Increased Carbon Dioxide (and equivalent) - CO2e - levels are a significant and harmful contributor to climate change. In turn, CO2is directly responsible for the rise in ocean temperatures and acidification, two major drivers of global reef degradation. To further help coral reef ecosystems and play our part against climate change, we are committed to reducing our carbon emissions in two major aspects of P4O Sun Care: packaging and transport.
Plastic Made from Sugar Cane
Most plastic is made from non-renewable petroleum feedstocks. The extraction process and conversion into plastic releases carbon into the atmosphere, adding to the climate issue. We needed to find an alternative to traditional plastic that lived up to the highest possible standards of social and environmental responsibility. So, this year we challenged ourselves to find a smarter packaging alternative: sugarcane plastic tubes.
We chose sugar plastic for a number of reasons, but the best one is that it comes from a renewable source - and that it actually removes carbon from our atmosphere. Just like trees, as sugarcane grows, it takes carbon out of the atmosphere. Sugarcane husks even generate bioelectricity in the factory that makes the sugar plastic, further reducing the carbon emissions from the production process, and in turn reducing climate change driven coral degradation.
The sugarcane used to make our tubes is sustainably harvested from Brazil. 90% of sugarcane cultivation and harvesting in Brazil is concentrated on converted pasture lands more than 2,000 km from the Amazon Rainforest Region, and a government regulatory framework bans planting in areas with high levels of biodiversity. Crops are primarily rain fed and produced using organic fertilisers. Finally, the sugarcane production is carried out under a grower/supplier code of conduct that affords new rights to workers and ensures they have a better quality of life.
Our sugarcane tubes are 100% recyclable through kerbside collection, but plastic that’s not recycled properly adds to landfills and pollutes the ocean. Our vision is for zero waste and we’ll continue to innovate to make our packaging more sustainable.
Carbon neutral shipping
'Because receiving a parcel shouldn’t cost the Planet', we are now shipping all orders with Sendle, Australia’s first 100% carbon neutral delivery service. By supporting genuinely world-changing initiatives aimed at preserving and regenerating natural ecosystems, Sendle ensures that all deliveries have a net carbon footprint of zero. Actually zero!
Sendle calculates the highest amount of carbon that could be generated by any given parcel send. This generates a carbon yield number. Using that number as a guide, Sendle uses each parcel contribution to fund sustainability projects via South Pole. By ‘offsetting’ our carbon emission with each parcel, we ensure your orders don’t release more CO2 into the atmosphere, which in turns helps coral reefs by mitigating climate change. What's more, we now ship in compostable satchels! Enjoy free carbon neutral delivery Australia-wide for all order over $50 and over $100 to NZ.
Everyday your skin goes into defence mechanisms from UV radiation, even with regular SPF application. In other words, you don’t necessarily need to be sunburnt to suffer the long-term effects of UV-exposure. While using a broad-spectrum sunscreen is vital, we shouldn’t solely rely on sunscreen to give our skin all the protection and care it needs from sun exposure. This is why After Sun care is essential for skin health...
Australia’s exposure to UV radiation is higher than most countries; the burn time can be as rapid as five minutes. This makes Caucasian Australians and New Zealanders 13 times more likely to develop melanoma skin cancer than the global average. Subsequently, the probability of prematurely ageing skin, pigmentation, sensitivities in these two countries are highest worldwide.
In this context, daily SPF application is crucial. Sunscreen protects your skin by absorbing/ reflecting UV rays. P4O mineral sunscreen works by reflecting UVA/UVB rays away from the skin, like a protective mirror. But no sunscreen can provide 100% protection from UV radiation. SPF 30 sunscreens reflect on average 97% of UV rays, while SPF 50 sunscreens reflect about 98% - only one percent more. Above SPF 50, the extra percentage of UV reflected is negligible. Without proper re-application, a skin exposed to direct sunlight for too long may lead to a sun burn. In that case, most people will reach out for post-sun treatments, in order to cool and soothe the burn. But did you know that applying post-sun treatment is essential to any sun-exposed skin?
According to Dr. Jean Laing, skincare creator at LaGaia Unedited: “Your skin is an internal and external reflection of your health. Many people believe that drinking 8 glasses of water day is sufficient for body hydration. Skin hydration is another story, being tucked into layers of protective membrane, it requires penetrating oils, vitamins and nutrients."
“Post-sun treatment is critical in helping prevent today’s sun exposure from becoming tomorrow’s visible damage,” she says. With a moisture-locking base of Organic Aloe Vera and Sodium Hyaluronate, P4O After Sun Solution is designed to help comfort the skin and replenish moisture loss due to excess sun exposure. Formula delivers powerful antioxidants and soothing ingredients that help your stressed skin bounce back after a long day in the sun.
Finally, if you are gradually building your tan, moisturising your skin everyday is key to maintaining a heathy glow. On hot summer days, P4O After Sun Solution is the perfect skin tonic and non-oily moisturiser. Applied daily, it helps restore and maintain healthy skin pH, moisture and plumpness. Well hydrated and oxygenated, your skin will cope much better to UV-induced oxidative stress and maintain a healthy summer glow.
What to do in case of a sun burn...
Over-exposure to UV works in a similar way to an overdose of thermal radiation (heat). When your skin burns, the damage spreads through the skin cells after the exposure has ceased. Proper after sun care will help stop the burn and put your skin on the path of recovery.
Take a cool shower: This will help stop the burn from spreading through your skin and give you a instant cooling relief.
Apply P4O After Sun Solution as a mask. This will further remove heat from skin and reduce inflammation and oxidative stress. Re-apply to saturate skin with hydration. For an increased cooling sensation, keep your P4O After Sun tube in the fridge.
Give your skin a break from any harsh treatment such as irritants and chemical products, and if you can, delay shaving or waxing.
Stay hydrated. Drinking fluids during and after sun exposure helps replenish your skin with the minerals it needs for proper cell function and repair against oxidative stress.
Avoid further sun exposure. A sun-exposed skin will take about 24 hours to repair at a cellular level. Give your skin time to recover between exposure and always wear broad-spectrum SPF. P4O sunscreens are deeply moisturising and ingredients natural and gentle on all skins, even the most sensitive.
Can you feel it? The change in the air? It’s undeniable…winter is taking over. Your bikinis are already feeling neglected and you probably won’t touch your sunscreen tube for the next few months... Big mistake! Skin experts align on this: to avoid cumulative damages on the skin, SPF must be used all-year-round.
The sun may feel weaker or even absent in winter…but that doesn’t mean skin-damaging UV rays are not hitting your skin. UVA rays, in particular, are present all-year-round. For this reason, wearing sunscreen throughout the year - even in the coldest months - is critical for those who want to keep your skin looking younger for longer. To fully understand it, here is a little refresher on UVA and UVB rays.
UVA | Ultraviolet A rays, also called "long wave" rays, make up 95 percent of the rays that reach the surface of the Earth. They can penetrate the skin much deeper than UVB rays, and are responsible for signs of aging (like dark spots and wrinkles). They also can initiate skin cancers. These are the rays that make you more tan (ref: gq.com). UVA rays can penetrate glass and clouds – you are thus likely to be exposed to UVA rays all year round, even in the shade and indoors.
UVB | Ultraviolet B rays, or "shortwave" rays, don’t penetrate the skin as deeply. They're what causes redness and sunburns. They are most intense from early spring to early fall, and during the day’s sunniest hours. UVB rays are not as likely to penetrate glass as UVA rays, but even though they dwindle in the winter, many can reach the Earth’s surface and are easily reflected off snow and ice. This makes them a bigger threat on the ski slopes, and at higher altitudes on sunny days (ref: gq.com). If you are hitting the slopes this winter, remember that reflection from snow can increase UV radiation by up to 50%, and increases by 15% for every kilometre in altitude.
Dermatologists recommend the use of a broad-spectrum sunscreen on a daily basis and all year round, to prevent cumulative damages caused by sun exposure, such as fine lines, wrinkles, discoloration and even skin cancer. According to Dr. Jean Laing, founder of the spa brand LaGaia Unedited, "most people underestimate the dangers of UV-exposure in winter, and associate sun-damage to sun-burn only. UVA rays are the most insidious because they hit the skin unseenand cause cumulative impacts over time". In essence, "if there is a shadow, there is UVA, even indoors!" To mitigate their effects, Dr. Jean Laing recommends wearing SPF daily – as part of your morning skin routine. “Sunscreen is your #1 sun and ageing control…You may not see it now, but in 10 to 20 years you will see a huge difference in your skin”.
We humans have lost our natural barriers against harmful UV-rays...Fur, dust and mud use to be our sun-screens. Today, our skin's health depends on the use of protective clothing and creams. Corals on the other hand, had to come up with a better solution to withstand the damaging effects of excessive sun exposure. Corals are a complex mix of plant and animal...they start their life as larvae floating in the water column, but eventually have to settle for life on the reef - ideally somewhere sunny - as they require the energy of the sun to grow into large coral colonies. Being stationary animals, corals can't take shelter from the sun when they've had enough of it, or apply sunscreen during the strong hours of the sun...Or is there something we can’t see? Something hiding under the surface?
When shining a special type of light on the reef, corals reveal colours that cannot be seen with the naked eye. They become fluorescent under UV-light (or more commonly known as black light). For many years, we enjoyed the beauty of coral flurorescence without really knowing it's origin and importance. In the 2000's, studies revealed that fluorescence may actually be a way for corals to protect their skin from the sun (Roth et al., 2006). Special proteins within the coral tissue are responsible for synthesising a layer of fluorescent pigments (called FP layer) that - very much like an inbuilt sunscreen - is capable of regulating the amount of light that the coral is exposed to in a process called photo-protection.
In excessive sunlight, the FP layer is able to dissipate excess energy into wavelengths, restoring suitable condition for photosynthesis and healty coral function. It is also believed that fluorescent proteins can help corals through period of heat stress by reducing oxidative stress within the coral tissue, thus keeping corals from bleaching for longer periods (Roth et al., 2006; Shalin et al., 2000; Bou-Abdallah et al., 2006). During a bleaching event, the fluorescent layer becomes visible under normal light as all other pigments within the coral dermis have been lost (see picture below). In that context, the FP layer can be considered the last line of defence for severely bleached corals during a marine heat wave. Much more than a sun-protection layer, the FP layer could help enhance resistance of corals to mass-bleaching...read more about coral bleaching here.
We've had many customers ask why we don't manufacture anything higher than SPF30 when it comes to sunscreen. This decision wasn't made lightly... During the formulation of the P4O sunscreen, we had to find the right synergy of ingredients in order to create our perfect sunblock: a product that works and lasts, feels great, and cares for the skin and natural ecosystems. And finally, we had to love our product above all...otherwise what's the point right?
Our intention with this product was to provide high sun protection with a 100% natural formula, using the mineral zinc oxide as our only active ingredient. For many goods reasons, we made the conscious (and unanimous) decision of formulating no higher than SPF30. And here is why…
Reason #1: High-SPF products cannot be natural
Formulating with SPF50 went against our very first intention to create a 100% natural sunscreen. We simply couldn’t manufacture a 100% natural product that also was SPF50. In order to reach an SPF higher than 30, the addition of chemicals was required. The reality is, no sunscreen blocks 100% of UV rays. The sun protection factor (SPF) is a measure of protection sunscreen gives against UVB radiation. In lab conditions, SPF30 filters 97% of UVB, SPF50 filters 98% and SPF100 up to 99%.
Reason #2: High-SPF products pose greater risk to health
According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), high-SPF products require higher concentrations of sun-filtering chemicals than low-SPF sunscreens. Some of these ingredients may pose health risks when they penetrate the skin and have been linked to tissue damage and potential hormone disruption. Some may trigger allergic skin reactions. If studies showed that high-SPF products were better at reducing skin damage and skin cancer risk, that extra chemical exposure might be justified. But they don’t, so choosing sunscreens with lower concentrations of active ingredients – SPF 30 instead of SPF 70, for example – is prudent.
Reason #3: Consumers misuse high-SPF products
Many studies have found that people are misled by the claims on high-SPF sunscreen bottles. They are more likely to use high-SPF products improperly and as a result may expose themselves to more harmful ultraviolet radiation than people relying on products with lower SPF values. As a result, they get as many UVB-inflicted sunburns as unprotected sunbathers and are likely to absorb more damaging UVA radiation.
P4O ®, Way to Go
Formulating a SPF30 sunscreen with zinc oxide allowed us to create an honest and versatile product with ingredients and results we can trust. The mineral filter zinc oxide provides excellent broad-spectrum protection and has several advantages over synthetic actives. Zinc particles sit on top of your skin and act as a reflective barrier (like a mirror) to block both UVAs & UVBs from penetrating your skin and causing damage and ageing. Moreover, zinc oxide is the only FDA* and TGA** approved Broad Spectrum sun protection ingredient, and unlike any other active ingredient, its concentration in a product has no limitation. It is also the EWG (Environmental Working Group) nº1 ingredient for sun protection. Finally, it is the only reef-safe UV filter available. In order to provide high sun protection, zinc should be at a minimum concentration of 20%. P4O sunscreen contains 22% of zinc oxide, providing natural high & broad spectrum sun protection in a product designed for face & body and worthy of your whole family, including kids and pets. Add to this Shea Butter, sustainably harvested Tasmanian Beeswax and a garden of spa-quality botanicals and you have P4O sunblock! 100% natural, 3-hour water resistant and completely reef-safe. Find more about our products and general sunscreen facts on our FAQs page.
* Food & Drug Administration (US Government).
** Therapeutic Goods Administration (Australian Government).
With summer fast approaching, what better time for a quick refresh on SPF fundamentals? We all have experienced the first summer day sunburn, from over-exposing our pasty white skins after a long winter. No harm should come to you this summer if you follow these must-know & do’s .
Australians are particularly aware of the role UV-rays have in fast-tracking skin-aging and increasing chances of skin cancer. Ensuring your SPF protects you with a maximum UVA filter is extremely important, particularly from an ageing point of view as these rays penetrate deeper into the skin and through glass and are as strong in the winter as they are on sunny days. They’re the main cause of patchiness, spider veins, enlargement of blood vessels, increased darkening and collagen and elastin damage while UVB rays are those that cause burning. Think of it like that UVA – Aging, UVB – Burning. Your SPF should protect you from both, so look out for the symbols UVA/UVB or the words ‘Broad Spectrum’ when choosing a brand.
Physical vs chemical
Physical filters (zinc oxide or titanium dioxide) sits on the surface of the skin deflecting rays like a mirror, while chemical filters (everything else), absorb the UV energy to prevent it from penetrating the skin. Chemical formulations are generally lighter and invisible, however most experts still recommend physical SPF as it offers both UVA and UVB protection and doesn't irritate sensitive skin.
It is recommended to wear sunscreen between SPF15 and SFF30 to give the correct level of protection. Anything below an SPF15 gives very little protection. As SPF30 blocks 97% of UVs and SPF50 98%, it is often asked whether anything higher than SPF30 is worth the greater level of sunscreen chemicals. Generally, it’s not essential unless you have a specific condition where SPF50/60 is recommended (e.g. hyper-pigmentation) but most skin cancer charities state SPF30 applied correctly and regularly is sufficient and limits the concentration of sunscreen chemicals the skin is exposed to, particularly sensitive skins and children.
Our commitment to 100% natural
Did you know that there are currently no 100% natural sunscreens with SPF50 protection sold in Australia (even though it can be labelled as such)? That is because SPF50 requires adding chemicals. As a matter of fact, formulating SPF50 requires 3x the amount of chemical ingredients than SPF30 for only 1% more protection. At P4O, we committed a long time ago to 100% natural…that means zero compromise and full transparency on our formulas. Until research allows fully natural SPF50 formulas, we simply won’t make one.
Our hero product, the SPF30 sunblock, is broad spectrum, 3-hour water resistant and of course, a 100% natural. Icing on the cake, it is lightly scented with our signature blend created with Spa specialist LaGaia Unedited. This product combines the high protection of a sunblock, the feel of a moisturiser and the finish and look of a spa treatment.
shop our range
After years of carefree Slip, Slop, Slapping, beach goers and reef lovers have recently discovered that their chemical sunscreen was somehow poisoning their favourite aquatic playgrounds. To protect its coral reefs and the economy depending on them, the state of Hawaii was recently first in history to ban oxybenzone and octinoxate; two chemical UV-filters widely used in sunscreen formulation. Scientific studies have demonstrated the deadly toxicity of these two compounds on corals and other marine organisms. My question is, if chemical sunscreens are detrimental to coral reefs, how come we allow these products on our skin? After reading this, you will probably think Hawaii’s initiative is also doing a favour to its people...
Have you ever felt clueless reading the ingredients listed on the back of your sunscreen? The toxicity of chemical sunscreens has been published worldwide, with scientific reports going back to the late 90’s! The more informed I get on the topic, the more clueless I am on the reasons why these compounds were ever approved on the market... Oxybenzone and octinoxate are used in 97% of sunscreens and 70% of cosmetics on the market. Like most chemicals, they become problematic once they are absorbed through the skin and enter the bloodstream via the application of sunscreens and other personal care products.
Oxybenzone (aka Benzophenone-3) is a photo-toxicant, especially in the presence of ultraviolet light. This means that the greater the light intensity, especially in the UV and near-UV spectrum, new forms of toxicity manifest, and usually in a dose-dependent manner of both oxybenzone and light. It is directly absorbed through the skin and can be detected in urine within 30 minutes of application [1,2]. Oxybenzone can also contaminate semen , placenta and breast milk of marine mammals and humans [4,5]and is even linked to Hirschsprung’s disease, a development abnormality in humans in cases of prenatal exposure to oxybenzone . That explains why it is not recommended to use oxybenzone-based products during pregnancy, breast-feeding, or on children under the age of 2. I personally believe this is enough reason to avoid oxybenzone all around.
The most common pathological reaction to octinoxate is contact dermatitis and photo-allergic reactions [7-13].When seating on the skin, it is degraded by sunlight into toxic by-product. Once in the body, octinoxate can cause toxicity to a number of different organ systems.It is a fat-soluble chemical, which means that some of it that is absorbed by the body will be metabolized and excreted in urine, but much of it will be stored either in fat tissue or lipid-rich tissue such as the placenta [14,15]. In sunscreen formulations, octinoxate can react with avobenzone (another chemical filter) reducing the overall sun protection factor of the product, leading to photo-instability and an increase risk of sunburn .
The list of scientific studies linking these two ingredients to health drawbacks is very long. To further read about it, I recommend reading full reports on www.haereticus-lab.organd www.ewg.org. If you are now looking to avoid these ingredients, there are safer alternatives with mineral-based sunscreens that use zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide as UV-filters. P4O sunscreen is formulated using zinc oxide and is 100% natural and biodegradable.
1. Meeker, J.D., et al., Distribution, variability, and predictors of urinary concentrations of phenols and parabens among pregnant women in Puerto Rico.Environmental science & technology, 2013. 47(7): p. 3439-3447.
2. Gonzalez, G., A. Farbrot, and O. Larkö, Percutaneous absorption of benzophenone‐3, a common component of topical sunscreens.Clinical and experimental dermatology, 2002. 27(8): p. 691-694.
3. Zhang, T., et al., Benzophenone-type UV filters in urine and blood from children, adults, and pregnant women in China: partitioning between blood and urine as well as maternal and fetal cord blood.Science of the Total Environment, 2013. 461: p. 49-55.
4. Rodríguez-Gómez, R., et al., Determination of benzophenone-UV filters in human milk samples using ultrasound-assisted extraction and clean-up with dispersive sorbents followed by UHPLC–MS/MS analysis.Talanta, 2015. 134: p. 657-664.
5. Hines, E.P., et al., Concentrations of environmental phenols and parabens in milk, urine and serum of lactating North Carolina women.Reproductive Toxicology, 2015. 54: p. 120-128.
6. Huo, W., et al., The relationship between prenatal exposure to BP-3 and Hirschsprung's disease.Chemosphere, 2016. 144: p. 1091-1097.
7. Collaris, E.J. and J. Frank, Photoallergic contact dermatitis caused by ultraviolet filters in different sunscreens.International journal of dermatology, 2008. 47: p. 35-37.
8. Schmidt, T., J. Ring, and D. Abeck, Photoallergic contact dermatitis due to combined UVB (4-methylbenzylidene camphor/octyl methoxycinnamate) and UVA (benzophenone-3/butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane) absorber sensitization.Dermatology, 1998. 196(3): p. 354-357.
9. Rodríguez, E., et al., Causal agents of photoallergic contact dermatitis diagnosed in the national institute of dermatology of Colombia.Photodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine, 2006. 22(4): p. 189-192.
10. Ang, P., S.K. Ng, and C.L. Goh, Sunscreen allergy in Singapore.American Journal of Contact Dermatitis, 1998. 9(1): p. 42-44.
11. Schauder, S. and H. Ippen, Contact and photocontact sensitivity to sunscreens: Review of a 15‐year experience and of the literature.Contact dermatitis, 1997. 37(5): p. 221-232.
12. Cook, N. and S. Freeman, Report of 19 cases of photoallergic contact dermatitis to sunscreens seen at the Skin and Cancer Foundation.Australasian journal of dermatology, 2001. 42(4): p. 257-259.
13. Warshaw, E.M., et al., Patch test reactions associated with sunscreen products and the importance of testing to an expanded series: retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001 to 2010.Dermatitis, 2013. 24(4): p. 176-182.
14. Schlumpf, M., et al., Exposure patterns of UV filters, fragrances, parabens, phthalates, organochlor pesticides, PBDEs, and PCBs in human milk: correlation of UV filters with use of cosmetics.Chemosphere, 2010. 81(10): p. 1171-1183.
15. Alonso, M.B., et al., Toxic heritage: Maternal transfer of pyrethroid insecticides and sunscreen agents in dolphins from Brazil.Environmental pollution, 2015. 207: p. 391-402.
16. Benvenuti. How does octinoxate degrade avobenzone?2012; Available from: https://http://www.futurederm.com/how-does-octinoxate-degrade-avobenzone/.
In my lifetime, our planet has lost about half its coral reefs. From dynamite fishing to coastal pollution, predator invasions and lethal marine heat waves...these ecosystems are retreating everywhere after thriving for millions of years. Today, we know that the chemicals in our sunscreens are an additional source of pollution on popular reefs around the world. But what if something as simple as making the switch to healthy sun protection could take some pressure off the world’s most endangered ecosystems?
This year, the state of Hawaii was first in history to ban the sale of sunscreens containing oxybenzone and octinoxate to protect its coral reefs, providing countless goods and services to the people of Hawaii. This new law wasn’t received well by manufacturers, and here is why: these chemicals are used in 97% of sunscreens and 70% of cosmetics on the market as UV-filters. In other words, most personal care products seating on your bathroom shelf may contain oxybenzone (aka benzophenone-3) and/or octinoxate. So what lead Hawaii into making such a controversial ban? Since the start of my investigation I have become more and more clueless on the reasons why these compounds were approved in skincare formulations in the first place...
In case you didn’t know, oxybenzone and octinoxate are characterized as “Hazardous to the aquatic environment, long-term hazard » by the United Nations Global Harmonized System (GHS). As they leach off the skin – in the shower or swimming in the ocean – these compounds wash off into various water sources with insidious consequences on aquatic and marine life.
UV-FILTERS ARE TRAVELLING UP THE FOOD CHAIN
Oxybenzone and octinoxate are ubiquitous environmental contaminants and are found in streams, rivers, and lakes and in marine environments from the Arctic Circle (Barrow, Alaska) to the beaches and coral reefs along the equator [1-7]. They can be found in swimming pools and hot tubs, and even in our drinking water (municipal treated and desalinated sources).
Oxybenzone and octinoxate may also bio-accumulate and be biomagnified in organisms [8, 9]. Biomagnification means they may increase in concentration in the tissues of organisms as it travels up the food chain. A number of aquatic and marine species have been discovered to be contaminated, from carp, catfish, eel, white fish, trout, barb, chub, perch and mussels to coral, mahi-mahi, dolphins, sea turtle eggs, and migratory bird eggs [10, 11]. Finally, additional testings have revealed oxybenzone also acts as an endocrine disruptor on marine invertebrates such as shrimps and bivalves . Other ingredients commonly found in cosmetics – such as butylparaben, octocrylene and a chemical called 4MBC – have proven highly toxic to marine life. You can find the full list at www.haereticus-lab.org.
ARE THEY THAT BAD FOR CORALS? YES.
These compounds eventually disperse in oceanic currents, accumulate in sediments or are absorbed by organisms where they can have devastating effects on invertebrates especially on juvenile development stages . Downs et al. (2015) quantified impacts at the scale of coral fragments and coral polyps, showing death at certain concentrations within the conditions of an experimental tank. Laboratory testing showed that exposure to oxybenzone can inhibit and alter the growth of baby corals, is toxic to seven coral species and is likely to induce coral bleaching in the wild .
Oxybenzone and octinoxate both induce coral bleaching and DNA damage at concentrations starting from one drop worth in an area the size of six and half Olympic swimming pools . That means that in highly touristic areas – particularly in heavily frequented, closed systems such as coves - sunscreen pollution should be addressed as an environmental hazard. Meanwhile, sunscreen manufacturers require “sound scientific evidence proving that, under naturally occurring conditions, sunscreen ingredients are contributing to coral-reef decline”. Scientists have however seen a clear effect on highly frequented – and contaminated - reefs in Maui and claim it is enough evidence to justify a ban .
What I think? Considering the critical state of coral reefs worldwide, applying the precautionary principle by promoting chemical-free and other mineral-based sunscreens on highly frequented coral reefs and coastal areas would take some pressure off these fragile ecosystems in decline. Besides, by switching to mineral sunscreens we will also be doing a favor to our skins and personal health. We don’t mention enough the skin and health impacts reported from exposure to these two ingredients in cosmetics. This will change in my next blog ;-)
DID YOU KNOW?
HOW CAN YOU HELP?
1. Tsui, M.M., et al., Seasonal occurrence, removal efficiencies and preliminary risk assessment of multiple classes of organic UV filters in wastewater treatment plants. Water research, 2014. 53: p. 58-67.
2. Tsui, M.M., et al., Occurrence, distribution and ecological risk assessment of multiple classes of UV filters in marine sediments in Hong Kong and Japan. Journal of hazardous materials, 2015. 292: p. 180-187.
3. Balmer, M.E., et al., Occurrence of some organic UV filters in wastewater, in surface waters, and in fish from Swiss lakes. Environmental science & technology, 2005. 39(4): p. 953-962.
4. Tashiro, Y. and Y. Kameda, Concentration of organic sun-blocking agents in seawater of beaches and coral reefs of Okinawa Island, Japan. Marine pollution bulletin, 2013. 77(1-2): p. 333-340.
5. Sang, Z. and K.S.-Y. Leung, Environmental occurrence and ecological risk assessment of organic UV filters in marine organisms from Hong Kong coastal waters. Science of the Total Environment, 2016. 566: p. 489-498.
6. Bachelot, M., et al., Organic UV filter concentrations in marine mussels from French coastal regions. Science of the Total Environment, 2012. 420: p. 273-279.
7. Rodríguez, A.S., M.R. Sanz, and J.B. Rodríguez, Occurrence of eight UV filters in beaches of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands). An approach to environmental risk assessment. Chemosphere, 2015. 131: p. 85-90.
8. Gago-Ferrero, P., M.S. Díaz-Cruz, and D. Barceló, UV filters bioaccumulation in fish from Iberian river basins. Science of the Total Environment, 2015. 518: p. 518-525.
9. Fent, K., A. Zenker, and M. Rapp, Widespread occurrence of estrogenic UV-filters in aquatic ecosystems in Switzerland. Environmental Pollution, 2010. 158(5): p. 1817-1824.
10. Gago-Ferrero, P., M.S. Diaz-Cruz, and D. Barceló, An overview of UV-absorbing compounds (organic UV filters) in aquatic biota. Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2012. 404(9): p. 2597-2610.
11. Rainieri, S., et al., Occurrence and toxicity of musks and UV filters in the marine environment. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2017. 104: p. 57-68.
12. Paredes, E., et al., Ecotoxicological evaluation of four UV filters using marine organisms from different trophic levels Isochrysis galbana, Mytilus galloprovincialis, Paracentrotus lividus, and Siriella armata. Chemosphere, 2014. 104: p. 44-50.
13. Downs, C., et al., Toxicopathological effects of the sunscreen UV filter, Oxybenzone (Benzophenone-3), on coral planulae and cultured primary cells and its environmental contamination in Hawaii and the US Virgin Islands. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. , 2015 70, 2, 265 – 288.
Long gone is the time when we covered ourselves in mud or olive oil to protect our skin from UV-rays. Today, sunscreens are made in the lab and available everywhere at any price and texture. The down side is? Whether you pick the cheap 5L tub or a fancy mist recommended by your pharmacist, you are probably exposing your skin to loads of nasties...
In my twenties, I had absolutely no idea [and no care] what my sunscreen contained, as long as I didn’t get a burn... What’s more, I considered sunscreen an unpleasant thing and I wouldn’t put much thought into choosing one for me. As summer came around, I would go to the store and get it over with: pick the highest SPF at the lowest price. What I didn't know was that my life as a marine biologist would have me involved with sunscreens more than I could ever have imagined! But that will be the topic of another blog. This one is about helping you understand sunscreens and giving you what it takes to make an informed decision on your next purchase.
To act as required, sunblocks must contain some type of UV-filter that absorb, reflect or scatter UV light. Listed as ‘active ingredients’ on your tube, these filters are either of chemical or mineral origin (sometimes, both are used together in one formula). Formulators then achieve desired texture by adding varying qualities of anti-microbial preservatives, moisturizers and anti-oxidants, which are labeled ‘inactive ingredients’ and account for up to 70% of the product.
Oxybenzone (aka benzophenone-3 or BP-3), benzophenone-4 (BP-4), para-aminobenzoic acid (PABA) and PABA esters, cinnamates, salicylates, camphor derivatives, dibenzoylmethanes and anthranilates ... The list of chemical UV-filters is awfully long and unfamiliar. What’s more, they are generally used in combination because no single one, at currently permitted concentration, provides sufficient protection against UV radiation...Hello chemical cocktail!!
That was enough to raise my suspicions on a product I apply on my skin everyday. I started browsing the scientific literature and soon discovered that not all UV-filters are created equal. Chemical filters have been under the radar of the Environmental Working Group after scientific studies revealed – among other things - hormone disruption effects, photo-oxidative stress and - in some cases - skin cancer! [1, 3-5].
In 2008, the Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) declared not advisable to apply chemical sunscreens [oxybenzone, avobenzone] before the age of 2. A few years later, several chemical UV-filters were detected in 85% of Swiss breast milk samples . From then, it was not recommended to wear chemical sunscreen while breastfeeding either. And guess what? That same study, detected oxybenzone in 96% of urine samples in the US, meaning ingredients contained in sunscreen enter the bloodstream via the skin. If that wasn’t enough, recent research also revealed that oxybenzone and its relatives [octinoxate, octocrylen, avobenzone] continue their destructive path on marine life and corals down the drain (read more in my next blog).
With oxybenzone and other chemical filters present in over 97% of sunscreens and cosmetics on the market, does that mean we should give up on sun protection and increase risks of sunburns, photo-aging or even skin cancer?
Fortunately, we have a good alternative in the minerals UV-filters zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. Also called physical, these filters are photo-stable and, unlike chemical filters, they have the advantage of blocking both UVA and UVB rays, providing broad-spectrum protection (although titanium dioxide doesn’t protect against the whole range of UVA rays). It is important to note that mineral filters are sometimes used in the form of nanoparticles (ultrafine particles ranging from 1 nm to 100 nm). Research shows that nanoparticles are potentially hazardous under UV illumination, creating a wide range of toxic effects in various environments [6, 7]. So, carefully read the tag and prefer non-nano when it comes to mineral filters.
If you are looking for a clean sunblock, non-nano zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are the way to go, with zinc oxide being most efficient at reflecting the full range of UVs. But keep in mind that it is not all about sunscreen! Wear a hat, protective clothing, and try to avoid prolonged sun exposure between 11am and 3pm. If you haven’t been in the sun recently, try to gradually build your tan. And remember, the Sun created life on Earth and has many health and mental benefits like the secretion of Vitamin D and serotonin (the good mood hormone) in the body.
Learn to tame it, not to fear it!
1. Chisvert, A., M. Pascual-Marti, and A. Salvador, Determination of the UV filters worldwide authorised in sunscreens by high performance liquid chromatography. . Journal of Chromatography 2001. A 921(2):207-15. .
2. Krause, M., et al., Sunscreens: are they beneficial for health? An overview of endocrine disrupting properties of UV‐filters. International journal of andrology, 2012. 35(3): p. 424-436.
3. Hanson, K.M., E. Gratton, and C.J. Bardeen, Sunscreen enhancement of UV-induced reactive oxygen species in the skin. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 2006. 41(8): p. 1205-1212.
4. Autier, P., Sunscreen abuse for intentional sun exposure. British Journal of Dermatology, 2009. 161(s3): p. 40-45.
5. Sharma, P., et al., Reactive Oxygen Species, oxidative damage, and antioxidative defense mechanism in plants under stressful conditions. Journal of Botany, 2012. vol. 2012 (Article ID 217037): p. 26 pages.
6. Yung, M., C. Mouneyrac, and K. Leunga, Ecotoxicity of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles in the Marine Environment. . Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology 2014.
7. Lewicka, Z., et al., Photochemical behavior of nanoscale TiO2 and ZnO sunscreen ingredients. . Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry, 2013. 263, pp.24–33. .
Most sunscreen formulas typically comprise up to 20 or more chemical compounds . As the skin rapidly absorbs these chemicals, your health is directly affected via the bloodstream. So while sipping a cocktail by the pool after slip slap slopping sunscreen, your body is soaking its own shot of chemicals.
Living most of my life in the sun (Born in Abu Dhabi, expatriated in Singapore, Mauritius, and studied in Australia and now a marine biologist), I’ve had growing concerns about the impacts chemical sunscreens had on my personal health over the years. Prone to beauty spots and freckles, I consult my dermatologist once a year for a full mapping. After my last consultation, she declared my skin-aging "above average" for my age and recommended that I wear sunscreen every single day.
I took these recommendations home, and started researching for the best sunscreen out there. My investigations led me to several scientific publications highlighting the potential health drawbacks from chemical UV-filters used in most commercial sunscreens: from increased free-radicals in the skin [2, 3], endocrine disruptive properties in the body  and – this is the ironic one – enhanced risk of melanoma in cases of sunscreen abuse for intentional sun exposure . All these years, my daily exposure to commercial sunscreens and cosmetics products (which most of contain UV-filters) were somehow putting my health at risk. I pursued my research with more questions on the insidious impacts of chemical UV-filters.
During my time working at restoring Seychelles coral reefs (2015-2017), another topic caught my attention: sunscreen pollution in the ocean. With the world’s coastal population rapidly growing along with our fear of skin cancer and our obsession for premature aging, the use of sunscreens and cosmetics containing UV-filters has dramatically increased (and will increase further), with millions of tonnes of sunscreen entering our waters ways and eventually, our oceans. As it turns out, UV-filters (e.g. oxybenzone) are detrimental to coral health and can lead to coral bleaching at very small concentrations. Second irony. Protecting my skin from the sun might have been impacting the very ecosystems I had been studying, protecting and restoring during all my professional life!
It has now been five years since I have banned chemical sunscreens from my life and switched to natural sunscreen formulas. I strongly believe chemicals in sunscreens are poisoning us from the outside in with subsequent insidious impacts on natural systems, down the drain or when leaching off our skin. Today, the issue of sunscreen pollution has caught the World's attention and chemical sunscreens will soon be something from the past. This year, Hawaii is leading the way by banning chemical sunscreens to protect its coral reefs.
As a woman, coral expert and ocean & sun lover, I noticed an absence of sun care products capable of addressing the collateral damages of sun exposure (e.g. pigmentation, skin-dehydration, pH stress, premature aging) while providing effective sun protection and still ticking the boxes of respect for personal health and Nature. Together People4Ocean and LaGaia Unedited, set out on a journey to create a global first: a natural sun system loved by marine scientists, luxury skincare users, eco-activists, ocean & sun lovers, resort and spa owners.
In our next blog, discover the ingredients to look out for - and the ones to avoid - on your next sunscreen purchase.
1. Danovaro, R., et al., Sunscreens cause coral bleaching by promoting viral infections. . Environ. Health. Perspect. , 2008 116 (4), 441−447. .
2. Hanson, K.M., E. Gratton, and C.J. Bardeen, Sunscreen enhancement of UV-induced reactive oxygen species in the skin. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 2006. 41(8): p. 1205-1212.
3. Chisvert, A., M. Pascual-Marti, and A. Salvador, Determination of the UV filters worldwide authorised in sunscreens by high performance liquid chromatography. . Journal of Chromatography 2001. A 921(2):207-15. .
4. Autier, P., Sunscreen abuse for intentional sun exposure. British Journal of Dermatology, 2009. 161(s3): p. 40-45.