News Coverage
Study: Sunscreens Unreliable Or Harmful
Published July 7, 2008
Nearly one million more Americans have been diagnosed with skin cancer since last year, when the Food and Drug Administration finally proposed a four-star rating system for sunscreens.
But it's been 30 years since the FDA first tried to regulate sunscreens, and the agency's rating system is still nothing more than a proposal.
Since last year, the FDA says it has been busy reading and studying comments from consumers eager for any help they can get to avoid cancer, and the sunscreen industry, which is fighting the regulations.
"It's taking a lot of our resources," FDA spokeswoman Rita Chappelle said. She could not predict, she said, when consumers could expect new rules to help take the mystery out of sunscreen purchases.
Meanwhile, a consumer group said this week that four of every five tested sunscreen products offer inadequate protection from the sun or contain ingredients such as oxybenzone that may be linked to suspected health hazards.
The Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based nonprofit organization, investigated nearly 1,000 sunscreen products.
It found that all 41 of market-leader Coppertone's sunscreen products failed to meet the group's criteria for safety and effectiveness. The group recommended just one of 103 products from Banana Boat and Neutrogena, the second and third largest sunscreen manufacturers.
The consumer group says about half of all product labels include claims such as "all day protection," "mild as water," "waterproof" and "instant protection." The FDA has called such claims misleading or unsubstantiated.
The study brought this industry response:
"This unfortunate attack on sunscreen products is an unjustified attempt to discredit an extensive, long-standing body of scientific data," said John Bailey, chief scientist at the Personal Care Products Council. That's a trade association for the $250 billion cosmetic and personal care product industry.
MORE COLUMNS
bullet Read previous Savvy Consumer columns
Sunscreens are over-the-counter drugs, and Bailey said they are subject to "rigorous scientific and regulatory oversight" by the FDA. He questioned EWG's methodology and data sources.
Coppertone said it rigorously tests all products to ensure safety and effectiveness.
Sonya Lunder, a senior scientist with the EWG, says that without federal regulations, manufacturers have "free rein to say whatever they want."
As for consumers, Lunder says, they have no way to know whether a sunscreen is effective. "They can only tell 20 years later when they have skin spots" or worse.
Last August, the FDA proposed a mandatory four-star rating system for sunscreen labels. Four stars would mean a product is effective against "Ultraviolet A" (UVA) light, which the FDA says causes premature skin aging and skin cancer.
The FDA wants to issue its rules 18-24 months after approval, whenever that comes. The Personal Care Products Council says that isn't "sufficient time" to comply.
Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, told the FDA that manufacturers have already had "a great deal of advance notice. ... We believe that an 18-24 month time frame may be excessive. We suggest, instead, a shorter one-year implementation date as being in the best interest of the consumer."
I checked the FDA's docket and found that the agency first proposed sunscreen safety regulations on Aug. 25, 1978.
So when can consumers expect the FDA to act?
The agency says it can't say until sometime after it finishes studying 10,000 documents and comments filed in the case.
Meanwhile, the National Cancer Institute estimates that more than 1 million Americans will get the most common types of skin cancer this year.
An estimated 62,480 people will be diagnosed with potentially deadly melanoma. More than 9,000 will die.
"It's pretty outrageous," Lunder says.
msorkin@post-dispatch.com | 314-340-8347
