|
Sunscreen labels may leave
Canadians exposed to harmful rays, experts warn
July 25, 2004
TORONTO (CP) - Canadians who rely on sunscreen to defend themselves against
the sun's cancer-causing rays may not be getting the protection from harmful
ultraviolet radiation that they think they are, experts say.
Labels on the myriad sunscreen products available in Canada lack information
about protection from ultraviolet A rays, which penetrate deeper in the skin
than UVB rays and recent research suggests may contribute to skin cancer.
"I think consumers are not aware enough of the fact that it's not only the
SPF that matters, but UVA protection is also an issue, and it's not well
measured," said dermatologist Dr. Robert Bissonnette.
The Montreal researcher is the author of a 1997 study that found most
sunscreen agents that boast protection against UVA rays don't provide
so-called "full spectrum" protection.
Many Canadians don't know how to adequately protect themselves against the
sun, but labels aren't exactly helping consumers the way they should,
Bissonnette said.
"What I think is lacking is an approved and standard way (of measuring UVA
protection)," he said.
"These ways exist, but there's no regulation that will force sunscreen
makers to use one given way to assess UVA protection, so that consumers
could compare sunscreens that offer UVA protection."
UVA radiation are solar rays that penetrate deeper than UVB rays, the main
culprit behind sunburn and skin cancer. UVA rays don't cause skin to burn,
but are primarily responsible for premature aging and may contribute to skin
cancer by suppressing the skin's immune defences.
While UVB protection is graded using the Sun Protection Factor (SPF) system
- which measures the length of time a product protects against skin
reddening - scientists and regulators have yet to determine a standard for
measuring UVA protection.
But many consumers rely on the SPF factor of a sunscreen as a means of
gauging the level of total sun protection, instead of as a measurement of
protection against UVB rays only.
"If you have a high SPF sunblock, it will carry some degree of protection
into the UVA spectrum," said Dr. Jason Rivers, a Vancouver-based
dermatologist and university professor.
"The consumer, though, will not be aware of which UVA blocker is better than
the other, just by looking at the package."
Even sunscreens claiming to provide broad-spectrum protection or bearing the
Canadian Dermatology Association's logo may not provide full-spectrum UVA
protection.
When a number of approved sunscreens listed on the CDA's website were
examined using Health Canada's drug product database, they did not contain
active ingredients that some researchers believe provide full spectrum
protection, such as avobenzone (also known as Parsol 1789), Mexoryl SX, zinc
oxide or titanium dioxide.
"It's really disturbing," said Paula Begoun, a Seattle, Wash.-based author
and cosmetics consumer advocate.
It's up to consumers to arm themselves with the information they need in
order to make better choices about which sunscreen they use, she said.
"Nothing can be done about labelling until scientists come up with a way of
measuring (UVA), like they have with UVB," Begoun said.
Studies have shown that using sunscreens that safeguard against UVB rays
only lead consumers into a false sense of security, she added.
"It is dangerous to sit in the sun and leave your skin exposed to UVA, when
the sunscreen is only protecting UVB," Begoun said.
"It's not only dangerous, it's deadly."
Canadians in general are oblivious when it comes to protecting themselves
against the sun, said Rivers.
"People don't realize that if you were going to a nudist beach and you want
to put the appropriate amount of sunscreen on, you need about 30 millilitres,
or a quarter of a bottle, to cover you once."
Sunscreen should never be used as a prime means of protection against the
sun, but should always be used in combination with tightly-woven,
loose-fitting clothing and avoiding the sun during peak hours, he added.
"They're not a panacea for sun exposure."
|