Wait a minute, should I be using this high SPF foundation???

Status
Not open for further replies.

SweetCheeks

Well-known member
I LOVE my Shiseido foundation, I use either the liquid or powder foundation from the sun protection line as it has high SPF (around 40) and it stays put and controls my oilies living in hot, humid Florida. My skin looks great, but reading about how SPFs leave a white cast makes me question using it ... would you switch, or is that just for photos?!
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
If it has anything other than zinc or titanium, you are doing more harm than good. It can have SPF 2000 and if its avobenzene,oxybenzone or octocrylene, you are inviting free radicals below the surface of your skin which will age you faster than skipping the sunscreen altogether.
Personally, I do not buy SPF makeup. I apply a thin layer of titanium/zinc sunscreen as a primer-it is very moisturizing-wait 15 minutes, blot and apply foundation. Minerals do not degrade.
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
2 oz:
Active Ingredients: Octinoxate 7.4%, Zinc Oxide 13.9%. Inactive Ingredients: Water, Cyclomethicone, Butylene Glycol, Dimethicone, Polymethyl Methacrylate, Dimethicone Copolyol, Polybutylene Glycol/PPG-9/1 Copolymer, Disteardimonium Hectorite, Trimethylsiloxysilicate, Dextrin Palmitate, Glycerin, Hydrogenated C6-14 Olefin Polymers, Xylitol, Methyl Gluceth-10, Glutathione, Sodium Glutamate, Zinc Myristate, Dipotassium Glycyrrhizate, Thiotaurine, Scutellaria Baicalensis Extract, Ononis Spinosa Root Extract, Ectoin, Cyclopentasiloxane, Acrylates/Dimethicone Copolymer, Isostearic Acid, Aluminum Hydroxide, Stearic Acid, Trisodium EDTA, Silica, Alcohol, BHT, Phenoxyethanol, Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Fragrance, Titanium Dioxide.

That's a good amount of zinc. Octinoxate degrades very quickly, but zinc does not degrade at all. (oh,btw, this is Shiseido's sunscreen formula) You are safe.
p.gif
p.gif
function changeType(tab) {document.getElementById("tab1").style.display = "none";document.getElementById("aTab1").className = "typeOff";document.getElementById("cellTab1").className = "cellOff"; document.getElementById(tab).style.display = "block"; if(tab == "tab1") { document.getElementById("aTab1").className = "typeOn";document.getElementById("cellTab1").className = "cellOn";}}
p.gif
p.gif
 

SweetCheeks

Well-known member
Thanks, good to know it's good for me to wear as it's great on my skin, doesn't clog pores, leaves a smooth finish, covers fairly well. I just didn't know if wearing a high SPF was only bad for pics or not a good idea in gerneral, though I don't see how it could be the latter? Just wanted clarification ...
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
If you are going to be taking pictures, use a non SPF. Or you can use powder, lots and lots of powder (because cameras love to make the middle of your forehead look really slick). Cell phone pictures are too small to be of consequence, but nice photos, any degree of spf will make your head look like it does not belong on your neck. It may look fine in person and under a light meter, but when the film is developed.......
I don't know about how it goes on digital cameras, I only know from my experience modeling-they used good, old fashioned film (photo shop did not exist).
 

rouquinne

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuuipo
It can have SPF 2000 and if its avobenzene,oxybenzone or octocrylene, you are inviting free radicals below the surface of your skin which will age you faster than skipping the sunscreen altogether.

this is COMPLETELY UNTRUE!!!

i have been faithfully wearing sunscreen for over 25 years and most of that time, these were the only active ingredients available in sun protection products.

i am almost 48 years old and a co-worker recently thought i was 36.

free radicals are NOT BELOW the surface of your skin, they are ON it! and the singlet oxygen that is produced by sunlight hitting your unprotected skin is the primary cause of aging.

if you were a real "science geek", you would know this.

*sheesh*
 

erine1881

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by rouquinne
this is COMPLETELY UNTRUE!!!

i have been faithfully wearing sunscreen for over 25 years and most of that time, these were the only active ingredients available in sun protection products.

i am almost 48 years old and a co-worker recently thought i was 36.

free radicals are NOT BELOW the surface of your skin, they are ON it! and the singlet oxygen that is produced by sunlight hitting your unprotected skin is the primary cause of aging.

if you were a real "science geek", you would know this.

*sheesh*


plus, it isn't the spf that makes you photograph lighter. the only foundation that mac carries that photgraphs lighter (by 3 or more shades
ssad.gif
) is studio fix. and guess what? theres no spf it that one. all the other foundations work great in photography, and almost all of those contain spf.

wearing an spf of 40 everyday is great. the only way to know how it photographs is to take an actual photo of yourself and see how that does. if you are happy with how it photographs, its a keeper!
 

lara

Well-known member
The 'white face' from flash isn't from SPF ingredients/titanium/zinc 95% of the time, it's from the flash blowing out and over-exposing your face.
Camera is directed at your face = flash hits your face predominantly but hits your neck and body indirectly = white face, tanned body.

If you use lots of powder ion your face and you're going to get your picture taken, you will look ghostly and have a different coloured face. Look at some FOTDs on this forum that list mineral make-up, Studio Fix, PX AnyWear etc etc etc and you'll see that their face will almost always have this dusty, ghost-like effect.
Powder foundation, loose mineral make-up, etc all refract light back and will cause your face to hotspot. Digital or film, it doesn't make a difference. The only exception are mattifying powders like Blot; due to their coarser irregular nature they don't bounce back as much light.
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by rouquinne
this is COMPLETELY UNTRUE!!!

i have been faithfully wearing sunscreen for over 25 years and most of that time, these were the only active ingredients available in sun protection products.

i am almost 48 years old and a co-worker recently thought i was 36.

free radicals are NOT BELOW the surface of your skin, they are ON it! and the singlet oxygen that is produced by sunlight hitting your unprotected skin is the primary cause of aging.

if you were a real "science geek", you would know this.


*sheesh*


RIVERSIDE, Calif. - Are sunscreens always beneficial, or can they be detrimental to users? A research team led by UC Riverside chemists reports that unless people out in the sun apply sunscreen often, the sunscreen itself can become harmful to the skin.
When skin is exposed to sunlight, ultraviolet radiation (UV) is absorbed by skin molecules that then can generate harmful compounds, called reactive oxygen species or ROS, which are highly reactive molecules that can cause "oxidative damage." For example, ROS can react with cellular components like cell walls, lipid membranes, mitochondria and DNA, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging.

fluorescence-intensity-image.jpg

Two-photon fluorescence intensity images of cells deep in the epidermis showing reactive oxygen species activity following sunscreen application to the skin surface. Reactive oxygen species can react with cellular components, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging.
sunscreen.jpg

UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene) widely used in sunscreens generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) in skin when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, augmenting the ROS that is naturally produced.
(Images by K. Hanson, UC Riverside)
When sunscreen is applied on the skin, however, special molecules – called UV filters – contained in the sunscreen, cut down the amount of UV radiation that can penetrate the skin. Over time, though, these filters penetrate into the skin below the surface of the epidermis, the outermost layer of skin, leaving the body vulnerable to UV radiation.
Led by Kerry M. Hanson, a senior research scientist in the Department of Chemistry at UCR, the researchers report that three UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene), which are approved by the Food and Drug Administration and widely used in sunscreens, generate ROS in skin themselves when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, thus augmenting the ROS that is naturally produced. The researchers note that the additional ROS are generated only when the UV filters have penetrated into the skin and, at the same time, sunscreen has not been reapplied to prevent ultraviolet radiation from reaching these filters.
Study results will appear in an upcoming issue of Free Radical Biology & Medicine. An advance copy of the paper is available online on the journal's Website.
"Sunscreens do an excellent job protecting against sunburn when used correctly," said Hanson, who works in the laboratory of Christopher Bardeen, an assistant professor of chemistry at UCR. "This means using a sunscreen with a high sun protection factor and applying it uniformly on the skin. Our data show, however, that if coverage at the skin surface is low, the UV filters in sunscreens that have penetrated into the epidermis can potentially do more harm than good. More advanced sunscreens that ensure that the UV-filters stay on the skin surface are needed; such filters would reduce the level of UV-induced ROS. Another solution may be to mix the UV-filters with antioxidants since antioxidants have been shown to reduce UV-induced ROS levels in the skin."
In their research, Hanson and colleagues used epidermal model tissue and applied sunscreen to the surface to test the effect of sunscreen penetration on ROS levels in the deep epidermis. A two-photon fluorescence microscope allowed them to visualize ROS generation occurring below the skin surface. The ROS activity was detected using a probe molecule whose fluorescent properties change upon exposure to ROS. On comparing images taken before and after the skin was exposed to UV radiation, they found that ROS generation in the skin increased after sunscreen penetration.
About 95 percent of the visible signs of aging are associated with UV exposure. About 90 percent of a person's total life-time UV exposure is obtained before the person is 18 years of age. Only a few UV-filters are available that block "UV-A," the wavelengths that penetrate more deeply into the skin, all the way into the dermis where collagen exists.
"For now, the best advice is to use sunscreens and re-apply them often – the Skin Cancer Foundation recommends every two hours, and especially after sweating or swimming, which can wash away sunscreen – to reduce the amount of UV radiation from getting through to filters that have penetrated the skin," Bardeen said. "This, in turn, would reduce ROS generation."
Next, the researchers plan to investigate the effect of smog on ROS generation in the skin.
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by rouquinne
this is COMPLETELY UNTRUE!!!

i have been faithfully wearing sunscreen for over 25 years and most of that time, these were the only active ingredients available in sun protection products.

i am almost 48 years old and a co-worker recently thought i was 36.

free radicals are NOT BELOW the surface of your skin, they are ON it! and the singlet oxygen that is produced by sunlight hitting your unprotected skin is the primary cause of aging.

if you were a real "science geek", you would know this.

*sheesh*


You may write about makeup, but its obvious you do not keep up with chemistry or medical news.
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
Two-photon fluorescence intensity images of cells deep in the epidermis showing reactive oxygen species activity following sunscreen application to the skin surface. Reactive oxygen species can react with cellular components, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging. Credit: K. Hanson, UC Riverside

Are sunscreens always beneficial, or can they be detrimental to users? A research team led by UC Riverside chemists reports that unless people out in the sun apply sunscreen often, the sunscreen itself can become harmful to the skin.
When skin is exposed to sunlight, ultraviolet radiation (UV) is absorbed by skin molecules that then can generate harmful compounds, called reactive oxygen species or ROS, which are highly reactive molecules that can cause "oxidative damage." For example, ROS can react with cellular components like cell walls, lipid membranes, mitochondria and DNA, leading to skin damage and increasing the visible signs of aging.

When sunscreen is applied on the skin, however, special molecules – called UV filters – contained in the sunscreen, cut down the amount of UV radiation that can penetrate the skin. Over time, though, these filters penetrate into the skin below the surface of the epidermis, the outermost layer of skin, leaving the body vulnerable to UV radiation.

1724_web.jpg

UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene) widely used in sunscreens generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) in skin when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, augmenting the ROS that is naturally produced. Credit: K. Hanson, UC Riverside​
Led by Kerry M. Hanson, a senior research scientist in the Department of Chemistry at UCR, the researchers report that three UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene), which are approved by the Food and Drug Administration and widely used in sunscreens, generate ROS in skin themselves when exposed to ultraviolet radiation, thus augmenting the ROS that is naturally produced. The researchers note that the additional ROS are generated only when the UV filters have penetrated into the skin and, at the same time, sunscreen has not been reapplied to prevent ultraviolet radiation from reaching these filters.

Study results will appear in an upcoming issue of Free Radical Biology & Medicine. An advance copy of the paper is available online on the journal's Website.

"Sunscreens do an excellent job protecting against sunburn when used correctly," said Hanson, who works in the laboratory of Christopher Bardeen, an assistant professor of chemistry at UCR. "This means using a sunscreen with a high sun protection factor and applying it uniformly on the skin. Our data show, however, that if coverage at the skin surface is low, the UV filters in sunscreens that have penetrated into the epidermis can potentially do more harm than good. More advanced sunscreens that ensure that the UV-filters stay on the skin surface are needed; such filters would reduce the level of UV-induced ROS. Another solution may be to mix the UV-filters with antioxidants since antioxidants have been shown to reduce UV-induced ROS levels in the skin."

Sponsored Links (Ads by Google)
No More Wrinkles
Medical skin care products can give you a healthy, youthful complexion.
cosminology.com

Waterproof Sunscreens
Specially Formulated To Protect You All Day Long. Choose 15 or 35 SPF!
www.solar-defense.com

All Natural Sunscreen
UV Natural SPF 30+ sunscreen Safe - Effective - Gentle
www.KatesCaringGifts.com


In their research, Hanson and colleagues used epidermal model tissue and applied sunscreen to the surface to test the effect of sunscreen penetration on ROS levels in the deep epidermis. A two-photon fluorescence microscope allowed them to visualize ROS generation occurring below the skin surface. The ROS activity was detected using a probe molecule whose fluorescent properties change upon exposure to ROS. On comparing images taken before and after the skin was exposed to UV radiation, they found that ROS generation in the skin increased after sunscreen penetration.

About 95 percent of the visible signs of aging are associated with UV exposure. About 90 percent of a person's total life-time UV exposure is obtained before the person is 18 years of age. Only a few UV-filters are available that block "UV-A," the wavelengths that penetrate more deeply into the skin, all the way into the dermis where collagen exists.

"For now, the best advice is to use sunscreens and re-apply them often – the Skin Cancer Foundation recommends every two hours, and especially after sweating or swimming, which can wash away sunscreen – to reduce the amount of UV radiation from getting through to filters that have penetrated the skin," Bardeen said. "This, in turn, would reduce ROS generation."

Next, the researchers plan to investigate the effect of smog on ROS generation in the skin.

Source: University of California - Riverside » Next Article in Medicine & Health: Report: U.S. ships banned GM rice
 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
Nanoparticles in sunscreens made safe



27 September 2007

Polymer-coating the nanoparticles used in sunscreens would protect DNA against any potential UV damage they might cause.
There has been recent controversy over the potentially adverse effects of using nanoparticles such as titania (TiO2) in sunscreens. TiO2 is a major component of photovoltaic cells and it is well-known that it emits a photoelectron when exposed to UV light. It is believed that these electrons go on to catalyse the production of peroxide radicals and other reactive oxygen species (ROS) which are known to react with lipids and DNA, causing damage.

b709449c-250-FOR-TRIDION_tcm18-100015.jpg

Exactly what kind of titania particles sunscreen manufacturers use in their products isn't clear

Now, Miriam Rafailovich at Stony Brook University, New York, US, and colleagues have provided clear evidence that titania nanoparticles do in fact catalyse DNA damage. But the researchers also say that they have found a solution that would allow nanoparticles to be used safely in sun lotions and creams.1 'We have produced a coated titania particle, which completely protects DNA against UV damage,' said Rafailovich.
The team grafted anti-oxidant molecules, made from a mixture of grape seed extracts, and an anionic polymer onto the titania particles. The multi-component polymer coating absorbs the photoelectron generated when titania nanoparticles are exposed to UV light and blocks the photocatalytic activity that causes DNA damage.
What is not clear, however, is exactly what kind of titania particles sunscreen manufacturers are already using. A spokesperson from cosmetics giant L'Oréal UK confirmed that their suncare products do contain titanium dioxide among other sun filtering ingredients. 'This may be in a microparticle form, sometimes coated, to enhance the light filtering performance,' said the spokesperson. 'We comply with all EU and national laws in ensuring the absolute safety of our products and their ingredients, which are clearly labelled on our products.'
Kerry Hanson, a research scientist at the University of California, Riverside, US, has recently published a report on the enhancement of UV-induced reactive oxygen species (ROS) in the skin due to sunscreen.2 The real question, said Hanson, is whether titania particles actually penetrate skin cells. Researchers have shown that the particles can penetrate the hair shaft, but whether or not they penetrate the surface of the skin or can travel through the nuclear membrane remains to be determined.
Even if the particles do get deep into cells, it's not clear that UV light would actually reach them there. 'If the molecules penetrate the skin, but the UV attenuation at the skin surface is great such that it does not reach the penetrated particles, then ROS will not be sensitised,' added Hanson.
Nevertheless, Hanson remained enthusiastic about the findings. '[These researchers] have come up with a clever way to reduce ROS generated by the sunscreen itself, right at the source of the ROS, which would prevent any subsequent damage that the sunscreen would have otherwise caused.'
Kathleen Too
References:
1. W. A. Lee, N. Pernodet, B. Li, C. H. Lin, E. Hatchwell and M. H. Rafailovich, Chem. Commun., 2007, DOI: 10.1039/b709449c
2. K. M. Hanson, E. Gratton and C. J. Bardeen, Free Radical Biol. Med., 2006, 41, 1205-1212.


Link to journal article

Multicomponent polymer coating to block photocatalytic activity of TiO2 nanoparticles
Wilson A. Lee, Nadine Pernodet, Bingquan Li, Chien H. Lin, Eli Hatchwell and Miriam H. Rafailovich, Chem. Commun., 2007, 4815
DOI: 10.1039/b709449c
Also of interest


Sunscreen's weakness brought to light
When you apply sunscreen you might not be as well protected from the sun as you think, say researchers in Italy.


Nature's sunscreen
Aquatic bacteria are a potential source of natural UVA protective sunscreens, say researchers in Israel.


Nanotechnology - friend or foe?
Australian scientists call for biological and toxicological testing of nanomaterials.



About this Magazine

Reader Services

Related Links

Tools

icon_email.gif
Email this to a friend




RSC quicklinks

I want information on:
Information on Select a subject Analytical Biosciences Careers Education Environment & Energy Food & Nutrition Industry & Technology Inorganic Materials Organic Physical
Information for:
Information for Select a role AuthorsLibrariansConference AttendeesMembersRefereesSchool StudentsParents/GuardiansSmall BusinessTeachersHE StudentsHE Lecturers
I am interested in:
products Select a product Conferences & EventsBooksChemistry WorldDatabasesJournalsMagazines

Related Products

Also Of Interest

Popular activities

function OAS_AD(pos) {document.write('
');document.write('');if (OAS_version >= 11)OAS_RICH(pos);elseOAS_NORMAL(pos);document.write('
');}//-->






Advertisements












 

Kuuipo

Well-known member
Sunscreen

WHEN out in the sun, how often do you apply sunscreen? If it's anything less than once every 2 hours, you might be better off not using any in the first place.
So says Kerry Hanson, a chemist at the University of California at Riverside. She and her colleagues exposed human skin samples grown in the lab to UV radiation while they were covered with three common UV filters found in sunscreens: benzophenone-3, octocrylene and octylmethoxycinnamate. After just 1 hour, they found each compound had sunk into the skin, meaning its protective effect was greatly reduced. Worse, Hanson's team found that the samples contained more reactive oxygen species (ROS) than skin exposed to UV with no sunscreen on it. ROS are free radicals that can damage skin cells and increase the risk of skin cancer (Free Radical Biology and Medicine, DOI: 10.1016/j. freeradbiomed.2006.06.011).
The Skin Cancer Foundation in New York recommends that people go no more than 2 hours between reapplications of sunscreen. Our findings tend to support that, says Hanson.
It might actually be necessary to reapply even more often. One way of counteracting free radicals, Hanson says, might be to add antioxidants such as vitamins C and E to sunscreens. "In previous work, we've shown that antioxidants can help neutralise ROS in the skin," she says, though she has yet to perform the same experiment with sunscreen.
The notion that sunscreen can increase damage to skin caused by UV rays is startling, says a spokeswoman for the Skin Cancer Foundation. "It's a very strong statement they're making." The take-home message? Reapply regularly.
 

MAC_Whore

Well-known member
Regarding the thread: Let's keep it civil, OK? We can all express our opinions without getting snarky. Thanks.
 

rouquinne

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuuipo
You may write about makeup, but its obvious you do not keep up with chemistry or medical news.

wrong again...

i can quote medical journals that contradict what you're saying too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top