(Link here) C As we bring in 2020, it's time to visit onsumer Reports came out with their 2018 sunscreen rankings today and some of the results are shocking. The online report says that about a third -- 24 of 73 -- tested at less than half of the SPF on their labels. The Consumer Reports sunscreen ratings are based on a number of factors: The UVA protection, UVB (SPF) protection and variation from SPF. The variation from SPF rating is a measure of how closely a sunscreen’s tested UVB (SPF) protection matched the SPF advertised on the label.
If a sunscreen contained 85 percent or above the labeled SPF it earned an excellent rating, between 70 and 84 percent, a very good rating, between 60 and 69 percent, a good rating, 50 to 59 percent, a fair rating and below 50 percent, a poor rating. SPF, or sun protection factor, is a measure of how well a sunscreen protects against ultraviolet B (UVB) rays, which are the major cause of sunburn and contribute to cancer. Broad-spectrum sunscreens also protect against UVA rays, which contribute to skin aging and cancer. No natural sunscreen -- products made with titanium dioxide, zinc oxide or both as active ingredients -- made its list of 13 recommended products this year. The magazine tested 73 lotions, sprays, and sticks. The report claims that in the past 6 years of sunscreen testing, they haven’t found a mineral product that offers both top-notch UVA and UVB protection and meets its labeled SPF . The report recommends against using sprays on kids until researchers know more about the potential dangers of inhaling the spray. Below are the following winners- LOTIONS
SPRAYS
STICK
Keep in mind many sunscreens weren't tested, including asian sunscreens. My current sunscreen, EltaMD UV Shield, wasn't tested. The lowest performing lotion, according to Consumer Reports, was Babyganics mineral-based lotion SPF 50+. Its overall rating was 22 on a scale of 100. The lowest performing spray was the UV Aero Continuous Spray SPF 45 by EltaMD. Its overall score was 27.
1 Comment
(Link Here) Consumer Reports came out with their 2018 sunscreen rankings today and some of the results are shocking. The online report says that about a third -- 24 of 73 -- tested at less than half of the SPF on their labels. The Consumer Reports sunscreen ratings are based on a number of factors: The UVA protection, UVB (SPF) protection and variation from SPF. The variation from SPF rating is a measure of how closely a sunscreen’s tested UVB (SPF) protection matched the SPF advertised on the label.
If a sunscreen contained 85 percent or above the labeled SPF it earned an excellent rating, between 70 and 84 percent, a very good rating, between 60 and 69 percent, a good rating, 50 to 59 percent, a fair rating and below 50 percent, a poor rating. SPF, or sun protection factor, is a measure of how well a sunscreen protects against ultraviolet B (UVB) rays, which are the major cause of sunburn and contribute to cancer. Broad-spectrum sunscreens also protect against UVA rays, which contribute to skin aging and cancer. No natural sunscreen -- products made with titanium dioxide, zinc oxide or both as active ingredients -- made its list of 13 recommended products this year. The magazine tested 73 lotions, sprays, and sticks. The report claims that in the past 6 years of sunscreen testing, they haven’t found a mineral product that offers both top-notch UVA and UVB protection and meets its labeled SPF . The report recommends against using sprays on kids until researchers know more about the potential dangers of inhaling the spray. Below are the following winners- LOTIONS
SPRAYS
STICK
Keep in mind many sunscreens weren't tested, including asian sunscreens. My current sunscreen, EltaMD UV Shield, wasn't tested. The lowest performing lotion, according to Consumer Reports, was Babyganics mineral-based lotion SPF 50+. Its overall rating was 22 on a scale of 100. The lowest performing spray was the UV Aero Continuous Spray SPF 45 by EltaMD. Its overall score was 27. Hi all! I've created this new section of my site to cover all the latest skincare news and research. I'm a big believer in using science backed skincare. I work in the science/technology field and love to keep up to date on all the newest gadgets and studies. (Link Here) A study came out this month on the benefits of facial yoga to treat the appearance of aging this week. Although I've never tried facial yoga, this study does look promising (done by Northwestern Medicine). It found that women who spent 30 minutes daily on facial yoga for nine weeks and then every other day for another 11 weeks looked on average three years younger after those weeks. The method used was developed by Gary Sikorski of Happy Face Yoga. I did some googling to find some of these exercises in case anyone wants to try. Specifically, the participants saw an increase in their cheek fullness. This is one of the first studies to examine the effects of facial yoga in relation to aging. However some things to keep in mind are:
|
ArchivesCategories |