Fab New Cheap Lip Products May 16, 2011

After reading a glowing review from Paula Begoun* of N.Y.C.’s Smooch Proof 16HR Lip Stain I decided that I just had to try this product.    So far I’ve bought this lip product is two different colors – smooch proof and champagne stain.  The champagne stain color is very close to my natural lip color so I find that I use it almost every day to enhance my natural lip color and give it a little more punch.  The smooch proof color goes on a more intense pink/red shade.  You can play around with the intensity of the color by how hard you press on your lips as you apply it.  Wielding the lip stain like a pen produces a darker color, but you can also glide the product across your lips and then smudge it with your fingers.  Consider applying sheer gloss on top.  The color does fade as the day goes on, contrary to the claims by the manufacturer, and as you eat and drink, but you are still left with some color on your lips at the end of the day which is pretty incredible for a $5 product.  I have to say that I am very impressed with this $5 product and am glad I tried it.

My other new fave lip product is Mint Balm from Glominerals.  This is a very hydrating lip balm that also has spf 15 (yea!!) and feels minty and cool on your lips.  You can use it under or over your favorite lip product.  Now it costs $12.50 and, of course, you may wonder why I am calling this a cheap lip product.  I definitely think it is cheap for the amount of product you get for $12.50.  The tube is HUGE!  Even if you use this product multiple times during the day I can’t imagine that you use it up in less than 8 or 9 months.  Everyone needs a lip product with spf in it; I recommend trying Mint Balm.

*  By the way, Paula Begoun’s Beautypedia, which used to cost money to access, is now free.  You can easily read all her reviews now.

Get It Before It’s Gone: Sephora’s Sun Safety Kit April 29, 2011

 

Sephora has once again started selling a sun safety kit for only $25.  You get 11 different sample size products from sunblocks to make-up with spf in them (and even a self tanner).  Plus you get a free tote.  Not only is this is a great price for so many different products, 100% of the net profits from the kits will benefit The Skin Cancer Foundation.  So what’s not to love about that?  Happy shopping!

Teens and Tanning Beds April 28, 2011

Hopefully you don’t know a teen who uses a tanning bed, but the scary thing is that too many teens do use tanning beds since they are completely unaware of the dangers involved with their use.  Once a teen starts tanning it is really hard to get them to stop (it has even been proven that tanning is addictive which is very scary).  The US lags behind other nations in banning the use of tanning beds by teens; for instance the UK has banned the use of tanning beds by anyone under the age of 18.

According to The Skin Cancer Foundation:

Despite a link between indoor tanning bed use and an increased risk of melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, 2.3 million teenagers visit tanning salons every year. In the spring, many tanning salon patrons are college students getting ready for spring formals, and high school students gearing up for prom season. So it’s no surprise that melanoma is now the most common form of cancer in young adults 25-29 years old, and the second most common form of cancer in adolescents and young adults ages 15-29.

“The damage caused by the ultraviolet (UV) radiation from tanning beds and the sun is cumulative and often irreversible, and the earlier people start to tan, the higher their risk of developing skin cancer in their lifetimes,” said Perry Robins, MD, President, The Skin Cancer Foundation. “In fact, melanoma risk increases by 75 percent when indoor tanning begins before age 35.”

If the threat of skin cancer isn’t enough to scare young people away from tanning salons, they should know that 90 percent of visible skin changes commonly attributed to aging are caused by exposure to UV radiation. Tanning accelerates the signs of aging, including wrinkles, leathering and fine lines, which can be seen as early as in one’s twenties.

Despite the fact that The American Academy of Pediatrics supports a ban on the use of tanning beds by minors it is still legal for teens to use tanning beds.  The Skin Cancer Foundation points out:

In the US, tanning is regulated by the states, some of which allow children as young as 14 to tan. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classifies UV-emitting tanning machines as Class I Medical Devices, meaning that it considers them to “present minimal potential for harm to the user.” Last year, the General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel of the FDA’s Medical Devices Advisory Committee unanimously recommended that the FDA upgrade its classification of tanning devices to better reflect the serious health risks tanning machines pose. The majority of the panel was also in favor of an age restriction to limit minors’ access to UV tanning devices.

So until the FDA and/or the federal government ban the use of tanning beds by minors what can you do to prevent teens from using tanning beds?  First and foremost, I think education is key.  If scaring a teen with the risk of cancer isn’t enough to get them to stop using a tanning bed appeal to their vanity by explaining that they are aging their skin tremendously by using a tanning bed.  If you want to do even more write to the FDA and/or your senator or congressperson asking them to support a ban on tanning bed use by minors.  Recommend to a teen who really likes how their skin looks tan to get a spray tan or fake a tan with a home applied tanning lotion.  There are a tremendous number of products on the market in all price ranges so there is really no excuse not to try one if you like the way your skin looks tan.

If any of the above tactics don’t stop the teens you know from tanning have them hear a personal story about the dangers of tanning beds.  I found this story on the FDA website:

Brittany Lietz Cicala of Chesapeake Beach, Md., began tanning indoors at age 17. She stopped at age 20 when she was diagnosed with melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer. The former Miss Maryland says she used tanning beds at least four times a week, and sometimes every day.

“Growing up, until I started using tanning beds, my parents were very strict about me wearing sunscreen,” says Cicala. Although she also tanned in the summer sun during her 3 years of tanning bed use, Cicala estimates that 90 percent of her UV exposure was in tanning beds during this period.

In the 4 years since she was diagnosed with melanoma, Cicala’s surgeries have left her with about 25 scars. Cicala gets a head-to-toe skin exam every 3 months, which usually results in removal of a suspicious growth.

 

Sources and Further Reading:

•  An ABC World News segment about the dangers of indoor tanning including the personal story of a young woman battling melanoma.
• Lots of information about the dangers of indoor tanning can be found on this page of The Skin Cancer Foundation website.
• Indoor Tanning: The Risks of Ultraviolet Rays from the FDA.
• Teens and Melanoma – Skin Inc.
• Indoor Tanning Encouraged by Parents, Peers– Skin Inc.

   

 

 

Challenging the EWG on Their Sunscreen Findings April 4, 2011

For the past few years The Environmental Working Group, a health and environmental watch group, has come out with an annual sunscreen report that casts an extremely damning eye on the vast majority of the sunscreens on the market today.  Last year the EWG recommended only 39 out of the 500 sunscreens that they reviewed.  The group called into question the use of retinyl palmitate (or vitamin A) and oxybenzone in sunscreens saying that retinyl palmitate could actually cause cancerous tumors if exposed to sunlight and that oxybenzone (which is so widely used in sunscreens it is hard to find a readily available commercial sunscreen without it) is an endocrine disruptor.  The report also went on to make harsh statements against The Skin Cancer Foundation for putting their seal of approval on sunscreens and the FDA for still not updating its sunscreen regulations, something they said they were going to do back in 1978 (yes, 1978 that isn’t a typo).   One more thing the EWG emphasized in their report was the fact that sunscreens’ were promising false security with exaggerated spf ratings.  I happen to agree with that last point wholeheartedly.  (For more on that issue please see my previous post – Spf 100 is a Joke.)

Last year’s EWG sunscreen report created quite a ruckus and got a lot of media attention.  In my opinion it also created a lot of unnecessary stress, worry, and aggravation particularly for parents who wanted to make sure that their children were properly protected from the sun.  Perhaps what bothered me the most wasn’t the debate about which sunscreens were best because I actually don’t think all sunscreens are created equal, but the lack of insight and the blind following that many people engaged in after reading (or just hearing) about the EWG report.  Instead of investigating the issue for themselves many people, and I knew quite a few personally, didn’t give the EWG’s statements a second thought and instead of doing some of their own investigating they simply became hysterical about buying the “right” sunscreen.  (I tried to cover different sides of this debate in my blog last summer is my posts: Sunscreen Woes – The EWG Releases Its Annual Sunscreen Report and The Debate Continues: More on the Sunscreen Controversy)  So I was pleased to see the recent article Shedding Light on Sunscreens in MedEsthetics Magazine which addressed many of the issues raised in the EWG report last year.

The article in MedEsthetics addressed the issues brought up by the EWG about retinyl palmitate and oxybenzone.  The article explains that the EWG reached their conclusions about retinyl palmitate causing cancerous tumors when exposed to sunlight:

based on initial, unpublished findings from a National Toxicology Program study released in late 2009 by the FDA.  The NTP is the federal government’s principal evaluator of substances that raise public health concerns.  In the study, lab mice were coated in 0.1% to 0.5% vitamin A cream and then exposed to the equivalent of up to nine minutes of midday Florida sunlight each day for one year.  The EWG says that tumors and lesions developed in up to 21% sooner in lab animals coated in the vitamin A cream compared to control animals covered in a vitamin-free cream.

The EWG’s interpretation caught physicians and the industry by surprise.  It wasn’t until November 2010 that dermatologists responded in a paper published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.  Lead author Steven Q. Wang, MD, from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, and colleagues disagreed with the EWG conclusions, saying that the number of malignant neoplasms in the two groups of mice were not significantly different in mice exposed to the higher doses of radiation.  They concluded that the evidence did not support calling the combination of retinyl palmitate and UV photocarcinogenic.

The EWG countered with its own online critique of the journal article, saying that it stood by its analysis of the data.  As we await a final report from the NTP, industry leaders weighing in on the evidence seem to agree with this statement from Tatiana Kononov, principle scientist at Revision Skin Care:  Although I applaud the stated mission of the EWG, the release of its report on sunscreens highlighted some harsh generalizations that I think were made solely for publicity purposes.  This specific act by the EWG was unfortunate and irresponsible.  I am sure that many future studies will show that retinyl palmitate is perfectly safe and even beneficial in sunscreen products.”

 As for oxybenzone, which the EWG labeled an endocrine disruptor, once again most experts disagreed with their findings:

The EWG bases its conclusion on studies in which mice were fed large amounts of oxybenzone.  “Oxybenzone has been around for 30 to 40 years, and there is no data showing that topical use is estrogenic in any way,” Dr. Lim says [Dr. Lim is the chairman of the department of dermatology at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit].  “Since the original mouse studies, several groups have done human studies looking for hormonal effects but found none.”

Oxybenzone is a helpful ingredient because it has some UVA absorption characteristics,” says Kononov.  “It is approved for use in sunscreens by many other countries including Japan, Australia and South Korea.

I have to say that I was pleased to read these counter interpretations of the EWG’s conclusions.  Though I was initially inclined to think the EWG was on to something when I read their report last year I have since decided that their claims were way overblown.  Of course all this makes me wonder – what is the EWG going to say in their 2011 sunscreen report?  Only time will tell.

Winter Sun Care December 15, 2010

Just because it is cold doesn’t mean you should put away your sunscreen.  Just the opposite, especially if you are going to participate in outdoor winter sports.  According to an online article in Skin Inc:

… researchers found that while UV levels can be just as high atop a snowy mountain as on a sandy beach in mid-summer, skiers and snowboarders don’t always protect their skin accordingly.  “It’s a little counterintuitive,” lead researcher Peter A. Andersen, of the School of Communication at San Diego State University in California, told Reuters Health. “But there’s an inordinate amount UV at that elevation, reflecting off the snow and coming at you from all directions. Skiers are bathed in radiation.”  … 

Andersen and his colleagues visited 32 high-altitude ski resorts in western North America, where they took a total of 4,000 UV readings—some pointed directly at the sun, others at the sky away from the sun or at the snowy slope of the mountain. On the same days, they interviewed guests on chairlifts and observed their sun-protective clothing and equipment.Not surprisingly, UV radiation peaked at midday, and was more intense during spring than winter, with clear skies and at higher altitudes and lower latitudes. Higher temperatures also played a small role. Of course, avoidance of these peak conditions does not mean absolute UV protection, the researchers say. Although UV can drop by as much as half with cloud cover, for example, there is still plenty of skin-damaging radiation that sneaks through.

“Depending on the conditions, the UV index at a ski resort can potentially be as powerful as Waikiki on a bright, sunny day,” he said, referring to the Hawaiian beach. He pointed out that his team had multiple readings of 10, or “very high,” based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s UV index. But people’s behavior didn’t always match the UV intensity, report the researchers in the Archives of Dermatology.

 

So what can you do to protect yourself from the sun while participating in outdoor winter sports?    Apply a sunscreen with spf 30 or higher every two hours while outdoors or reapply after sweating.  Cover up with gloves, hats with brims, and sunglasses while outdoors.  Any exposed skin should have sunscreen on it so be sure to apply sunscreen to your neck and ears.  And don’t forget your lips!  They need sunscreen as well – always. 

And remember these tips are for everyone even if you don’t spend a lot of time outdoors during the winter.  You still need your sunscreen if all you are doing is driving back and forth from work in your car.   Sun protection is  year round committment – never put your sunscreen away!

 

Sources and Further Reading

 

• UV Radiation as Prominent in the Snow as on the Beach – Skin Inc. – December, 2010
• Your Winter Face – The Skin Cancer Foundation
• My posts –  Winter Skincare Tips and Dos and Don’ts and Winter Skincare

Great Sunscreen Article – Hooray! August 27, 2010

(Though I know that summer is coming to an end I thought it would be useful to highlight this article about sunscreen as a reminder that you need to use your sunscreen year round.)

Recently I read More magazine, a fashion/lifestyle magazine geared toward women who are 40+, for the second time.   The tagline of More is: “For women of style & substance”, and I have to say that the magazine lives up its motto.  While I have yet to reach the age demographic the magazine is geared toward (though I am fast approaching it), I enjoy reading the articles in the magazine and really like the fashion advice.  While reading the June issue of the magazine I came across an excellent article about sun protection and sunscreen entitled Customize Your Sun Protection Strategy.

The article does a great job of debunking sunscreen myths and truly covers all the important issue when it comes to sun protection.  The published version of the article, though not the online version unfortunately, has short but thorough “asides” about SPF ratings, getting enough Vitamin D, and what level of SPF you need.  I especially liked the fact that the article correctly explains that even moderate to little sun exposure can be harmful and that everyone needs a sunscreen on a daily basis even if they are not spending the day outdoors. 

I only have one quibble with the article.  The author of the piece Genevieve Monsma writes:

If the formula you choose contains only chemical sunscreen, you must re­apply it every two hours to ensure protection. And when you’re in and out of water or sweating a lot, you should reapply any sun protection every two to three hours, whether it’s a chemical or physical formula.

No matter what sunscreen formula you use – chemical or physical – you need to reapply it every two hours if you are outdoors.

Bottom Line:  This is a great article to both read and save for future reference.  A job well done More!

Sunburn Relief August 16, 2010

What can I say?  I wish I didn’t have to write this post at all.  But even when you have the best intentions when it comes to sun protection sometimes you can still get a sunburn.  Hopefully once you’ve had one sunburn you’ll remember to religiously use your sunscreen in order to prevent another one because sunburns are actually a very dangerous injury to the skin, a massive trauma.  According to Allure “getting just six sunburns in your lifetime will increase your chances of developing melanoma by 50 percent”.

What is a Sunburn?

 

According to Dr. Ellen Marmur in her book Simple Skin Beauty (page 145):

The reason your skin is hot [after a sunburn] is that the sun is not only cooking you from the outside but also causing your blood vessels to dilate fully.  That redness is 100 percent due to increased vasodilation, rushing all of your repair mechanisms to the skin through the circulatory system.  When you blister, it’s because there’s a shift of fluid from where it should be, in the cells and blood vessels, to the skin tissue, making it bubble up.  A sunburn also kills basal cells, which then lose their ability to grip on to the dermis, and the loosening of the epidermis from the dermis generates blisters too.  …  To make matters worse, sunburn continues to develop for twelve to twenty-four hours after the initial burn takes place.  It’s no wonder that a sunburn (or a lot of them) can lead to skin cancer.

Signs You’re Getting a Sunburn

If you start to feel that your skin is stinging, feels sensitive, or tender you are getting a sunburn.  Of course if your skin turns red you have a sunburn.

 

What to Do Once You’ve Burned

 

• Getting a burn is actually an inflammatory response by the body so consider taking an aspirin (or two) or ibuprofen to help calm the inflammation.
• Apply fresh aloe vera to the burn.  Aloe has both anti-inflammatory and humectant properties which will help sooth the burn.  Be sure to use pure aloe vera.  Aloe vera creams and gels can contain alcohol which is drying.
• Other anti-inflammatory ingredients that can soothe your burn: black tea (apply by soaking a washcloth in the tea), shea butter, olive oil, cucumber, and allantoin.  You can even try hydrocortisone cream.
• Drink lots of water since your body loses fluids when you burn.
• Stay out of the sun for a free days after your get burned because you are at a risk to burn again.

 

What NOT to do After a Burn

 

• Avoid applying topical products with alcohol, witch hazel, menthol, peppermint, calamine, or benzocaine to your burn.
• Don’t apply milk to your burn since the lactic acid in milk can exfoliate the already injured epidermis.
• Don’t apply just plain water to the burn.  Once the water evaporates it dehydrates the skin and makes the burn feel worse.  Make sure your cold compresses are soaked in aloe or have a cream on them before applying to the burn.
• When you skin begins to peel do not pull on the peeling skin or use a body scrub on it.

 

Sources and Further Reading: 

• Simple Skin Beauty by Ellen Marmur, MD – pages 145-146
• Insider’s Guide:  How to Treat a Sunburn  – Allure July 2010
• Treating Sunburn – The Skin Cancer Foundation

Spf 100 Is A Joke August 10, 2010

Have you noticed lately that you can easily find sunscreens with a SPF of 50, 70, or even 100?  Have you wondered if those sunscreens protect you better than ones that have a SPF of 30? 

Actually you should think twice before using a sunscreen with an SPF higher than 30. 

 

First of All – What Does the SPF Rating Mean?

 

In order to understand why you really don’t need a SPF over 30 you first need to understand the SPF ratings.  The Skin Cancer Foundation does a good job at explaining what SPF means:

The SPF rating is a reliable measurement of protection against UVB (short-spectrum) wavelengths (290-320 nanometers; 1 nm is a billionth of a meter). SPF is the comparative ratio between the minimal erythemal dose (MED) in skin protected with sunscreen and the MED in unprotected skin. For example, if it takes 20 minutes without protection to produce erythema, an SPF 15 sunscreen might prevent reddening 15 times longer—about five hours. That figure is theoretical, however, and sun damage can occur even without reddening, so dermatologists normally advise reapplying after approximately two hours.The Skin Cancer Foundation considers SPFs of 15 or higher acceptable UVB protection. Such sunscreens also provide some protection against UVA wavelengths (320-400 nm), though the SPF rating refers only to UVB protection. No FDA-approved measurement standard exists yet for UVA protection in the US, even though UVA penetrates more deeply into the skin than UVB, reaching the dermis. In the past, experts believed that UVB causes burning and skin cancer, while UVA causes photoaging, but the truth has proven more complex. In addition to producing sunburn, UVB can contribute to photoaging, and both UVA and UVB exposure can lead to skin cancer.

Broad-spectrum sunscreens combine UVB and UVA-absorbing chemicals and/or physical blockers, and give the most protection. However, they do not provide complete coverage in the UVA1 range (340 – 400 nm).

 

How Much Sun Is Blocked?

 

SPF 30 does not give you twice the sun protection of SPF 15.  Dr. Ellen Marmur explains the SPF rating confusion in her book Simple Skin Beauty thusly (page 88):

SPF math is also deceptive because the numbers don’t add up.  SPF 30 does not double the protection of SPF 15, for example.  It would figure that you should be able to stay in the sun thirty times longer, but that’s not the case.  An SPF 15 allegedly blocks 93 to 95 percent of UVB rays, while an SPF 30 supplies 97 percent coverage.  So bumping your SPF to over 50 doesn’t make it that much more protective.

Furthermore, The Skin Cancer Foundation answers the following question on their website:

Q. Many people mistakenly believe that an SPF 30 rating gives twice as much sun protection as an SPF 15 and an SPF 50 more than three times that much. What is really the difference?

A. In vitro tests have shown that SPF 15 sunscreens filter out 93% of UVB rays, while SPF 30 protects against 97% and SPF 50 98%.

  

  

What’s Wrong with SPF 100

 

As you now understand from what you’ve read above that anything over SPF 30 doesn’t give you much more sun protection than the sunscreen with SPF 30.  So do so many people persist on using products with a high SPF and why do so many companies manufacture them?  The answer comes down to people thinking that they are getting superior sun protection and the fact that companies are more than happy to sell that false hope.   According to the Environmental Working Group:

In 2007, the FDA published draft regulations that would prohibit companies from labeling sunscreens with an SPF (sun protection factor) higher than “SPF 50+.” The agency wrote that higher values would be “inherently misleading,” given that “there is no assurance that the specific values themselves are in fact truthful…” (FDA 2007).

Since then FDA has been flooded with data from sunscreen makers seeking to win agency approval for high-SPF products, and store shelves have been increasingly packed with high-SPF products the agency has yet to validate. Johnson & Johnson (makers of Neutrogena and Aveeno sunscreens) submitted data in August 2008 to support SPF 70 and SPF 85 claims (J&J 2008). Playtex (Banana Boat sunscreen) sent data supporting high SPF claims in 2007. A Coppertone spokeswoman said, “Many manufacturers, including Coppertone, have submitted new data [on high-SPF products] for review and are awaiting FDA’s response” (Boyles 2009).

High-SPF sunscreens are popular. Sales have been on the rise for at least a decade, so it’s no wonder that sunscreen makers are fighting to keep them legal. In a letter to FDA 10 years ago, Neutrogena cited consumers’ clear demand for high SPF products, calling them “one of the fastest growing segments” of the market (Neutrogena 2000). Between 2004 and 2008, sales of high-SPF products in Europe (SPF 40 and 50+) swelled from 15 percent to 20 percent of the market (Jones 2010). In 2010, sunscreen makers have once again increased their high-SPF offerings in the US. Nearly one in six products now lists SPF values higher than “SPF 50+”, compared to only one in eight the year before, according to EWG’s analysis of nearly 500 beach and sport sunscreens.

 

My anger with SPF 100 (or 50 or 70) really comes down to giving people a false sense of protection.  No matter what SPF rating your sunscreen has it gets used up over time and needs to reapplied.  People also use less of sunscreens with a SPF higher than 30 which means they actually get less sun protection and are really exposing themselves to more sun damage.  Once again I’ll quote from Dr. Marmur’s book (page 128):

 A 1999 study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute showed that using higher-SPF sunscreens lead to increased sun exposure.  In the experiment, one group was given a low-SPF sunscreen, while the other sued SPF 30.  The group given the higher SPF spent 20 percent more time in the sun than the other group.  Even though it’s wrong-headed, we’re often guilty of spending more time in the sun than we should and not reapplying a sunscreen just because the SPF is 50 or 70.  Those are deceptive numbers for sure, and inaccurate – especially if you remember that a higher SPF give you only a fraction more protection.  In fact, for these reasons, the FDA is considering limiting SPF values to 30, with higher SPF labeled “30 plus”.

 

 The Bottom Line

  

When it comes to sunscreen use SPF 30 will give you more than adequate protection.  What is most important when it comes to sunscreen use is applying enough sunscreen (an adult needs a shot glass size amount of sunscreen for their whole body) and to reapply sunscreen throughout the day – every two hours if you are spending the day outdoors.  It is also important to look for a sunscreen that gives you protection from both UVA and UVB rays.

 

Sources and Further Reading

• Simple Skin Beauty by Ellen Marmur, MD
• The SCFs Guide to Sunscreens  The Skin Cancer Foundation
• What’s Wrong with High SPF?  Environmental Working Group
• Your Personal SPF: Determining Your Number  Paula Begoun

Sun Protection While Driving August 6, 2010

I know there will be some people who will see the title of this post and think that I have really gone overboard with my continuing efforts to get people to use sunscreen everyday, all day.  I know many people feel they don’t need sunscreen when they only spend a small portion of their day outdoors.  Perhaps, if you are lucky, your commute to work is short.  Why do you need sun protection in that case?

Ok so think about these facts (courtesy of The Skin Cancer Foundation) for a moment:

A recent study in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology revealed that nearly 53 percent of skin cancers in the US occur on the left, or drivers’ side of the body.  If you’re one of the approximately 208 million licensed drivers in the US, take heed: “The increase in left-sided skin cancers may be from the UV (ultraviolet) exposure we get when driving a car,” said Susan T. Butler, MD, coauthor of the study.

The sun’s ultraviolet radiation is associated with most cases of skin cancer, which will affect one in five Americans over a lifetime.  UV radiation reaches us in the form of shortwave UVB and long-wave UVA rays, but glass blocks only UVB effectively.  Although car windshields are partially treated to filter out UVA, the side windows let in about 63 percent of the sun’s UVA radiation; rear windows are also unprotected, leaving back seat passengers exposed. 

So even your short, daily commute to and from work can expose you to unwanted UV rays and leave you vulnerable to skin cancer (not to mention wrinkles).

 

Keep a Well Stocked Car

 

Be sure to keep sunscreen in your car so that it is always around in case you need to apply it or reapply it.  When you are going on longer drives have a hat to wear in the car if you have a sun roof or drive a convertible, and don’t forget sunglasses as well.

Get protective films on your car windows that screens out UVA and UVB rays.  You can even get shades or window films that you install yourself for the back side windows in order to protect your kids from too much sun exposure while they are in the car.

 

Further reading:  Sun Safety in Cars – The Skin Cancer Foundation

Skin of Color and Skin Cancer – Everyone is at Risk July 31, 2010

There is a very simple reason why I chose to place a photo of Bob Marley at the beginning of a post on skin cancer and skin of color – Bob Marley died of melanoma at the age of 36.

The Skin Cancer Foundation has devoted a page to this subject (written by Mona Gohara, MD and Maritza Perez, MD) their website which does an excellent job at explaining the skin cancer risks that people of color face:

Caucasians are the primary victims of skin cancer. However, everyone, regardless of skin color, can fall prey to it. Unfortunately, many patients and even some physicians are under the impression that non-Caucasian people are immune to this disease. That is one reason people of color are diagnosed with skin cancer at later stages. These delays mean that skin cancers are often advanced and potentially fatal, whereas most skin cancers are curable if caught and treated in a timely manner. Tragically, this is what happened to legendary reggae musician Bob Marley: What was dismissed as a soccer injury under his toenail turned out to be an aggressive form of melanoma that ultimately caused his death at 36. Mr. Marley’s story reminds us why both medical providers and the public need to be educated about skin cancer and skin of color.  …

 Basal cell carcinoma is the most common skin cancer in Caucasians, Hispanics, Chinese, and Japanese Asians,^8-10 and the second most common skin malignancy in African Americans and Asian Indians.⁸ In all races, basal cell carcinoma is usually linked to UV light exposure. Basal cell carcinomas are mainly found on body parts that receive the most sun exposure (Figure 2). A study from Howard University, Washington, DC, revealed that 89 percent of basal cell carcinomas on naturally brown skin occur on the head or neck.⁶ The correlation between UV light and basal cell carcinoma in darker skin types explains the relatively higher incidence of this malignancy among darker-skinned populations living in sunnier climates, such as Hispanics residing in New Mexico and Arizona.^8,15

Basal cell carcinomas rarely metastasize (spread to other parts of the body). However, one study showed that when Hispanic patients develop basal cell carcinomas they are more likely to have multiple lesions either at the time of presentation or in ensuing years.¹⁶ Risk factors other than UV light for basal cell carcinoma in minority populations include previous radiation therapy, albinism (a group of genetic disorders that causes people to have a partial or total lack of melanin), trauma, burn scars (particularly among Asian Indians), other chronic scarring processes, arsenic exposure, solid organ transplantation, and genetic skin conditions.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the most common skin malignancy among African Americans and Asian Indians, and the second most common skin cancer among Hispanics and Chinese/Japanese Asians.^6,8,17-19 Information from the Singapore Cancer Registry suggests that UV light plays an appreciable role in skin cancer development among fair-skinned Asian populations,¹⁰ and a Hawaiian study revealed that the incidence of basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and Bowen’s Disease (a type of squamous cell carcinoma) was at least 45 times higher in the Japanese population of Kauai, Hawaii (a sunny climate) than among the Japanese population in Japan (a temperate climate).²⁰

UV light is not the primary risk factor for the development of squamous cell carcinoma in brown-skinned persons within the African Diaspora, and the head and neck are not the most common sites for squamous cell carcinoma. Among African Americans and native Africans, squamous cell carcinomas occur mainly on the legs, followed by the anogenital region (including both the anus and genitals) (Figure 2).^6,8,21-23 Skin conditions that result in scarring or chronic inflammation, such as discoid lupus; leprosy; burn scars and non-healing skin ulcerations are the main risk factors, along with radiation therapy and physical or thermal trauma.^6,8,21-23 Unlike the squamous cell carcinomas that most Caucasians develop, those occurring in people of African descent due to scarring or chronic inflammation can be aggressive, and have a higher tendency to lead to metastasis and death (Figure 3). One reason for this is, again, later detection and treatment.

Melanoma is the third most common type of skin cancer among all racial groups. Although UV light plays a role in the etiology of melanoma in Caucasians, the primary risk factor for melanoma in people of color is undetermined⁸, though incidence among Japanese and Hispanics residing in both Puerto Rico and South America and Hispanics residing in New Mexico have increased.^8,24-26 Among African Americans and others of African descent, Asians, Hawaiians, and Native Americans, melanomas are most likely to appear in the mouth, or in the form of acral lentiginous melanoma — melanomas on the palms of the hands, soles of the feet and under the nails (as in Bob Marley’s case) (Figures 2, 4). Among fair-skinned Hispanics, evidence suggests the trunk and legs as the most likely areas of involvement, and the feet as the most common location in dark-skinned Hispanics.

Figure 4. Acral Lentiginous Melanoma in a brown-skinned patient.

Other reported risk factors for melanoma in minority populations include: albinism, burn scars, radiation therapy, trauma, immunosuppression, and preexisting moles (especially on the palms/soles and mouth).

Due to delayed diagnoses and advanced stage at disease presentation, the five-year mortality rates of non-Caucasians who have melanoma are higher (in many instances significantly) than those of their Caucasian counterparts.²⁷

The doctors conclude their article by writing:

The US Census Bureau projects that by the year 2050, 50 percent of the US population will be comprised of Hispanics, Asians, and African Americans.²⁸ Now, more than ever, it is pivotal to raise awareness of skin cancer in people of color.

EVERYONE needs to use sun protection on a daily basis.  No matter what color your skin is if you see a suspicious lesion anywhere on your body be sure to have a dermatologist look at it immediately.

Further Reading:  Dark-skinned Clients Encouraged to Receive Skin Cancer Screenings  Skin Inc.  July, 2010