Sunscreen’s Shady Label Claims: The Sequel

EarthlyDelights/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/earthlydelights/4426492624/">Flickr</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


As the Environmental Working Group found in its most recent sunscreen review, just because your Hawaiian Tropic sunscreen says it provides SPF 50 protection doesn’t mean it will. In fact, the real protection level is closer to SPF 10. And just because it’s “waterproof” doesn’t mean it will actually stay on in water. To curb false claims like these, the FDA has set some new rules for sunscreen manufacturers. The FDA has been promising to make guidelines for sunscreens since 1978: in fact, Mother Jones‘s 1993 May/June cover story mentioned that the FDA had “plans” to release new guidelines, and examined the confusing language and seals on sunscreen labels. At a minimum, the new FDA rules will require manufacturers to have more accurate labeling. More importantly, they’ll give consumers a better idea of what they’re getting.

The new rules, in a nutshell: 

–all sunscreens must be SPF 15 or higher if they claim to prevent sunburn, early aging, and reduce skin cancer risk. Anything under SPF 15 could only be advertised to help prevent sunburn.

–all sunscreens must provide protection against both ultraviolet B radiation (UVB) and ultraviolet A radiation (UVA) in order to be labeled as “Broad Spectrum.”

–no more labels that market a sunscreen as either “waterproof” or “sweatproof.” The label “sunblock” is also disallowed.

–any product that claims water resistance must also tell consumers how much time they can expect to get SPF protection for while in the water.

–no product can claim to offer immediate protection after application unless they submit data to the FDA and get the FDA’s express approval

–sunscreens in the form of wipes, towelettes, powders, body washes, and shampoo cannot be marketed without approved application.

“This new information will help consumers know which products offer the best protection,” said FDA’s Lydia Velasquez. “We want consumers to understand that not all sunscreens are created equal.” The new rules will become effective in a year. In addition to them, the FDA has proposed regulation that would get rid of those ridiculous SPF 200 and SPF 150 numbers. Instead, the most a manufacturer would be able to advertise is “SPF 50+”. The FDA is also drafting guidelines to help sunscreen companies test and label their products to be in compliance with the regulations, and the agency is requesting information from manufacturers on just how effective their various sunscreen sprays, creams, oils, butters, sticks, gels, and lotions are.

While the new rules are a big step for the FDA, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) says it’s too little, too late. “It is clear that FDA caved to industry and weakened its safety standards,” said EWG’s David Andrews. “Its earlier [2007] draft proposed stronger health protections.” EWG says that even with the new regulations, 20% of sunscreens used in the US could not be sold in Europe because they do not provide enough UVA protection. The FDA, however, puts the responsibility on the consumer. “It is important for consumers to read the entire label, both front and back, in order to choose the appropriate sunscreen for their needs,” said FDA’s Velasquez.

WE'LL BE BLUNT:

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't find elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate