quote:

Originally posted by KathyC:
And, Kathleen, here are Mag's comments regarding UVA being the "Silent Killer": (Abbreviated)."

Kathy C,

Yes, this is exactly what I was reading and it TOTALLY makes sense regarding increased cancer and countries pushing sunscreen use! People are staying out more in the sun and getting even more UVA exposure because they don't burn and don't know to go inside!

I don't think the sunscreens are causing cancer at all; I think it's all the increased UVA exposure from extended exposure with sunscrens that are totally useless at blocking UVA!

________________________________

Did Mag have a change to look at SVR, though? This one seems less confusing and has a claimed PPD of 20:

NEW VERSION- SVR 50B Cream SPF 50/IPD 45/ PPD 20 - 50ml tinted, 100% physical

Comment: 100% physical filters, tinted, only one light shade, best for fair complexion, consistency not greasy, light, w/o, fragrance-free.

Active ingredients:
- - Titanium dioxide - 11%
- Zin oxide - 3%

- Thermopherol 3% (Thermus thermophilus ferment 1% + Tocopherol acetate 2%) (supposed to help with

Aqua (Water Purified), Caprylyl Dimethicone Ethoxy Glucoside, Titanium Dioxide, Isocetyl Stearate, Glycerin, Sodium Chloride, Cyclomethicone, Sodium PCA, Tocopherol Acetate, Polyglyceryl-4 Isostearate, Alumina, Methicone, Cetyl Dimethicone, Thermus Termophilus Ferment, Zinc Oxide, Quaternium-18 Hectorite, Dimethicone, Caprylylsilane, Dimethiconol, Alcohol, CI 77492 (Iron Oxides), CI 77491 (Iron Oxides), CI 77499 (Iron Oxides), Methylparaben.

It may indeed have larger mineral particles and be pasty, which is why they have to tint it. I'm fair skinned, so the tint would be okay except it gets on clothing!)


If she thinks the PPD looks iffy, I will get the Avene with Tinosorb and octyl methoxycinnamate. Well, I am more and more convinced that the UVA protection is more important than 1 mild estrogenic chemical.

Thanks!
Kathleen

No worries Kathleen! I don't mind zipping over to the YTF board once in awhile for a change of pace. It keeps me up on other things that are discussed over there.

Well... I bought the Vichy! It was even on sale for $19.99 (CDN) for 100 ml tube! I think it will be just fine for me, and I love the consistency.

I used to use L'Ombrelle, but stopped when I started worrying about the chemicals. Now I am just looking for more effective chemicals - lol!

KathyC

Hi Kathy: Thanks being the messenger for us. I am becoming more familiar with most of the products posted, and all the information from you, Kathleen, and Meg are helpful. I still have to read some more technical papers on my spare time on these and other new sunscreen ingredients to take a position on any of the sunscreens posted.

I, however, have some mixed feelings about the objectivity and rationale offered in the cover story published by acs.org about the sunscreen agents used in Europe and the U.S. Although interesting and enlightening, the cover story’s perspectives are mostly one sided and from marketing personnel or scientists from sunscreen manufacturers. I believe the marketing and R&D scientists and administrators would be the most knowledgeable and have first-hand knowledge and experience in dealing with the FDA; however, they would also have more emotional and monetary incentives to reap returns on the time and money invested on their research and product development to allow the FDA scientists and doctors to review historical, experimental, and/or product reports and data presented. The 1999 Kobo presentation at PCIA that I posted concurs and alludes to the fact that the evaluation of the performance of sunscreen formula relies on the accuracy of the test method, and most research scientists find in-vivo and in-vitro test is time-consuming and costly.

Consumer regulations within a laissez-faire system provide some protection and balance in my view. Active sunscreen ingredients are classified as drugs instead of cosmetics and are regulated by the FDA. I personally do not want to volunteer to be a test subject or be experimented on. Experimental and clinical data are not guarantees, but at least we don’t revert back to the old snake-oil era and are making some educated guesses and spending our money wisely.

Quote Kathy C:
Kathleen, I find that very interesting about the UVA being a "silent killer".

I’m not sure if UVA is or is not a silent killer, but UVB light can penetrate into epidermis but not into the dermis as UVA can and it’s the cause of sunburn, malignant melanoma, and skin cancer. UVB ultraviolet spectrum is between the wavelengths of 290-320 nm.

On the other hand, UVA has the longest wavelength from 320-400 nm and 100 times the intensity of UVB. UVA can penetrate deeply into the middle of the dermis (deeper than epidermis) and cause immediate skin tanning and photo-aging.

I'm not convinced that U.S. sunscreens don't provide enough UVA protection. See my comment below to Kathleen.

Quote:
why the Avene with less % of titanium and zinc has a higher PPD. Could it be that it is the other way around?

I'm not sure the counter-part being compared to with Avene’s PPD of 10 or which Avene specifically in the quote, but the Kobo explains how high solid dispersion, particle size, and selections of the proper surface treatment, suitable vehicle, and potent dispersant all affect the performance of inorganic (TiO2/ZnO) sunscreens. It took me a while to understand the findings in Kobo paper because with the factors mentioned above, the subject is complex. I may lose some of you with the following explanation, but I’ll try. The Kobo paper does not use PPD to measure UVA but PFA.

For example, the in-vivo PFA results support the conclusion that smaller ZnO particle size and larger TiO2 particle size offer higher UVA protection. Although larger TiO2 particle size offers effective UVA protection, it lowers the SPF and transparency. In addition, ZnO usually offers better UVA protection than TiO2 because it absorbs UVA strongly. However, at mid-size of about 154.1 nm, TiO2 offers a better PFA unit per percent active (Table 8). At the same percent active ingredients, formulation and particle size of inorganic pigments affect both the transparency and UVA and UVB protection. http://www.koboproductsinc.com/Downloads/PCIA99-Sunscreen.pdf

Quote Meg:
“But UVA is far more dangerous, even in small doses, than chemicals, which may or may not be harmful to some people.”

Could you ask Meg or if you have them, what references she has that support that UVA is definitively more dangerous than chemicals sunscreens? Once the cascades of free radicals start in the dermis whether induced by normal metabolism, UVA, or chemical sunscreens, there is little recourse except from possible topical antioxidants and anti-oxidant supplement. Is this an issue of lack of toxicity test results of chemical sunscreens, or does she have test results that rule out DNA damage from chemical sunscreens as oppose to UVA light?

Kathleen: I know you choose chemical sunscreens over physical sunscreen on your face to prevent Melasma. I am not convinced that inorganic sunscreens don’t offer sufficient UVA protection yet. It’s true that at certain wavelength ranges, both ZnO and TiO2 lose some UVA and UVB protection (Kobo paper) and probably the same as what you referred to as “the drop-off point,” but if the inorganic sunscreens are formulated properly and with different particle sizes, the loss of UV protection in certain wave ranges possibly can cancel each other out. What do you think?

JW,

I was quoting Mag (not Meg) in the foregoing posts which was for the benefit of Kathleen and others at Kathleen's request. I am grateful for the time she has taken for me now and I have been bombarding her lately! You are certainly welcome to head over to the YTF board and post a message for her. She's very open and helpful. Here is a link for your convenience that may get her attention if you post within it. I think you will find her very helpful and informed.

http://www.spectacularskin.com/cgi-bin/forum/index.cgi?read=14180

KathyC

Thanks, Kathy.

Just one correction on one of my statments from the previous post.

I looked over the graphs (Fig 6 and Fig 8). Micronized ZnO and TiO2 particles do not lose both UVA protection and UVB protection. Both minerals offer pretty constant UVB protection but not 100% and only lose (or gaine) UVA protection at different wavelength ranges.

Each offers 95-97% UVB maximum protection from the smallest particle size tested. At the largest particle size tested, titanium dioxide and ZnO would still offer 70% and 78% UVB protection, respectively.

Titanium dioxide offers 70-80% UVA protection at the largest particle size of 263.4 nm, and 30-95% UVA protection at the smallest particle size tested if 125.3 nm. So, depending on particle size being formulated, TiO2 has still a 30-95% UVA protection range for titanium dioxide. Larger TiO2 particle size offers more UVA protection but some UVB protection is lost (70% instead of 95%). See Fig 6.

ZnO offers pretty constant UVB and UVA protection 78-97% up to 350 nm. After 350 nm wavelength, ZnO offers 60-85% UVA protection from the smallest to the largest ZnO pigments (Fig 8).

In summary, without formulating or adjusting the size of the particles to increase UVA and UVB protection mentioned in the previous post, ZnO and TiO2 would offer an UVA protection of 60-97% and 30-95%, respectively.

quote:

Originally posted by KathyC:
No worries Kathleen! I don't mind zipping over to the YTF board once in awhile for a change of pace. It keeps me up on other things that are discussed over there.

Well... I bought the Vichy! It was even on sale for $19.99 (CDN) for 100 ml tube! I think it will be just fine for me, and I love the consistency.

I used to use L'Ombrelle, but stopped when I started worrying about the chemicals. Now I am just looking for more effective chemicals - lol!

KathyC

OH! That is a great price! I will have to check out the Vichy.

Lol at your statement about chemicals. I was deathly afraid of the chemicals, too. I still take them very seriously, but I figure 1 or 2 won't hurt me that much compared to the damage of the UV, especially UVA to our immune system. Moreover, it appears they don't necessarily absorb 100% into your system anyway and I don't use it on my whole body or anything. (I'm not a beach person at all!!)

I still look for non-estrogenic chemicals where possible.

But my stress levels are down with less worrying about every single chemical and concentrate more on protecting myself from the UV. The worry alone would probably age me more than anythng else, lol!

BTW, I think I asked you in antoher thread, but you didn't see it: You are using Renova or Retin A, correct? I keep reading about it and that it's still gold standard for skin rejuvination, coupled with either copper or vit C and acids as needed to keep flakes away.

What do you think about this? I was of the impression acids could do everything retinoids can, but recent studies pointed out to me have me thinking I may be wrong. I am not opposed to Retin A and used it for a few years with good results, albeit some irritation. But the CPs help with that. If you have any knowledge, please impart!

Thanks!
Kathleen

quote:

Originally posted by JW:
Thanks, Kathy.

Just one correction on one of my statments from the previous post.

I looked over the graphs (Fig 6 and Fig 8). Micronized ZnO and TiO2 particles do not lose both UVA protection and UVB protection. Both minerals offer pretty constant UVB protection but not 100% and only lose (or gaine) UVA protection at different wavelength ranges.

Each offers 95-97% UVB maximum protection from the smallest particle size tested. At the largest particle size tested, titanium dioxide and ZnO would still offer 70% and 78% UVB protection, respectively.

Titanium dioxide offers 70-80% UVA protection at the largest particle size of 263.4 nm, and 30-95% UVA protection at the smallest particle size tested if 125.3 nm. So, depending on particle size being formulated, TiO2 has still a 30-95% UVA protection range for titanium dioxide. Larger TiO2 particle size offers more UVA protection but some UVB protection is lost (70% instead of 95%). See Fig 6.

ZnO offers pretty constant UVB and UVA protection 78-97% up to 350 nm. After 350 nm wavelength, ZnO offers 60-85% UVA protection from the smallest to the largest ZnO pigments (Fig 8).

In summary, without formulating or adjusting the size of the particles to increase UVA and UVB protection mentioned in the previous post, ZnO and TiO2 would offer an UVA protection of 60-97% and 30-95%, respectively.

Hi JW,

I know sunscreens are confusing and I don't profess to be an expert (yet ) by any means! I don't have time tonight to dig up studies, but I can.

But suffice to say tonight that I think you are saying that ZnO and TiO2 can be formulated with particle size to effectively block UVA. This may be true, but then you state that to do this, you lose UVB protection. The end results you come up with are ranges from 35-95%. I personally need to know whether I am getting the 35 or the 95% as that is a huge difference.

Most U.S. sunscreens that claim UVA protection offer a PPD of about 3-4, if that, which is like 30% protection from UVA. COTZ only offers about an 8, still not very good. This is known because the SPF is very high, meaning, by your example, that some UVA wold necessarily be lost.

There are tons of studies (and not performed by sunscreen manufacturers) demonstrating the harm to the immune system, etc. from UVA exposure. This is a very plausible reason why persons who use lots of suncreen in very sunny places in Australia are seeing increased skin cancers. They stay in the sun longer because they don't burn, but there is little protection against UVA, which affects the immune system ad creates a whole host of problems.

In Australia, a sunscreen must block 90% of UVA to state that it blocks UVA. I don't think any of the Australian formulas use only zinc and titanium, so I'm thinking it may be impossible to get both a high SPF AND a high PPD with zinc and titanium alone.

In the U.S. where people are accostomed to the SPF as a measure of efficacy, products are made to ensure high SPF, which ends up sacrraficing UVA based on your hypothesis of particle size.

I also would like to share some correspondence I had with Fallene, makers of COTZ:

Hello,

I recently learned that the term "broad spectrum" gives no information whatsover to the amount of protection being provided in the UVA range. I was shocked to learn that most so-called UVA blockers such as titanium and zinc oxide actually protect us against very little of the UVA rays. They may protect throughout the entire UVA spectrum, but the PERCENT of UVA rays they actually block or absorb is pathetically low. It appears only the newer sunscreens like Tinosorb can protect us from these rays.

Europeon sunscreens are now using a PPD system which is similar to the SPF for UVB. These newer sunscreens can provide PPD up to 30, which is pretty amazing.

I am very concerned because I have melasma and preventing the UV rays from hitting my skin may eradicate this condition for me. Thus, I need the best possible sunscreens. I can, of course, order from Europe and will, however, I would like to give your company a chance to provide me with any stats you may have on what % of UVA rays Total Block or COTZ provide. I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you,
Kathleen

This was their response:

Dear Kathleen, Thank you for your interest in our products.As you are probably aware, there currently is no approved UVA rating system in the US;Fallene has completed PPD testing for our own info, but unfortunately cannot release the data. Drug products, which sunscreens are, cannot make unapproved claims, this information would constitute a claim that FDA does not allow. We would be interested in your sources regarding the percent of UVA that the physical actives address, and I can say that it is, in my opinion, far from minimal. Although Tinosorb is not yet available in the US we look forward to its approval,however it is a chemical active, with its own set of limitations. Nothing to date, in our opinion, can match multiple particle formulations, both from a protective perspective and a localized reaction to either the ingreidents or their byproducts, as a result of the reaction that occurs upon exposure to light.thank you.

I subsequently found out it is NOT illegal to disclose PPD or UVA absorbance studies, you just can't put such claims on the products itself because it's not a recognized standard or measuring sunscreens.

However, I sent them these links, which includes the L'Oreal paper to the FDA regarding Mexoryl and the need for it because the U.S. has no good UVA sunscreens:

Dear Harry,

Thank you for replying to my email. Below are links to some sources I used in writing my letter to you.

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/00/mar00/032400/sup0030.pdf

http://www.biochemistryofbeauty.com/sun/mysun16.html and go from there to read further information.

I will be quite interested to hear your response to the issues raised in these links regarding the inadequacy of physical sunscreens and what Fallene may do differently to overcome these limitations and provide a high PPD product.

Although you cannot disclose an actual PPD due to FDA regulations, are you permitted to state what percentage of UV rays are actually blocked (or absorbed) by Total Block and COTZ? I realize that zinc can block throughout the entire UVA, but these sources are saying that they do not block much in that range. The figures I am seeing suggest a PPD of maybe 6 with high percentages of physical sunscreens, which would be around 70-some % of UVA rays, if my calculations are correct.

I think for general use, this is good enough! However, I have melasma and I know that the highest UVA possible is required to get rid of it. Of course (and this is not your fault!), the physical sunscreens tend to make for a thicker, less cosmetically appealing product.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,
Kathleen

To date, Fallene has NOT replied to my email, which speaks for itself, i.e., that they don't provide more UVA protection that what I suggested in my email.

I realize 70& UVA blockage may be enough for you and, on my body, I am willing to accept 10 PPD to avoid chemcials. But 8 is a bit low. That is why I was looking at SVR and Avene. Some of the Avene use only 1 chemical and have PPD of 15-20, which is very good and certainly good enough for me for the body! I am going to check out Vichy now, as well.

It's late, so if I have not evaluated this correctly, please let me know.
Kahleen

quote:

Originally posted by Kathleen:
BTW, I think I asked you in antoher thread, but you didn't see it: You are using Renova or Retin A, correct? I keep reading about it and that it's still gold standard for skin rejuvination, coupled with either copper or vit C and acids as needed to keep flakes away.

What do you think about this? I was of the impression acids could do everything retinoids can, but recent studies pointed out to me have me thinking I may be wrong. I am not opposed to Retin A and used it for a few years with good results, albeit some irritation. But the CPs help with that. If you have any knowledge, please impart! Thanks!
Kathleen

Hi Kathleen, I did respond to you, perhaps you missed it?? Or perhaps I didn't push the "post now" button! Anyway, to answer your question, yes, I have used renova since December 2004. I started out using it every third day, then the next month I increased to every second day, and now I use it almost every night. I will continue using it nightly now until December of 2005. I will then continue for maintenance only, about twice a week.

I also use lactic acid on occasion (10% is the highest I can tolerate). When I want to apply the lactic acid, I back off the renova for a day or two prior to using the lactic acid as this can be an irritating combination. Dr. Pickart did tell me, however, that using lactic acid on occasion would be ok. He also said that retinoic acid and CPs are fine to use together and personally I like the combination. I don't get much of the flakes anymore, and if I do it's not a big deal.

Some history on me, I started using SRCPs in March of 2004, and believe that when I introduced renova to my routine it helped speed things along. I believe I am getting the best of both worlds by using both SRCPs and retinoic acids, with the occasional lactic acid peel at low strength, but it is hard to know which product is actually working. I tend to think that it's the combination of products. My routine consists mainly of SRCPs, renova, DMAE serum 5% once daily, and lactic acid on occasion.

Sorry to be rambling on here. If you have any other questions, let me know! Right now, I have to scoot off to the doctor to see if I can get something to help with these allergies!! I'm a mess this time of year!

KathyC

oh good post KathyC, I was just thinking about retin-a. There are some posts over on the YTF board about places to get retin-a online that apparently don't require a perscription.

http://www.pharmacymex.com/products/retin-a.asp
http://www.4cnrs-skincare.com/retin-a.html

Are these products real? How can they dispense without a script? I don't understand but I'm tempted to order. I'm waiting to hear back from someone who ordered from pharmacymex.

The reason I came to this forum... I got my Anthelios fluid extreme (eBay guy) and it seems too good to be true (except for the price!) I am used to smearing what feels like axel grease on my face for sun protection and this stuff is sooooo thin and light. How do I know if I'm putting it on thick enough for protection? With the axel grease there is no doubt about coverage, but the thin nature of the anthelios makes me wonder. It seems I should keep adding layers but not at what I paid for this stuff (I'm such a tightwad ) It is worth every penney if it actually provides the protection is says at that texture and consistency, but I just can't get past feeling inadequate in the coverage dept.

Hi Ducky,

I know you can get retin-a without an RX at various internet sites. I did try to get it at medsmex.com and they tried shipping it to me to Canada on two occasions and finally gave up and credited me the money back. Apparently it kept being returned as "unclaimed" even though my post office told me nothing had come through for me from Mexico.

I think you're safe just putting on the normal amount of Anthelios sunscreen. I've never heard that you need to apply more. It has a great consistency from what I am told. Kathleen uses it from this forum and loves it! I managed to get one at a local drug store here in Canada that is almost as wonderful as Anthelios but quite a bit cheaper (Vichy SPF 60 with mexoryl). I got it for $19.99 for a 100 ml tube. Yesssssssss! That's more like it! I guess I'm a tight wad too! LOL!

KathyC

Kathy C,

Thank you for reposting the Retin A/Renova info for me. I must have missed your earlier post, sorry!

I don't think you are rambling. I was hoping maybe you'd used acids prior to Renova and could give a comparison of the two. I am not sure yet that acids are as good as retinoic acid, but definitely I've always read they are great adjuncts therapy, especially since acids will get rid of the flakes from retinoic acid.

There are some things that retinoic acid does that I have not seem listed in the effects from acid. So I am thinking I would like to try it.

I have been using acids regularly now for a while, so I think perhaps I would be in a position to compare results. I have some Differin I am going to use up first as it is so much milder and I hope it can ease me into retin A. But I want to try mandelic acid, too, lol, so will have to figure how to fit it all in! Like you, I probably won't use Retin A every night, so I can use mandelic the other days perhaps. I still love Exfol or some BHA in the A.M.


Ducky,

Yes, there are lots of places you can buy Retin A online. The generic is cheapest, they charge a LOT for the new Retin A Micro Gel and I personally hate the stuff! Goes on like a stiff paste, and dries fast without blending in. Weird.

Yes, these products are real, they just come from countries where I guess you either don't need an Rx or they can sell them without some regulatory body breathing down their necks.

I have bought Differin from S. American and Skinoren (Azelex) from Australia. They both were the real stuff. I could tell by the way they worked, etc. Usually, the products I buy are coming from Australia.

Also, there is an anti-aging site in the UK that is dedicated to selling whatever anti-aging drugs/supplements work whether people have a script or not. They have some good info on the site on supplements and whatnot, although I think they are bit extreme taking anti-aging drugs. Of course, that has nothing to do with Retin A! The link is: http://www.antiaging-systems.com/



Perhaps the customs are stricter in Canada? I have never once had any Rx stuff stopped in the U.S.

However, I have read studies showing Retin A gel may be the best for skin rejuvination, so if you can tolerate that, you can just search for that. The creams can actually break out some breakout prone persons, ironically.

Oh, sorry to be so long winded!

And yes, on a final note, I LOVE Anthelios. Don't worry, it is one of the best sunscreens on the market, you are covered! I have read that you need 1 cc sunscreen for every 20 cc of skin. I also was told that you need 1/3 or 1/2 tsp (can't remember which) for your face and neck. Sounds like a lot, but they way I apply sunscreen, I am sure I put that much on, lol.

Kathleen

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SkinBiologyWebmaster,

Hi - could someone direct to stores in Canada (Vancouver) that sell products containing Mexoryl - appreciate your help!

Hi Shaveta, you can try Vichy Capital Soleil SPF 60 Extreme Sunblock Lotion which contains Mexoryl. I am in the Penticton, B.C. area, and get it at Shoppers Drug Mart.

HTH.

Kathy

The Spanish Ebay seller says Anthelios XL Fluide Extreme has PPD 17. This contradicts what some people were saying about its PPD being in the 20s. Am I looking at the wrong Fluide Extreme?

Hi Kathleen, I realize this is a very old post I'm replying to but would like to know why you are using HA to make your skin lotion? I thought HA was an unapproved ingredient because it wets the outer proteins. I realize that since this is an old post you may not do that anymore or even be hanging around this forum. Just curious, as I familiarize myself with all these threads, trying to learn.

quote:

Originally posted by Kathleen:
Belle,

There is no comparison in texture between COTZ and Athelios. Athelios wins hands down! It has the most elegant texture of any sunscreen I've ever used. It is very light and silky. I actually have a tendency towards oily, but dehydrated skin, but this does not dry matte or anything, so I think it would be fine for even dry skin, although it was designed for oilier skins. The texture is so light, you won't have any problems putting makeup or anything over it.

COTZ is very heavy and thick--what I didn't like about it. Also, for me, I think it may have been prone to causing breakout. It also has a sort of sallow cast to it which is not very flattering. Still, if you want only physical sunscreens and your skin is dry, it may work for you. There are sites out there that will send you free samples to try. And many sites let you return a full size if you don't like it.

If you think you may prefer Athelios, they do also have other formulations with the same level of protection. There is a "lait" formula (milk formula) or even a cream. You may find you prefer these if your skin is dry, but unfortunately, I don't know of anywhere to get samples of Athelios and it is expensive if it turns out you don't like it. Also, most cream sunscreens are SO heavy, I don't know if even dry skins prefer them as it hard to put anything on top if you wear makeup.

I don't think you would dislike it the Fluide Extreme or Lait formulas, though.

Also, what I have been doing is aplying it over my emu/ha emulsion in the AM. Then I try to gently pat it into the skin to help it absorb and get rid of some of the shine. Makeup goes on easily over it. I love it and I think if you apply it over your moisturizer, you will be fine. I think you use mineral makeup and you could probably just mix it with the Fluide Extreme to make a liquid foundation/sunscreen in one. (I have been meaning to getting around to ordering some Aromaleigh samples to try this myself). But if in doubt, get the Athelios in the lait formula.

HTH,
Kathleen

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SkinBiologyWebmaster,