Were you aware that the FDA doesn’t regulate sunscreens. I wasn’t. I was under the misguided assumption that, when shopping for a way to protect myself from the sun’s damaging rays, there was some regulation of protection claims. But now I find that there is no regulation. Go figure.

It gets better.

As we go into the Memorial Day weekend and millions will be hitting the beaches and backyards all over this country, The Environmental Working Group (EWG) released it Sunscreen Safety Guide. They studied 500 different beach and sport sunscreens and the results were staggering: of the 500 tested, only 39 were recommended. The rest failed due to “a surge in exaggerated SPF claims above 50″ and questions regarding active ingredients.

First, the SPF. Though sunscreen does help prevent sunburn, according to the FDA there is no proof that it helps to prevent skin cancer and premature aging. A product labeled SPF 15 blocks about 93 percent of the sun’s UVB rays; an SPF 50 protects against about 98 percent. Consequently, because 100% blockage is impossible (unless you stay indoors) SPFs higher than 50 are somewhat pointless, according to Dr. Henry Lim, chairman of the department of dermatology at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. The question is also how effectively sunscreens block UVA rays, the ultraviolet radiation that causes cell damage and contributes to skin cancer. The Environmental Working Group reported it found that one popular children’s sunscreen marketed as SPF 100 had a UVA protection factor of 9, which is relatively low.

Then come the other ingredients. Some sunscreens contain Vitamin A, which the EWG recommends avoiding. Seems Vitamin A can an enhance the rate of UV-induced skin tumor formation in lab mice. Big oops. One ingredient to look out for is Retinyl Palmitate, a Vitamin A derivative. Another ingredient is oxybenzone, an FDA-approved ingredient which boosts UVA protection BUT may have an estrogenic effect and is absorbed into the bloodstream. The jury is still out on this one.

So what is the FDA doing about this? There are conspiracy theorists who say that the FDA has known for some time about the problems with Vitamin A and done nothing. Under the FDA’s proposed guidelines, sunscreens would carry a four star rating system to show how effective each one is against UVA rays. Also, the term “waterproof” would be prohibited, replaced with water-resistant and suggestions would be added for how often the sunscreen should be reapplied.

The FDA’s timetable? Well……here there seems to be some hesitation. They hope to have all their new regulations in place by October or November of this year but…..well……you know they are working as hard as they can…….

And once the regulations are in place, the sunscreen companies have a full year to comply……so……nothing is really going to change until well into 2012.

Here’s to protecting the well being of the People.

I just go back about a year to the FDA vs. Zicam. Quick refresher: about 340 users of the nasal inhaler complained of a loss of smell after using the cold product. I feel bad for those 340 people, but still, a relatively low percentage of people who used the product (I was a HUGE fan). The FDA issued a warning and impressed on Zicam’s parent company that they could not market the product without FDA approval. Consequently, Zicam was pulled from the shelves. Here we have a situation where less than 10% of the products on the market may be as effective as advertised and, worse yet, may be leading to long term health problems down the road, and the best the FDA can do is ponder resolution for a few years? That doesn’t seem right, does it?

Conspiracy theorists, feel free to comment here…….