UV Geekery part 2...
...it's a heatwave, I couldn't not...more sunscreens I love, how to get your kids to wear sunscreen, some great sun-related further reading, nerdy UVA facts and a new skin book worth shelf space...
After last week’s mega download of UV-related knowledge, I wasn’t sure if you had the stomach for more but have you SEEN what’s going on with the weather in the UK? I say UK, partly because I’m London-based and because the caricature of Brits being obsessed with the weather is actually, erm, true. (Social anthropologist, Kate Fox, says it’s part of our social code, our way of saying “I’d like to talk to you.”) But also because I feel like our reaction in the UK is very specific (although actually as you’ll discover below, it turns out it’s not as specific as I thought.) I put the wider UK response to sunny weather down to the fact that the UK has traditionally not been that sunny, and so there’s a sort of groupthink that the only time we use sunscreen is when we go “abroad”. So when it’s sunny here, we seem to have a collective madness that compels us to strip off all our clothes and lie in the sun, often with no protection at all.
Part of the reason I avoided the parks near me this weekend was because I just couldn’t deal with seeing acres of exposed flesh turning pink, having listened to people talk about the relationship between burning and skin cancer. Last week I sat in the hairdresser’s and literally bit my own tongue to stop myself intervening as I listened to a teenager say he was going to Brighton at the weekend and would “probably get a bit burnt”. The guys who turned up this morning — predicted temperatures in London today 35C — to install the solar panels looked at me like I was mad when I told them to let me know if they needed any water — or any sunscreen — at any point during the day.
Anyway, all this is to say that I don’t think we can talk too much about sun protection. And I realise that if you’re reading this, I’m probably preaching to the converted, but please do spread the word. I think we underestimate the impact that we can have — and not in a boring, wanging-on type way. Some friends of my husband came to dinner a few months ago and they were asking about my work so, naturally, I started talking about the UV report and the recommendations, and it transpired that one of them was fond of a sunbed. I wasn’t being judgey about it, but I must have made a face (sorry, my face just does that when I hear about someone doing something awful to their skin), and so he asked me were they really that bad. I just told him one of the stats that had stuck in my head: that using a sunbed before the age of 35 had been shown to increase melanoma incidence by 59% (although some newer research — see below — suggests it’s even more than that.) I didn’t bang on, or tell him he shouldn’t. But a few weeks later, my husband came back from work “J told me he’s stopped using sunbeds since he came round to ours.” Now I have no idea if that’s true, or if it is, if it will last, but it did make me think we shouldn’t underestimate what sharing — without being a twat about it — knowledge can achieve.
So yes, this week it’s more UV-related stuff — some slightly depressing news from the US, some quite positive news from Australia, more of the sunscreens that I love, some UVA / PA+++ geekery, and a new book I think skin geeks will LOVE…
BTW: some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate links which means if you buy a product through them, I can earn a small amount of commission. This will never influence my opinion on something: I only rave about products I really rate. If you hate the idea of this, please let me know, as this is very much a work in progress and nothing is set in stone (and, for more on my thoughts on affiliate links, click here.)
It’s not just us Brits
Obviously my Insta algorithm is BOUND to feed me UV stuff but this week it served up three separate Allure posts around sunbeds and tanning that I thought were a) fascinating and b) depressing — the latter because it suggests that what I thought were uniquely British behaviours (based on us being historically sun-starved and thus not having a clue what to do when it shines) are actually far more widespread. So maybe I should take comfort from that, but I don’t really… (I would also love to hear about how you would characterise your country’s attitude to the sun if you’re from somewhere else.)
Anyway, it turns out that one journalist, Kara Nesvig, wrote all of the pieces that caught my eye (so obviously I’m now stalking her on all social media.) One is a big investigation into how the culture of tanning in US colleges (what we in the UK call universities) has changed and while there’s been a move away from sunbeds, there’s been a move towards “laying out” — or getting a suntan the traditional way. It’s a great long read and well worth your time. She also wrote on something that has been really bothering me as I keep hearing it talked about among young people and it’s such an awful / brilliant example of the law of unintended consequences — If You’re Using the UV Index to Tan, You’re Using It Very Wrong. Finally Allure reposted a piece they published last December about a new piece of research into sunbeds (which shamefully I’d missed), A New Study Proves That Tanning Beds Are Far Riskier Than We Ever Knew.
It’s about a paper published at the end of last year that found — among other things — that sunbeds create more genetic mutations and also create unique genetic mutations (that aren’t found in skin that is exposed to UV from the sun). Anyway, it’s scant comfort that the UV crisis we’ve identified in the UK is more far-reaching. But at least it means that there are more scientists, academics, psychologists and sociologists working on how we can fix it. (I actually think the “why” people are doing this is not only the key to sorting it but also one of the most interesting aspects of this. Dr Angela Rodrigues who gave evidence at the UV enquiry was fascinating on this — her latest study on young people’s attitudes to sunbeds is very interesting.) If you have any thoughts on the “why” I’d love to hear them.
Australians, influencers & sunscreen
Moving on, there is some good news from Australia — where TBH a lot of the good news around UV protection is coming from. They’ve banned sunbeds and think they’ve reached peak skin cancer thanks, in part, to a decades long consistent public messaging campaign, Slip, Slop, Slap!
But last week my eye was caught by a massive piece of research that two Australian content creators in the beauty space that I follow, Michelle Wong and Hannah Collingwood English, have been involved with. The report, Influencing Sunscreen Use: Influencers and Promotion of Sunscreen in Australia, looks at the role that influencers have on sunscreen use in Australia. It was prompted, in part, by a change to the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code (which is kind of like the rules that the ASA oversee here but specifically applies to the advertising of “therapeutic goods” — which includes sunscreen) that since July 2022, has specified influencer testimonials as one of the areas that it covers.
The report argues that influencers talking about sun protection is one of the most significant ways in which people learn about products, how they feel and how to use them, and that since July 2022, there has been a drop in the number of influencers creating this sort of sunscreen content — presumably because they’re worried they’re going to fall foul of the code. The unintended consequences? (Yes, those pesky things again.) People using less sunscreen because they’re not getting the information that they were before, and dangerous misinformation about sunscreen (nope, beef tallow won’t protect you) not being countered by the correct information.
This might not sound like good news, but there is some. I learnt loads from their really wide-ranging report (and I realise I’m bombarding you with a tonne of long-reads on a similar topic this week, but honestly, if you’re interested and have the time, do take a look.) Not least that following a surge in social media content glamourising tanning, TikTok and Melanoma Institute Australia launched the “Tanning: That’s Cooked” campaign, and from December 2022 to mid-2023, tanning content was removed, and links to sun safety information were presented to users instead. I had no idea — how brilliant! Why can’t we do the same over here?
It also found that the biggest barrier to sunscreen use was people not finding one with a texture that they liked. I’m hoping that my recommendations last week for every day sunscreens might have helped if you’re having a similar conundrum. This week I’m sharing some others that might also help, especially if you’re looking for something tinted, are prepared to splash the cash on something a bit pricier, or just need a sunscreen that your kids will actually use (and some tips on getting them to wear it)…
More sunscreens I’m loving…
This was part of what I cut from last week’s newsletter because it was getting so long so if you want regular, untinted daily sunscreens, take a look back there. But here are a few more that get my vote…
The tinted ones
I’ve raved before about my love of a tinted SPF and while Merit’s The Uniform (£34) still very much has my heart (I wrote about it here), but in the last couple of weeks I’ve been bowled over by La Roche-Posay’s Tinted UVAir (£21.60). I posted on my Instagram stories the other day and they probably tell you all you need to know… It comes in three shades — I tested the two lighter ones and Dr Emma Amoafo-Mensah was talking on her Insta about trying the darkest and liking it…
The pricey ones
These two are, I concede, really expensive, but I am 100% sold on the science behind them, they’re created by dermatologists that I really rate, and they both sit beautifully under makeup. The idea is that if you’re using either of these, which are absolutely packed with potent skincare ingredients as well as high quality sun protection, that you don’t need a serum or moisturiser as well. So although they cost a lot more than the others I’ve mentioned, they’re all-in-one products…
The first is The Skin Diary Age Defence (£92), which comes from a truly brilliant team of brains, including Prof Chris Griffiths, one of the biggest names in skincare research (University of Manchester). The clinical trials and biological data they have on this product are incredible, plus Inge Van Lotringen, who is just as sceptical as me, has partnered with them so I know I’m not the only one who rates it.
Then there’s Klira The Dayscript (£82 as a one-off, £66 on subscription). Klira is the brand that analyses your skin via a questionnaire that goes way beyond looking at if it’s just dry or oily, and also takes into account your propensity for pigmentation and a tonne of other things to give you your SkinSize and a bespoke evening treatment. I use their combo of tretinoin and azelaic daily (Dr Emma Craythorne and Dr Cristina Psomadakis who are among the brains behind it are two of my favourite derms). This is their offering for mornings, and is a broad spectrum SPF packed with peptides and antioxidants too, again the idea is that this is all you need. I love the idea of being someone who only has a cleanser, a night treatment and a day treatment, but that might be a step too far for even my minimalism.
The ones I use on my kids
You will be utterly unsurprised to hear that I am militant about sun protection when it comes to my kids. I blame the killer combo of understanding the impact of childhood exposure to UV on lifetime cancer risk, plus the fact that both my 2 year old and my 4 year old have their father’s pale Celtic skin. Most of the time I try to minimise how much of them is exposed — see below. While they’re both accustomed to having cream slathered on them, it is a million times easier to use UPF clothing to cover them so if they’re in a pool, for example, it’s long sleeved rash vests, longish shorts and a hat with both a peak and neck protection…
In terms of what I use… when I started, I used to use exclusively products intended for children — La Roche-Posay Anthelios Dermo-Pediatrics SPF50 (£22), Avene Spray for Children SPF50 (£19.20) — I am nothing if not wedded to French pharma brands. But increasingly, I use pretty much anything on them (and their skin doesn’t seem to have an issue) — as with everything SPF, my view is use the one you’ll actually use and if they want to use the green spray, or the blue one, let them use it.
While it’s pretty easy to smear cream all over a tiny baby, once they get to toddler stage and can object, my secret weapon was using a brush. I used an old foundation brush (washed, obvs) as it’s far more fun for them to paint their face / have them paint yours — mine actively wanted to get involved. As they’ve got older, I’ve let them play around with whatever they wanted — sticks, rollerballs (this morning they loved the Altruist Kids Sunscreen Roller (£7.95)) but I also discovered Solar Buddies (£7.98), a clever refillable rollerball with sponge that you can fill with your favourite sunscreen and let your child apply themselves. My bigger one loved it and honestly, it’s the sort of thing I want a company like L’Oréal or Nivea to buy a tonne of, brand and then distribute to all primary school kids.
UVA / PA++++ / *****
I was at a round table event for Altruist last week (the sunscreen mentioned above) and we covered a lot of interesting ground — do follow them on Instagram as I think you’ll start seeing some of it there (I was paid for my time but am not being paid to either write this or plug their sunscreen which, as anyone who has followed me for a while will know, I’ve been banging on about for years.)
One of the things that we talked about was labelling of UVA protection. Now in Europe and the UK you’ll see a UVA in a circle — this indicates that you’re getting UVA protection that is at least a third of the SPF protection. So a UVA in a circle on an SPF 50 product shows you’re getting what’s called UVA-PF (aka PPD value) that’s about a third of 50 or around 16.6. The star symbol that Boots invented is also about ratios — a four-star rating on an SPF 50 indicates around 80% UVA-PF so around 40. But in Asia they use the PA+ system — the highest rating is PA++++ and that represents 16 and above.
Dr Andrew Birnie, the consultant dermatologist who founded Altruist which declares the PPD of all its products, was saying that for brands that only use the PA+ system or the UVA in a circle marking, there’s no real incentive to shoehorn in anything higher than 16 because you can’t get a higher rating. He also said that he believes that some of the lighter, Korean and Korean-style sun protection products can only be created by keeping the UVA-PF/PPD value at around 16. I mean you could say that he would say that wouldn’t he? (His products go from PPD values of 20 up to 52 and I recommend them a lot because I do think they’re very cosmetically elegant, if not quite as light and silky as some others.) Anyway, I thought it was food for thought when thinking about your sun protection.
New book geekery
A quick PS, which was on my mind because I was writing about Klira above… if you’re thinking your bookshelf is lacking a really good book about skin, last week I went to the launch of Dr Emma Craythorne’s book, Skin: An owner’s guide. It’s a reference book, it’s a compendium of weird and wonderful skin knowledge (Why do we itch? What causes pins and needles?), it’s a guide to what’s BS and what’s not when it comes to skincare, and a demystification of what happens inside a dermatology clinic and what all those treatments actually do. As you can probably tell, I really liked it.
That’s all for this week, until next time…
If it wasn’t for you & Inge, I’d be doing the wrong suncare