Sunscreen’s Shady Label Claims: The Sequel

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

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of 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.

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. It's our first time asking for an outpouring of support since screams of FAKE NEWS and so much of what Trump stood for made everything we do so visceral. Like most newsrooms, we face incredibly hard budget realities, and it's unnerving needing to raise big money when traffic is down.

So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

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