You’re Not Allowed to Have the Best Sunscreens in the World - Newer, better UV-blocking agents have been in use in other countries for years. Why can’t we have them here?
AB999E9E-5DD3-4F22-9975-74B37A67C102.jpeg
The preponderance of babies in rashguards and bucket hats that you now see at the beach shows how much has changed, and how quickly. Skyrocketing skin-cancer rates, specifically for fair-skinned people, among whom the disease is more prevalent, have scared plenty of people into rethinking their tans, as has the realization that sun exposure causes—horror of horrors—wrinkles and other visible signs of aging. Now SPF is ubiquitous. You can find it in lotions, sprays, gels, oils, powders, and implements that look like grade-school glue sticks, as well as infused into skin-care products, lip balms, makeup, and clothing. Sun care has its own aisle at big-box stores, and beauty companies worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been built from the ground up by offering only products that block ultraviolet rays.
Yet if sun protection, and specifically sunscreen, has become a very big deal in a relatively short amount of time, the UV blockers Americans are slathering on have barely evolved at all. While some of the more expensive U.S. products are better than they used to be in terms of texture and how they look on skin, their active ingredients remain stubbornly unchanged. To make matters worse, we’ve brought this situation on ourselves. Consumers in Europe and Asia are not locked in, as we are, to a small and outmoded set of active ingredients. Simply put: They have better sunscreen than we do.
We should have it too.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...u-asia/661433/