BBC Reading Content-03

Mineral v chemical sunscreen: Which one should you be using?

Some people are trading chemical sunscreens in favour of mineral versions because of
fears over toxicity, pollution and effectiveness. Is there actually any difference?
Mineral sunscreen is having a moment. Amid concerns that so-called "chemical"
sunscreens may be bad for our bodies, brains, and even coral reefs, mineral-based
formulations have become the fastest-growing share of the global sunscreen market
But debates over "chemical" versus "mineral" sunscreens are riddled with
misconceptions. Many commonly repeated claims – such as mineral sunscreens not
containing chemicals; that chemical sunscreens have been proven harmful; or that
chemical sunscreens absorb UV, while mineral ones only reflect it – are misleading, even
false.
The confusion begins with terminology. "Everything is a chemical," points out Brian Diffey,
emeritus professor of photobiology in dermatological sciences at the UK's University of
Newcastle and inventor of sunscreen's UVA star rating. What people call "chemical" filters
are more accurately termed organic, since they contain carbon-hydrogen bonds, says
Diffey. Inorganic filters (often called mineral), primarily titanium dioxide and zinc oxide,
lack those bonds. All are chemicals. Seeking to protect our skin and bodies from the Sun
is not a new trend – nor are sunscreens, organic or inorganic. Ancient Mesopotamians
used umbrellas; ancient Greeks, wide-brimmed hats. Along with various coverings,
people applied concoctions to the body. In Africa, the use of ochre-based pastes, still
used as sunscreen by people such as the Himba in Namibia, dates back at least 285,000
years, while the Roman writer Cornelius Celsus advised slathering the skin with olive oil.
It wasn't until the 19th Century, however, that scientists discovered ultra-violet radiation
(UVR) – and realised that some ingredients, like quinine sulphate (derived from a tree
bark), could absorb it. Scientists duly recommended it as a sunscreen. By 1930,
researchers had found a number of other ingredients that absorbed UVR, including
aesculin (from trees such as horse chestnut) and larch bark tannin. Though they wouldn't
meet today's SPF standards, in terms of how they protected the skin, they all were organic
("chemical") sunscreens.
It was thought that organic sunscreens absorbed UVR, while inorganic sunscreens
physically reflected and scattered UVR away from the skin
Later, dozens of other ingredients were added to this list – including those produced by
mixing together different substances in a laboratory to induce a chemical reaction. Often
referred to as "synthetic chemicals", these types of ingredients – including avobenzone,
oxybenzone, octisalate and octinoxate – have been found to absorb UV rays far more
effectively than their predecessors. Another type of sunscreen came to market, too:
"mineral" sunscreens.
While they might seem more "natural", the titanium dioxide and zinc oxide in today's
sunscreens are usually lab-produced. The great deflection debate
At first, it was thought that organic sunscreens absorbed UVR, while inorganic
sunscreens physically reflected and scattered UVR away from the skin – a belief that was
perpetuated further in a 1970s United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
monograph.
This idea is still commonly heard today, including from seemingly authoritative sources.
It also is partly why inorganic sunscreens sometimes are also called "physical
sunscreens", implying that they block out UV rays like an umbrella deflects raindrops.
"People say that mineral or inorganic sunscreens reflect ultraviolet radiation," says Antony
Young, professor emeritus of experimental photobiology at King's College London and a
lifelong researcher of sunscreen efficacy. "And that's not true."
In fact, modern titanium dioxide and zinc oxide only reflect or scatter 4-5% of the UV
range, an authoritative, peer-reviewed 2015 study found. They absorb the other 95%.
Indeed, scientists have been aware that inorganic sunscreens absorb UV since the 1980s
– so much so that the authors of the 2015 study already seemed exasperated with having
to provide even further proof. Their study emphasised "yet again", they wrote, "that the
true function of these insoluble 'physical' or 'mineral' UV filters is in fact identical to that of
the soluble 'chemical' UV filters. "These data indicate clearly that these filters act primarily
as UV-absorbing materials, and not as UV-scattering or UV-reflecting materials."
They're not even actually "reflecting" that 5%, adds Diffey: "They scatter it." UV rays aren't
bounced off the surface of the inorganic particles. Instead, he says, "the light rays go into
the medium. They bounce around from the atoms or molecules. Some of them then will
come back out again. And that's called scattering."
Meanwhile, many sunscreens, even some marketed as "mineral", use both organic and
inorganic UV filters.
Most organic filters are soluble, meaning their active ingredients can be dissolved in a
medium like water or oil. But in general, experts say, whether a UV filter works by
absorbing, reflecting or scattering UVR doesn't really matter. The amount of heat
generated in the skin by absorption is negligible – and a tiny fraction of the heat generated
from the Sun's exposure itself.
Ultimately, says Mary Sommerlad, a consultant dermatologist based in London and
British Skin Foundation spokesperson: "You don't need to decide whether you want your
UV energy to be absorbed or reflected, because they're working in pretty much the same
way." That is, by reducing how much UVR your skin absorbs to protect it from damage
and risk of developing cancer.
Particles and solutions
If organic and inorganic sunscreens work so similarly, why do they feel different
It comes down to solubility. Most organic filters are soluble, meaning their active
ingredients can be dissolved in a medium like water or oil. Inorganic sunscreens are not:
their particles remain intact. As a result, inorganic sunscreens can feel thicker and give a
white cast, while organic filters can provide smoother, clearer formulations.
As chemistry advances have shrunk inorganic particle sizes down, the white-cast effect
has decreased. These "nanoparticles" (less than 100nm in size) of titanium dioxide and
zinc oxide have led to their own set of concerns around skin penetration. But even this
minuscule particle size doesn't penetrate more than the stratum corneum – the outermost
skin layer – thus preventing systemic absorption.
Most organic UV filters operate at the surface of the skin, too. Because sunburns develop
at the upper layers of the skin, a UV filter must bind to the stratum corneum in order to
work, say experts. Like inorganic sunscreens, therefore, organic sunscreens absorb the
vast majority of UV at the skin's surface.
But it is true that some organic filters are systemically absorbed. "Some active ingredients
will find their way through to the bloodstream," says Diffey. "Whether or not that's doing
us any harm or not remains to be seen."
So far, there isn't good evidence that it is.
The vast majority of research finding risks of chemicals like oxybenzone has been
performed on animals, using massive amounts. In one 2001 study that sparked concern
about endocrine disruption, for example, baby rats were fed extremely large quantities of
UV filters like oxybenzone for four days. Those that consumed oxybenzone had uteruses
that were 23% larger than rats that didn't. The reason for these studies is to determine
how much is safe – Michelle Wong
But when later researchers put these numbers into perspective, they found that – to reach
the same systemic concentration of oxybenzone the rats had – a human would need to
apply a 6% oxybenzone sunscreen every day… for 277 years.
Why are animals exposed to so much of a particular ingredient? Because it helps
scientists determine the potential safety limit. "The reason for these studies is to
determine how much is safe," says Michelle Wong, chemist and author of the book The
Science of Beauty who frequently tackles sunscreen myths online. As a result, "they are
always looking for an effect. They will generally use a large enough amount of the
ingredient… to elicit some sort of effect. "If they don't, then they don't know where the line
is."
So far, the threshold at which the ingredients pose a risk seems to be many times higher
than the quantity in which people are using them. One scientific review published earlier
this year found no evidence that UV filters like avobenzone and homosalate can damage
DNA or cause cancer in humans – and that blood levels of these chemicals from topical
sunscreen are far below the amount at which they might have an effect.
In one 2004 study, for example, 32 people applied creams made up of 10% oxybenzone.
Four hours after application, both men and women had slightly lower levels of
testosterone. But after just four days of application, the differences between the appliers
and the control group disappeared – leading the researchers to conclude that differences
in the hormones weren't actually from the sunscreen itself.
Even so, because ingredients like avobenzone are absorbed into the bloodstream, out of
caution regulators like the FDA have requested more safety data from manufacturers.
The effects of organic filters on the environment – particularly coral reefs – are a little
more unclear. Studies that have raised concerns have mostly been lab-based
experiments; real-world impacts may be different. One study, for example, found that
while UV filters were detected in the seawater across 19 tourist hotspots in Hawaii, 12
locations showed less than 10 parts per trillion of oxybenzone – the equivalent of 10 drops
in a water-filled football stadium. The area with the highest concentration, Waikiki Beach,
had 136 parts per trillion.
The best sunscreen, experts say, is one you are happy to use. All were at levels far below
the concentration at which the lab-based studies found damage to coral reefs. However,
in 2018 Hawaii made the move to ban the sale of sunscreens containing chemicals
oxybenzone and octinoxate. "If you have places with a high load of tourists going in, it is
not unreasonable to stay cautious and say, 'Yes, there may be additive effects'," marine
scientist Jorg Wiedenmann said at the time.
Still, while much of the focus regarding coral toxicity has been on organic UV filters,
inorganic UV filters may have an effect too. Meanwhile, some marine biologists point out
that the far larger (and better-proven) threat to corals is climate change – and that the
biggest bleaching events have been in places without tourists.
While scientists haven't yet proven any concrete, adverse effects to humans of using
organic (or inorganic) sunscreens, aside from occasional side effects like allergic
reactions, we can't say the same of excessive UV exposure. At worst, it can lead to skin
cancer, the most common type of cancer in countries including the US and the UK. If it
spreads, the deadliest type, melanoma, has only a 35% five-year survival rate.
This is why the best sunscreen, experts say, is one you are happy to use.
For some people, that is a sunscreen that is smoother, clearer and absorbs more quickly.
For others, that might be a sunscreen that has fewer toxicology concerns, no matter how
theoretical. "SPF is SPF," says Young. "It doesn't really matter what the ingredients are."
For trusted insights into better health and wellbeing rooted in science, sign up to the
Health Fix newsletter, while The Essential List delivers a handpicked selection of features
and insights. give explanation with synonyms
 Word Synonym(s) বাাংলা অর্ থ
Trade Replace, switch পরিবর্তন কিা, অদল-বদল কিা
Toxicity Poisonousness, harmfulness রবষাক্তর্া
Contamination, environmental
Pollution দূষণ
damage
Effectiveness Efficiency, success কার্কারির্া
ত
Misconception Misunderstanding, fallacy ভুল ধািণা
Riddled with Filled with, full of ভিা, ভরর্ত
Compound Mixture, combination যর্ৌগ, রিশ্রণ
Inorganic Non-organic, mineral-based অজৈব, খরনৈ-রভরিক
Organic Carbon-based, natural জৈব
Absorb Soak up, take in য াষণ কিা
Reflect Bounce off, mirror প্ররর্ফরলর্ কিা
Filter Screen, strainer ছাাঁকরন, পরিশ াধক
Exposure Contact, vulnerability সংস্প ,ত প্রকা
Ingredient Component, element উপাদান
Enter Penetrate, go into প্রশব কিা
Evidence Proof, indication প্রিাণ
Risk Danger, threat ঝাঁ রক
Extreme Excessive, intense অরর্রিক্ত, চিি
Application Use, implementation প্রশ াগ
সানস্ক্রিন, যিাদ প্ররর্িক্ষািূলক
Sunscreen Sunblock, UV protection cream
স্ক্রিি
Barrier Shield, protection বাধা, প্ররর্িক্ষা
Lab-based Laboratory-tested পিীক্ষাগাি-রভরিক
Concentration Strength, density ঘনত্ব
Harm Damage, injury ক্ষরর্
Climate
Global warming ৈলবা পরিবর্তন
change
Coral reef Marine ecosystem প্রবাল প্রাচীি
Regulation Rule, policy রন ি, রবধান