Road Cycling - Suncreen Article

Hey everyone,

I normally hate Newsweek as its articles are "USA Today-esque" in terms of substance and depth, but they did have a nice little article on sunscreen. For many of us, this is probably the biggest health risk we face as a result of cycling. Due to the amount of time we spend on the bike all summer long, and due to the amount of time we spend riding each ride (sometimes 6 - 8 hours on longer rides), there are few other activities where one's faces, legs and arms are as exposed to UVA/UVB rays.

I know I bought the Neutrogena - Ultra Sheer with Helioplex 70 for my face and upper arms (as someone of Scottish decent, I am particularly vulnerable to skin-cancer), so this article made me somewhat releived. However, I bet many here are not quite educated on what to look for in terms of sunscreen, and could be riding around without effective sun screen.

Anyways - to summarize - make sure you 1 of the following 2 ingredients in your sunscreen:

UVA-safe: aveobenzone or parsol 1789.

For UVB - the SPF factor is a good indicator.

Also - since UVA blocking ingredients can break-down UVB ingredients faster than the SPF rating, look for either Helioplex or Mexoryl.

If you want to be completely safe - get Neutrogena. It may be more expensive, but it is readily available in most drug-stores and seems to be the safest bet at this point.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19484510/site/newsweek/

It is almost impossible to find a sunscreen without those ingredients. All list the SPF.

The best sunscreens are opaque, either zinc or titanium oxide. Neutrogena is for sunbathers.

DocRay:

if you read the article, UVB is not the issue. The issue is the UVA rays, and many subscreens do not contain wither of the above two ingredients. Plus, if they do, studies have shown that the UVA ingredients (except Helioplex or Mexoryl blends) break down UVB ingredients faster than previously thought.

I agree, Zinc/Titanium Oxide is a good UVB blocking ingredient, but it was only until recently that UVA started to become something dermotologists became aware of.

Doc Ray:

also - I did not realize that sun exposure changed based on whether you were cycling or sunbathing?

Bullfrog Surfer Formula

You can close the thread now. If you think another sunscreen is better, your mistaken. It's not your fault, but now you know....

Since Mexoryl was just approved in the U.S. in July of 2006, most sunscreen products in the U.S. don't have it in it. I have 5 bottles of different brands of sunscreen at home and none of them have Mexoryl in it. Lancôme UV Expert 20 has it in it which the wife uses. I also use it on my face and it does work better than other products without Mexoryl.

Not true, CCFish
the best is Anthelios. HDwound beat me to the punch, it is the
best of the mexoryl sunsctreens.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sunscreen/SN00041

Thanks for posting this VT Biker.

I'll just keep using my mix of baby seal blubber and rosy periwinkle pedal extract, but thanks.

The Neutrogena stuff is awesome! I bought some for a beach trip this past Sunday and it's so easy to spray on. It doesn't give me problems like oil or lotion does.

rule - good advice. But it only works if you have personally clubbed the baby seal yourself.

DocRay:

if you read the article, UVB is not the issue. The issue is the UVA rays, and many subscreens do not contain wither of the above two ingredients. Plus, if they do, studies have shown that the UVA ingredients (except Helioplex or Mexoryl blends) break down UVB ingredients faster than previously thought.

I agree, Zinc/Titanium Oxide is a good UVB blocking ingredient, but it was only until recently that UVA started to become something dermotologists became aware of.

That article is not well written, dermatologist have known about UVA damage for decades. The Zinc/Ti creams are the best because they block all light, even infrared light, which is also damaging. No clear liquid will block far UV and infrared. Most people don't use the products properly, they need to be applied thick, and frequently. Not like on the TV commercials.

Studies are showing that people who use sunblock and tanning oil are getting higher levels of skin cancer than those who don't, because they abuse these products to stay in the sun longer. For back of neck, and nose, Ti creams are the way to go. Some days I wear a light long sleeve jersey. But the best defense is not to ride in hours of high UV. Also, because the FDA does not regulate topical applicants, no one has tested whether these chemicals are safe to use in the long run. I can tell you a lot of these compounds are very similar in structure to known toxic chemicals, and many end up in the bloodstream.

Many are not safe for use on children.

I love bullfrog. It most definitely works. I have a jersey that has little holes all over it. Didn't think of putting lotion on underneath. I ended up having a polka dot jersey for a week.

How do you know it works? Because you don't get sunburn?
That's the issue, many of these products prevent sunburn, but they don't prevent DNA damage.
So while you don't burn, you stay out longer and get dosed more than if you felt the burning.

The FDA approved Mexoryl in July of 2006 and didn't test it? LOL http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01417.html

How do you know it works? Because you don't get sunburn?
That's the issue, many of these products prevent sunburn, but they don't prevent DNA damage.
So while you don't burn, you stay out longer and get dosed more than if you felt the burning.
I was a nuclear operator and have broken over 30 bones. I am screwed anyway.

The FDA approved Mexoryl in July of 2006 and didn't test it? LOL http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01417.html


They also approved Teflon and Asbestos...


http://www.webmd.com/news/20060127/epa-urges-teflon-chemical-ban

Avoid the nano-version of certain lotions, because they appear to be toxic due to their ability to enter the skin and into the tissues.

The BEST solution has always been to wear a large sunhat or use an umbrella. Zipp needs to make an aero sunhat for us summer bikers. I find that the helmets with the visors shade my nose and face quite well during periods of intense sunlight (11am-2pm).

The FDA approved Mexoryl in July of 2006 and didn't test it? LOL http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01417.html

"The most common side effects in patients were acne, dermatitis, dry skin, eczema, abnormal redness, itching, skin discomfort and sunburn."

No, they didn't test the breakdown products of this compound, no, they didn't test long term use of this compound, and yes, many people have died over the years from FDA approved drugs.

The FDA has 'streamlined' approval since 2000, which is very good for pharma corps.

They also approved Teflon and Asbestos...


http://www.webmd.com/news/20060127/epa-urges-teflon-chemical-ban

and thalidomide

http://www.t-nation.com/img/photos/04-atomicdog-010_files/image002.jpg

Vioxx, Fen-Fen, etc.etc.

Ummm no kidding guys -- Doc Ray said the FDA does not regulate this stuff. They approved Mexoryl so they DO regulate it. If they didn't it would have been available in the U.S. before 2006 when the approved it. I'm not naive enough to believe anything the FDA approves SHOULD be approved and is safe.

Maybe I should post with DOC before my name so you don't have to worry :rolleyes:

Ummm no kidding guys -- Doc Ray said the FDA does not regulate this stuff. They approved Mexoryl so they DO regulate it. If they didn't it would have been available in the U.S. before 2006 when the approved it. I'm not naive enough to believe anything the FDA approves SHOULD be approved and is safe.

Maybe I should post with DOC before my name so you don't have to worry :rolleyes:

The regulate the compound, but they certainly don't test every product it goes into. But you're right, just randomly mixing chemicals and applying to your body in large amounts-what could happen?

Avoid the nano-version of certain lotions, because they appear to be toxic due to their ability to enter the skin and into the tissues.

The BEST solution has always been to wear a large sunhat or use an umbrella. Zipp needs to make an aero sunhat for us summer bikers. I find that the helmets with the visors shade my nose and face quite well during periods of intense sunlight (11am-2pm).

Nano particles are virtually impossible to unclump. Because they are so small, the inter-particle forces over comes the body forces and they always end up turning into big clumps of non-nano balls. It's the big problem with nano-particles, you can make em but they bunch right back up again...its all just marketing (especially in sun block)

If the sun ever shines and if the temperatures ever warm up enough so that I can ride without a jacket and tights, I'll worry about sunscreen. The way it's going ... I don't see that happening this year.

If you want to be completely safe - get Neutrogena. It may be more expensive, but it is readily available in most drug-stores and seems to be the safest bet at this point.
How do you figure? Neutrogena Ultra Sheer, Dry-Touch Sunblock, SPF 55 scores an 8 (higher is worse) in the health hazard category.

Not a single Neutrogena sunscreen made the low health hazard / low sun hazard category.

How do you figure? Neutrogena Ultra Sheer, Dry-Touch Sunblock, SPF 55 scores an 8 (higher is worse) in the health hazard category.

Not a single Neutrogena sunscreen made the low health hazard / low sun hazard category.

That's because of the fragrance. Without the fragrance, almost every active 55+ sunblock out there has close to the same rating.

That's because of the fragrance. Without the fragrance, almost every active 55+ sunblock out there has close to the same rating.
OK, point taken, but whether it's the fragrance or the sun-blocking ingredients, it's still a health hazard. There are others that are as effective in blocking the sun but don't pose as great a health hazard - do they stink like a rotting corpse?

There are others that are as effective in blocking the sun but don't pose as great a health hazard - do they stink like a rotting corpse?

Yes. But you're right, I'd rather they leave the fragrance out, I don't mind stinking like a rotten corpse.

Actually, FDA testing shows that SPF-30 stops about 97% of all UV rays.

Anything higher like an SPF-40 or 50, stops very little more, and is not that effective. The problem, is people are wearing these super high SPF rated lotions thinking they can stay in the sun longer, when they don't do much more to stop the UV rays. So, they end up using these more concentrated chemicals in an attempt to get more protection, when it may actually be causing more harm to your body by being absorbed into the blood stream.

Well as they break down, I'll have more of the ingredients left.

Take it from a recent skin cancer victim. The sunscreen should have titanium or zinc, so says the guy that is trying to save my life.

Richard


Doc Ray:

also - I did not realize that sun exposure changed based on whether you were cycling or sunbathing?

How do you figure? Neutrogena Ultra Sheer, Dry-Touch Sunblock, SPF 55 scores an 8 (higher is worse) in the health hazard category.

Not a single Neutrogena sunscreen made the low health hazard / low sun hazard category.

Here is a snippet from the Consumer Reports
"What to do. Choose a sunscreen with maximum protection against both UVA and UVB rays--preferably one labeled very water resistant or waterproof, with an SPF of at least 30. Two fine choices: Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry-Touch SPF 45 and No-Ad Sunblock Lotion Maximum SPF 45, a CR Best Buy."

Also - it has no fragrance for those with masculinity concerns (if you are not over those after parading around for miles on end in lycra, I guess you have some serious hang-ups with your childhood).

Again - only my own stupid hypothesis, but perhaps the high rate of cancer amongst users of sun-screen is because until only recently, UVA rays were not considered for many sunscreens. As the article points out, UVA does not cause the burn we associate with sun exposure. It could very well be that the rates will go down as sun screen has improved.

Well should I listen to my dermatologist or consumer reports?

Richard


Here is a snippet from the Consumer Reports
"What to do. Choose a sunscreen with maximum protection against both UVA and UVB rays--preferably one labeled very water resistant or waterproof, with an SPF of at least 30. Two fine choices: Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry-Touch SPF 45 and No-Ad Sunblock Lotion Maximum SPF 45, a CR Best Buy."

Also - it has no fragrance for those with masculinity concerns (if you are not over those after parading around for miles on end in lycra, I guess you have some serious hang-ups with your childhood).

Again - only my own stupid hypothesis, but perhaps the high rate of cancer amongst users of sun-screen is because until only recently, UVA rays were not considered for many sunscreens. As the article points out, UVA does not cause the burn we associate with sun exposure. It could very well be that the rates will go down as sun screen has improved.

Well should I listen to my dermatologist or consumer reports?

Richard

By your same logic, the guy that stands to profit from treating the symptoms of your disease, or the nonprofit organization?

Yes I am sure my doctor wants me to die of skin cancer. Seeing as how I already have it I am sure he will recommend a crappy product so he can line his pockets.

Jeez,
Richard

Yes I am sure my doctor wants me to die of skin cancer. Seeing as how I already have it I am sure he will recommend a crappy product so he can line his pockets.

Jeez,
Richard

Well can you explain why consumer reports would want to recommend a crappy product?
I wouldn't worry about your doctor, he stands to gain NOTHING if you die of cancer. I'm not knocking you, just throwing in another point of view where you have someone who gets free vacations from certain companies for pushing their medication vs. a nonprofit org. Nothing that you're wrong, you could be completely right about all this.

Well should I listen to my dermatologist or consumer reports?

Richard


Look,

Clearly listen to your dermotologist. But I would be interested for you to ask him about aveobenzone. It appears to be an alternative for tackling UVA rays versus Titanium/Zinc Oxide. I would be interested to hear his opinion on the effectiveness.

That being said, I have a tough time thinking Consumer Reports (which is the most trusted consumer products testing entity) would steer clear of Zinc/Titanium oxide if they felt there were not something as effective or more effective.

And I was not trying to offer medical advice either. I merely thought (and you can tell from the various opinions/ideas in this thread alone) that there was a lot of confusion over what is the most effective sunscreen, and an article from Newsweek and Consumer Report would provide some clarity and guidance, especially since most still stick with just the SPF rating.


Finally - I wish you luck with your cancer. I know I am at a high risk myself. I wish you a speedy recovery.

I didnt say CR recommended a crappy product. I was agreeing with DocRay about the sunscreen should have zinc or titanium.

Once you are told you have melonoma you tend to start looking into it a little. I have talked with several doctors two of which are dermatologist, and one who is a surgeon take took out a hunk of my arm. The surgeon specializes in cancer biopsies. All of them separately said get sunscreen with zinc or titanium. My wife who was a little upset talked with her dermatologist, and a friend of hers who is a doctor. Guess what they all said? Get sunscreen with zinc or titanium. I guess it is all a big conspiracy.

Richard

VT, get checked. Once it gets to stage 3 it gets messy.

I have a giant list I have received from the two doctors that are treating me. They seem to trust the zinc or titanium the most. I can tell you it stinks. I smell like metal all of the time.

Obviously I am high risk. I am only 38 to, so it came as quite a shock. They also recommended using clothes with the SPF in addition to the sunscreen. I will stick with the zinc / titanium products until they recommend something better. I will certain post to this forum if they give me some good info.

Take care,
Richard



Look,

Clearly listen to your dermotologist. But I would be interested for you to ask him about aveobenzone. It appears to be an alternative for tackling UVA rays versus Titanium/Zinc Oxide. I would be interested to hear his opinion on the effectiveness.

That being said, I have a tough time thinking Consumer Reports (which is the most trusted consumer products testing entity) would steer clear of Zinc/Titanium oxide if they felt there were not something as effective or more effective.

And I was not trying to offer medical advice either. I merely thought (and you can tell from the various opinions/ideas in this thread alone) that there was a lot of confusion over what is the most effective sunscreen, and an article from Newsweek and Consumer Report would provide some clarity and guidance, especially since most still stick with just the SPF rating.


Finally - I wish you luck with your cancer. I know I am at a high risk myself. I wish you a speedy recovery.

Here is a snippet from the Consumer Reports
"What to do. Choose a sunscreen with maximum protection against both UVA and UVB rays--preferably one labeled very water resistant or waterproof, with an SPF of at least 30. Two fine choices: Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry-Touch SPF 45 and No-Ad Sunblock Lotion Maximum SPF 45, a CR Best Buy."

Ah, we were looking at 2 different reports. This is what I read (got to it via a link in the article you posted): link (http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens/summary.php). Click here for their ratings of the best-selling suncreens: link (http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens/topsellers.php) - Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry Touch gets slammed on health hazard risks (as slvoid points out, a lot of this is b/c of the fragrance).

If a cager doesn't get you, skin cancer will, and if you can dodge both those bullets, it just may be peanut butter that does you in (I recently found out that pb can cause cancer :cry: ).

I have a giant list I have received from the two doctors that are treating me. They seem to trust the zinc or titanium the most.

Richard, are they recommending any specific brands?

Not really, mostly it is an ingredient list. I will scan and post it one day once I get back in the groove.

Richard

Ah, we were looking at 2 different reports. This is what I read (got to it via a link in the article you posted): link (http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens/summary.php). Click here for their ratings of the best-selling suncreens: link (http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/special/sunscreens/topsellers.php) - Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry Touch gets slammed on health hazard risks (as slvoid points out, a lot of this is b/c of the fragrance).

If a cager doesn't get you, skin cancer will, and if you can dodge both those bullets, it just may be peanut butter that does you in (I recently found out that pb can cause cancer :cry: ).


If you look at their rankings, the two problems are fragrance and Oxybenzone. Well - Oxybenzone helps to block I beleive Long-ray UVA rays, so for me, I will accept the risk of the fragrance. I have not shown any allergic reactions.