Literature DB >> 12967508

Sunscreens--the ultimate cosmetic.

Ronni Wolf1, Hagit Matz, Edith Orion, Jasna Lipozencić.   

Abstract

One decade ago, a sun protection factor (SPF) of 15 was considered a complete blocker of ultraviolet radiation (UV). The logic behind that cutoff point was that sunscreens with this SPF number would always prevent erythema and that preventing erythema would prevent all the ill effects of UV exposure. Today, we know that both of these assumptions were wrong and we tend to recommend higher SPF. Consumers apply only about one-quarter to one-half thickness of the layer of sunscreen material used to measure the SPF in the laboratory. That means that less than 50% of the SPF number claimed on the label is spread on the consumer's skin, meaning that a sunscreen with an SPF 30 will give the real protection of an SPF of 15. Therefore, recommend 60 when you want a real protection of 30! Significant injury, DNA damage, mutations, and carcinogenesis can and do occur also with cumulative suberythemal UV exposure. Thus, erythema induction, a criterion that defines SPF, is not a good indicator of UV damage. We also need higher SPF values to prevent the damage caused by suberythemal doses of UV. The value of the SPF claimed on the label is diminished by environmental factors that are not taken into account during SPF measurements in the laboratory, such as sweating, water immersion, rubbing off, and photodegradation. There are some misunderstandings and confusion about the mode of action of physical sunscreens. It was originally considered that, in contrast to organic sunscreens, the inorganic metal oxides (zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) acted as scatterers or reflectors of UV light, as a mirror. This is not the case with modern micronized forms of metal oxides. It has been shown that both zinc oxide and titanium dioxide mobilize electrons within their atomic structure while absorbing UV radiation. Thus, although metallic oxides are not inert per se, in their coated form they are stable, non-toxic, and safe and they act as highly efficient UV attenuators. Therefore, we recommend our patients to use this type of sunscreens. We should exert all our influence upon our patients not to expose themselves to excessive sunlight, to routinely use generous layers of sunscreen agents, and to wear protective clothing. To wait for the dust to settle around the issue of the effectiveness of sunscreens in preventing melanoma, while the ideal sunscreens--topical, systemic, whatever--are at our disposal, is a luxury we cannot afford.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12967508

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Dermatovenerol Croat        ISSN: 1330-027X            Impact factor:   1.256


  12 in total

Review 1.  Ingestion of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a definite health risk for consumers and their progeny.

Authors:  Raphaël Cornu; Arnaud Béduneau; Hélène Martin
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-07-27       Impact factor: 6.168

Review 2.  Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of current toxicological data.

Authors:  Hongbo Shi; Ruth Magaye; Vincent Castranova; Jinshun Zhao
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 9.400

3.  Mechanism of N-acetyl-cysteine inhibition on the cytotoxicity induced by titanium dioxide nanoparticles in JB6 cells transfected with activator protein-1.

Authors:  Hongbo Shi; Yuanliang Gu; Zhenhua Xie; Qi Zhou; Guochuan Mao; Xialu Lin; Kui Liu; Yu Liu; Baobo Zou; Jinshun Zhao
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 2.447

4.  Oral toxicity of titanium dioxide P25 at repeated dose 28-day and 90-day in rats.

Authors:  Min Beom Heo; Minjeong Kwak; Kyu Sup An; Hye Jin Kim; Hyeon Yeol Ryu; So Min Lee; Kyung Seuk Song; In Young Kim; Ji-Hwan Kwon; Tae Geol Lee
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 9.400

5.  Titanium dioxide nanoparticles oral exposure to pregnant rats and its distribution.

Authors:  Jinsoo Lee; Ji-Seong Jeong; Sang Yun Kim; Min-Kyu Park; Sung-Deuk Choi; Un-Jung Kim; Kwangsik Park; Eun Ju Jeong; Sang-Yoon Nam; Wook-Joon Yu
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 9.400

6.  Repeated-dose 28-day dermal toxicity study of TiO2 catalyst (GST) in Sprague-Dawley rats.

Authors:  Jun Ho Kim; Myeong Kyu Park; Jae Min Im; Heung Sik Seo; Hee Ju Park; Sung Soon Nah
Journal:  Environ Anal Health Toxicol       Date:  2022-05-10

7.  Physico-Chemical Properties of Inorganic NPs Influence the Absorption Rate of Aquatic Mosses Reducing Cytotoxicity on Intestinal Epithelial Barrier Model.

Authors:  Valeria De Matteis; Makarena Rojas; Mariafrancesca Cascione; Stefano Mazzotta; Gian Pietro Di Sansebastiano; Rosaria Rinaldi
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 4.411

8.  Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticle Penetration into the Skin and Effects on HaCaT Cells.

Authors:  Matteo Crosera; Andrea Prodi; Marcella Mauro; Marco Pelin; Chiara Florio; Francesca Bellomo; Gianpiero Adami; Pietro Apostoli; Giuseppe De Palma; Massimo Bovenzi; Marco Campanini; Francesca Larese Filon
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 9.  Engineered nanomaterials in food: implications for food safety and consumer health.

Authors:  Alina Martirosyan; Yves-Jacques Schneider
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Comparative study of the cytotoxic and genotoxic potentials of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles.

Authors:  Maryam Khan; Alim Husain Naqvi; Masood Ahmad
Journal:  Toxicol Rep       Date:  2015-02-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.