Advertising
In recent years, sunscreen with mineral filters (also known as natural or “natural origin”) have gained particular popularity, since many consider them softer or safe than chemical sunscreens.
Nevertheless, the real differences between the two types of sun protection are more technical than they perceive the general public, which makes it easy to understand that the scientific community knows about the consequences of their health.
How do UV filters act
The main difference between chemicals and mineral sunscreens is their active ingredients and the method of blocking ultraviolet radiation (UV).
Chemical sunscreens absorbs ultraviolet radiation, convert it to heat and release it from the skin. On the other hand, minerals – or, of course, sunscreen create a thin layer on the surface of the skin, which reflects or disperses radiation.
However, it is worth noting that the terms “mineral” and “chemical” are very misleading, since all sunscreens are based on chemicals. Many mineral formulas also include additives known as “reinforcements” that help active filters work more efficiently.
Christian Surber, a dermatologicalologist from the universities of Zurich and Basel, offers a more scientific approach: to distinguish the filters into “soluble” – which can penetrate the skin – and “insoluble”.
“The difference is only in the mechanism of filter actions,” Jurber explains in Euronews Health. “It can be absorption or scattering of radiation.”
Nevertheless, Euronews Health uses the terms that consumers more often encounter when looking for sunscreen on the shelves.
Health and European agreements
Reflections on the influence of sunscreen on health are not new. In 2021, the Scientific Committee for Consumer Safety of the European Commission (SCCS) appreciated the safety of three non -minor ultraviolet filters: oxybenzon, homosalat and is subtle of fears that they may have endocrine.
The committee concluded that homosexual and oxybenzone are not safe in the concentrations used then. On the contrary, Oktryleni was considered safe up to 10%of the concentration, although it was noted that scientific data remains unclear.
For example, in one study it is estimated that a person should use the sunscreen daily for 277 years to develop endocrine disorders similar to those that were observed in mice that consumed oxybenzone in the laboratory.
However, in 2022, the European Commission imposed new restrictions to reduce the permitted concentration of these filters.
“In practice, we no longer see them in the market,” says Laura Clase from the organization of Euronsers and the associations of consumers of test Ahats in Belgium. “Manufacturers know that (can) create problems or be completely banned in the European market in the coming years.”
Mineral filters: soft, but not always effective
Many people with sensitive skin prefer a zinc oxide or titanium oxide – important ingredients in mineral filters – since they cause less irritability, as Klis says.
Nevertheless, in tests conducted by test aspects, many exclusively fossil sunscreen creams provided lower protection than SPF on the packaging, which means that “products containing only mineral filters do not protect you enough,” he indicates.
Since these sunscreens are not absorbed by the skin, it is important to correctly cover the whole body.
This is difficult in practice, according to her tests. Consumers, as a rule, use them less often, partly because they leave a white membrane on the skin – what many find irritating.
Conclusion: Use the sunscreen that you actually put
With proper use, both chemical and mineral sunscreen are widely considered safe and effective dermatologists and competent healthcare authorities.
“In principle, all sunscreen filters went through security assessment and were approved by regulators,” Tsurber said.
In the end, experts agree with one thing: The best sunscreen is the one that you will wear stableField
“There is no real difference in health,” Clima concludes.