreen, and then go out in the sun way longer than they should, with or without sunscreen, and since most non-full spectrum sunscreens don't protect against melanoma, you're seeing a behaviorally-caused increase in cancer incidence, not an increase due to direct carcinogenicity.

Also, I personally have heard people say to me they think the SPF number tells you the number of hours you can be out in the sun. I have no idea where they get this idea, but I try to disabuse them of it- not always successfully.

[Echidna]

^
yes, I know the higher melanoma rate among sunscreen users might very well be the false security these people have.
Also, there are different radiations- one that simply tans your skin (and builds vitamin D, so highly useful and wanted)- this is the one sunscreen blocks-, and then the one that penetrates deep and doesn't do much but unravel the dna in your skin cells, so to speak, aka cause melanoma.
That's the radiation sunscreen lets pass through.

This alone would already explain the effect, whether or not chemical ingredients are harmful or not.
I didn't elaborate because I was feeling very lazy.
Also, unless someone is wiping out an entire coral reef with their sunscreen, I really don't care if someone thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread.

It produces a load of ickiness in the water supply though, not to mention pools and lakes.
But that goes for most skin care products.

[AniaR]

Thanks for the great info!

[AniaR]

I posted a thread a while back about the importance of sunscreen but this is great info from the other side of the coin

[Merman Storm]

One reason to use the higher SPF sunscreens is not so much as to get better protection, but to get at least some protection if you happen to have a thin spot, where you did not get good coverage.

Ive been thinking about tails that go up farther than the waist. If made of neoprene, covering more of your body will help with cold water. Now, there is another reason; more sun blockage. I wondering if making the tail like a farmer john wet suit would be a good idea. The shoulder straps would stop any tenancy for the tail to slip down as well.

[Shyren Shey]

I wondering if making the tail like a farmer john wet suit would be a good idea. The shoulder straps would stop any tenancy for the tail to slip down as well.

The image of Mertail overalls is endlessly amusing to me right now. :D

[AptaMer]

One of the problems with the sunscreen business has been the BS companies are allowed to spread about protection, and in particular about whether their product genuinely protects agains UVA wavelengths.

Fortunately in the USA the FDA cracked down on misleading claims, and manufacturers can only claim "full spectrum" protection if their product specifically inhibits UVA I & II group wavelengths. In the EU they have long had the same rules, and in 2013 Canada cracked down on hyped manufacturers' claims:

http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2013/06/canada-plans-strong-sunscreen-warnings

Mers who are looking for a sunscreen with genuine full spectrum protection, and who would like to know ingredients so they can avoid coral-harming brands might find this article helpful:

http://www.15minutebeauty.com/2014/02/full-uv-spectrum-sunscreen.html

[PhaylennMurúch]

I guess I'm on the opposite end, I seem to be a living white balance. I use SPF 85 and above if I'm deliberately going out to swim or otherwise frolic in the sun and 65-70 for a base daily sunscreen because I've found that my pale AF flesh burns like crazy in anything below 60 and I look like an angry raspberry macaron.
I'm working on a fuller coverage top that'll mean that I don't have quite as much exposed, both to prevent burning and to reflect less so as to not blind people

[AptaMer]

And now this article adds to the debate. It seems some companies are putting exaggerated claims on their packages.

http://time.com/4340120/sunscreen-spf-uv/

[Mermaid Jaffa]

And now this article adds to the debate. It seems some companies are putting exaggerated claims on their packages.

http://time.com/4340120/sunscreen-spf-uv/

I once saw SPF 120! I used to think 60+ was too much, but 120?