Clear zinc oxide sunscreen skin#

I’ve already said there’s only about 5% difference in heat, which is tiny. “Mineral sunscreens are better because they don’t produce as much heat.” So this myth birthed another myth – maybe we can make like a sunscreen myth family tree (a cursed family tree)… How much heat is produced

But basically, absorption’s fantastic, because it actually destroys the UV and turns it into something less harmful, while scattering is like deflecting a bullet. This isn’t really a problem because it increases the chances of it hitting another sunscreen particle and getting absorbed and transformed into heat. But scattering isn’t as good as it sounds – most of the UV that gets scattered is actually scattered forwards, deeper towards your skin. Now some people might cling onto that scattered 5% and still say zinc oxide is still better. But it doesn’t matter: almost all of the UV is absorbed by mineral sunscreens, and the final ~5% is scattered.

Clear zinc oxide sunscreen skin#

I think there’s also confusion with the word “absorb” – it sounds like chemical sunscreens absorb deeper into skin so they don’t protect the upper layers, which is also a myth. I think it mostly just comes down to how absorbing sounds like it doesn’t protect you as much as a superhero shield that bounces the UV away, like there’s some UV that can still hang around and hurt you. I’m not sure why scattering and reflection is used as a reason for why mineral sunscreens are better. Related post: How Do Sunscreens Work? The Science (with video) About 95% of the UV that mineral sunscreens block gets absorbed and converted to heat, with about 5% contribution from back-scattering or reflecting ( the nitty gritty of how different sunscreen ingredients work is explained here). Just like chemical sunscreens, mineral sunscreens mostly work by absorbing UV and turning it into a tiny amount of heat. This is probably the most widespread myth about mineral sunscreen, but it isn’t true. “Because zinc oxide sunscreens reflect and scatter UV like a shield, while chemical sunscreens absorb UV like a sponge” So: zinc oxide being the most effective sunscreen. Related post: Chemical vs Physical Sunscreens: The Science (with video) Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are the physical sunscreens, everything else is chemical. It’s not great terminology and it kills me a bit inside every time – organic and inorganic are more accurate – but it’s what everyone calls them, so I’m just going to be a sheep (an SEO-aware sheep). I’m going to be calling the two types of sunscreen ingredients “chemical” and “physical” or “mineral”. If you prefer them, then keep using them! I just want everyone to know what the real benefits and drawbacks are, so you can make the best decision for your own situation.

The video is here on YouTube – keep scrolling for the text version.įirst off, I have nothing against people using zinc oxide sunscreens. I’ve also probably missed a few myths so if you think of any more leave them in the comments.) (I was originally going to cover the other aspects as well, but it ended up too long, so that’s future Michelle’s problem. But this post is going to focus on the myths around zinc oxide sunscreens giving better protection – that they’re actually better performing sunscreens. I’ve talked about the pros and cons of chemical and physical sunscreens before, including issues like safety, irritation, environmental impact. And a lot of these myths are being spread not only by social media, but also the regular media, sunscreen brands, doctors, dermatologists, cosmetic chemists, scientists – and I think these myths are getting people to use sunscreens that aren’t actually the best option for them. Some of these advantages are true… but so many are just myths. And it’s usually zinc oxide that gets all the hype. There are so many myths around mineral or physical sunscreens – the ones with zinc oxide and titanium dioxide – and how they’re supposedly better than chemical sunscreens with scarier names like oxybenzone and octocrylene.