169
submitted 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/health@lemmy.world

Products sold in Europe, Japan and South Korea offer more protection from the sun. In the U.S., the key ingredients aren't FDA-approved.

When dermatologist Dr. Adewole “Ade” Adamson sees people spritzing sunscreen as if it’s cologne at the pool where he lives in Austin, Texas, he wants to intervene. “My wife says I shouldn’t,” he said, “even though most people rarely use enough sunscreen.”

At issue is not just whether people are using enough sunscreen, but what ingredients are in it.

The Food and Drug Administration’s ability to approve the chemical filters in sunscreens that are sold in countries such as Japan, South Korea, and France is hamstrung by a 1938 U.S. law that requires sunscreens to be tested on animals and classified as drugs, rather than as cosmetics as they are in much of the world. So Americans are not likely to get those better sunscreens — which block the ultraviolet rays that can cause skin cancer and lead to wrinkles — in time for this summer, or even the next.

Sunscreen makers say that requirement is unfair because companies including BASF Corp. and L’Oréal, which make the newer sunscreen chemicals, submitted safety data on sunscreen chemicals to the European Union authorities some 20 years ago.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] athos77@kbin.social 21 points 4 weeks ago

Well, what's preventing the corporations from lobbying to change the rules to benefit them, just like every other time? I'm not going to cry because corpos haven't bought enough congresscritters.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 weeks ago

Why can’t they get FDA approval? Seems sus as fuck.

[-] athos77@kbin.social 11 points 4 weeks ago

Well, if you read the article ................ :/

a 1938 U.S. law that requires sunscreens to be tested on animals and classified as drugs, rather than as cosmetics as they are in much of the world.

companies are wary of the FDA process because of the cost and their fear that additional animal testing could ignite a consumer backlash in the European Union, which bans animal testing of cosmetics, including sunscreen.

Won't someone think of the poor corpos! Corpos like BASF and L’Oréal, which only had profits last year of €225,000,000 and €32,000,000,000!

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 weeks ago

So they are “afraid” eh? Still sus as fuck. Fuck those corpos they can play by the rules they don’t want to.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The "poor corpos" are saying the benefit of adding another market isn't worth the expense, and the risk of reducing their sales in established markets, so they are unwilling to jump through the hoops to enter that new market.

...and the hoop in question is animal testing. Of products that have been used by humans for decades.

this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
169 points (95.7% liked)

Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

1946 readers
56 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS