| |
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:05 am  |
Okay, kids....this was in Paul Beguoin's latest newsletter. What do you think?
Was 20/20 Blinded by the Light?
Ever since the ABC network news program 20/20 aired a segment on the alleged superiority of an active sunscreen ingredient called Mexoryl, letters and emails asking me about this have been piling up. Everyone wants to know why, if Mexoryl is the best UVA-protecting ingredient around, more sunscreens don't contain it. And they're asking how come I haven't been informing consumers about this important ingredient. Let me help straighten all this out--because Mexoryl is not a miracle sunscreen ingredient that anyone needs to travel to Canada or Mexico to buy.
First, I have actually been writing about L'Oreal-owned Mexoryl since the July/August 1998 issue of this newsletter, as well as in subsequent editions of my books, The Beauty Bible and Don't Go to the Cosmetics Counter Without Me. It was originally available as Mexoryl SX, but now Mexoryl XL, a second-generation chemical composition, is in use. Both ingredients were developed and patented by L'Oreal, and the company has used them in their sunscreen formulations outside of the United States since 1993. Mexoryl is approved for use in Europe and many other countries throughout the world, but not in the United States, which is why no sunscreens sold in this country can (legally) use it.
The big deal is that in order for a sunscreen to be truly effective it must protect skin from both the UVA and UVB rays in sunlight. UVB rays cause sunburn, UVA rays cause serious, long-term damage that reveals no short-term impact on skin. Regrettably, there is no SPF rating for UVA protection, so the active ingredients that provide it are the only way to tell if your product is really offering full protection. The UVB range is 280 to 320 nanometers, and the UVA range is 320 to 400.
According to researchers who have analyzed Mexoryl, both its long-term photostability and its capacity to block some UVB and all UVA rays (where most other active ingredients, such as oxybenzone, fall far short of the full UVA spectrum) are what make it so special. Mexoryl protects against UV wavelengths in the 290–400 nanometer range. In the United States, a typical, very reliable, and potent UVA-protecting ingredient is avobenzone (also called butylmethoxy dibenzoylmethane); it protects over the range of 320–400 nanometers (Sources:www.dermatology.org/skintherapy/stl0205.html; and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,www.cdc.gov/excite/skincancer/mod06.htm). Neither Mexoryl nor avobenzone can protect skin from sunburn by themselves; they must be combined with other active sunscreen agents to gain an official SPF rating.
Despite the enthusiasm of L'Oreal and some dermatologists, independent, peer-reviewed research supporting L'Oreal's claims for Mexoryl is lacking. Almost all of the studies pertaining to Mexoryl's UVA-protecting prowess have been funded by L'Oreal (or a L'Oreal-owned company such as La Roche Posay). A small-scale, double-blind German study showed Mexoryl to be effective when paired with avobenzone and titanium dioxide (this combination is used in many commercial sunscreens featuring Mexoryl). But this study begs the real question: How do we know the Mexoryl is responsible for the positive results? Rather than spotlight Mexoryl's individual ability to protect skin from UVA damage, the study demonstrated that Mexoryl works best when combined with other active ingredients, and that variances between active ingredients can affect how well a sunscreen protects skin (Source: Photodermatology, Photoimmunology, and Photomedicine, December 2000, pages 256–259).
In contrast to the information about Mexoryl, several studies show that titanium dioxide and zinc oxide are capable of providing significant UVA and UVB protection when used alone, and that they have no risk of skin irritation. However, the 20/20 report made no mention of that whatsoever (Sources:www.abcnews.com; Skin Therapy Letter, volume 2, number 5, Table 1, 1997; Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, January 1999, pages 85–90; The British Journal of Dermatology, August 1999, pages 250–258; and Photodermatology, Photoimmunology, and Photomedicine, October 2003, pages 242–253).
There is no official confirmation on the FDA's Web site (www.fda.gov) that L'Oreal has submitted Mexoryl for approval as a sunscreen active. However, media reports, including one fromwww.washington post.com, have alluded to the proceedings but mention that the FDA is not commenting on Mexoryl's application. The media-relations folks at L'Oreal are also remaining tight-lipped, commenting only that "All we really say about Mexoryl is that we have initiated a process of discussion with the FDA about Mexoryl and are continuing to work closely with the FDA." Where ABC got the notion that Mexoryl was the be-all and end-all of sunscreen ingredients is unknown, because there is no research showing that to be the case, and no one else in the industry (aside from L'Oreal) believes that is the case.
The bottom line is that U.S. consumers are not being shortchanged in meeting their sun-care needs just because Mexoryl is not widely available. While it would be nice to have another UVA-protecting sunscreen ingredient in the U.S. market, research does not support the media stories that proclaim Mexoryl as "the best" sunscreen agent, although I bet L'Oreal is loving the free publicity
Maria  |
_________________
Maria, early 50's, post meno, normal to dry skin, more dry in winter, some sun damage... |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 2:34 pm |
Thanks for that interesting article!
It really grounds your feet when you realise that whenever there is some miracle ingredient out there, it's not 100% great, especially when you take into account who is funding the research and advertising for stuff like that. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:26 pm |
It just really gets confusing, doesn't it?!!!
But from everything I understand, you get much better protection from the Euro sunscreens. I use Skinceuticals Physical 30 spf and have not had a problem, but I know eventually I will take the plunge and get LRP....whether Anthelios, or Pediatrics, don't know....
Maybe she's just jealous b/c she doesn't have a mexoryl sunscreen in her line of products!!!
Maria |
_________________
Maria, early 50's, post meno, normal to dry skin, more dry in winter, some sun damage... |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:39 pm |
Maria -
Jealous or not, she probably may have a hard time swallowing the news of new advances in UV protection, even if they only work best with a combination of other ingredients. I really sense that she has this sort of attitude that comes through in her articles and reviews.
Anyway, I have yet to find a good sunscreen that does not leave me looking like I am recovering from terminal illness. I think I will just have to resort to wearing a nice and expensive broad rimmed hat all year.
Don't know if it is me or the horrible sun in NZ, but ever since I stepped out in shorts and dresses early spring, i have had lots and lots of tiny dark specks pop up on my legs. Like freckles but not cute.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:46 pm |
At first I found her website very helpful, especially the ingredient info section. But then I found out she's selling her own stuff  That placed her credibility into question for me. Then in another forum I read that she uses some of the ingredients she rates negatively in her own products I was completely turned off at that point. To be fair, some of her products do get good reviews on MUA, but I'm still wary.
Not to be paranoid ladies, but beauty is BIG business. There is a lot of money at stake. I'm reserving judgement on her article until I've done some research  |
_________________
40's; combo to oily skin recently sensitive; hormonal breakouts; rethinking skin care routine |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:11 pm |
I like Paula. Ya, she has attitude which isn't always easy to take. But she doesn't use the ingredients she criticises. Just because someone says she does this doesn't mean it's so. Read her reviews, look at her ingredient lists, then decide.
She seems fair to me. She did high end and drugstore comparisons recently which I found really helpful and she only recommended her own product when there wasn't a reasonable drugstore alternative. It was of her new toners, of which none contain alcohol. I agree with her, not very often you can find drugstore toners without alcohol or other irritants.
Some of her formulations are ones I have been dreaming of using forever. Like unscented moisturizers that don't ball up under make-up like the LRP unscented one I like so much, less irritating acne products, non-greasy sunscreens, yes, without Mexoryl, and unscented hair products. |
_________________
V2J 6P7 |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 6:43 pm |
On another note about Mexoryl,a sunscreen symposium just met a couple weeks ago about SPF's. I read for the first time that CoQ10 ihibits cancer cells!But back to the thread of the topic - Mexoryl was discussed:
http://www.cosmeticsandtoiletries.com/news/1746846.html
A few other hot topics were studies on coenzyme Q10 and commentary on the Mexoryl brand sunscreen:
Niven Narain (University of Miami) presented some interesting findings on his work with coenzyme Q10 in which he reported, “CoQ10 inhibits the proliferation of (certain) cancer cells,” specifically in breast, prostate, and liver cancer.
On another note, one attendee observed that there seems to be some “mass hysteria” about the sunscreen Mexoryl. Among several experts, there seemed to be some banter about Mexoryl XL and SX (the water-soluble form). Some concern was expressed for the water-soluble form because formulators felt the ingredient initially may test for a certain SPF level, then once incorporated into a formulation it could wash off, giving no protection. |
_________________
Oily skin,dry in winter; nonstop breakouts-some hormonal; ethnic skintone-golden tan; mid 30's |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:04 pm |
| What kind of tests did they do to approve Mexoryl in Europe and Canada? I'm sure it is extensive enough that's why it was approved to begin with. The US process just takes a lot longer. What about another equally good sunscreen unavailable in the US called Tinosorb, what does Paula think of that? |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:22 pm |
Yes, she didn't mention Tinsorb...nor did she mention anything at all about photostability; or instability...  |
_________________
~normal but prone to dryness~slightly sensitive~usually clear~totm breakouts~mid 20s~ |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:48 pm |
| Quote: |
| Just because someone says she does this doesn't mean it's so. Read her reviews, look at her ingredient lists, then decide. |
Which is why I'm reserving judgement pending some research on my part! And for the sake of fairness, I did mention my bias - that it is hard for me to take her reviews seriously because she has a conflict of interest. |
_________________
40's; combo to oily skin recently sensitive; hormonal breakouts; rethinking skin care routine |
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:51 pm |
| Quote: |
| the study demonstrated that Mexoryl works best when combined with other active ingredients |
Works for me - and while I see her point, I wouldn't dream of using Mexoryl alone to begin with. Furthermore, U.S. dermatologists (the ones I have been to in southern California, New York, Texas, Florida, & Oklahoma) all unanimously rave about the benefits of Mexoryl.
A sunscreen I use very often, European drugstore brand BioDerma Photoderm Max SPF 50+, contains titanium dioxide, Avobenzone, and zinc oxide among the first seven ingredients. Walk into any U.S. drugstore and only about 2 out of 10 sunscreens there contain even one FDA-approved active ingredient (zinc, titanium, avobenzone). Forget finding a sunscreen there that contains more than one of these ingredients! I think I've seen about 3 brands here in the U.S. that actually do that - and even then, they're not micronized and are thus essentially unwearable.
Additionally, almost all of the sunscreens that do contain at least one of the 3 FDA-approved active ingredients tend to contain alarmingly low potencies of that (one) ingredient. For example, take this severe-sounding sunscreen: http://www.drugstore.com/products/prod.asp?pid=91654&catid=12101&trx=PLST-0-SRCH&trxp1=12101&trxp2=91654&trxp3=1&trxp4=0&btrx=BUY-PLST-0-SRCH
Titanium dioxide is listed as the last of the active ingredients. Shameful!
When I went to the Boots drugstores all over the U.K. 3 months ago, I nearly flipped out. Almost every ordinary, inexpensive pharmacy sunscreen I picked up fit this multiple-active ingredient bill: Vichy, Avene, Garnier, Simple - the list goes on. I shipped home so many! Yep, our U.S. sunscreens here have a great deal of catching up to do in terms of impressive UVA protection. I stand behind that with hands on hips.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:19 pm |
I think a lot of the reason why the U.S. hasn't caught up with sunscreen is because it seems that it isnt such a big worry to most people. That alarms me. I'm the only person other than my sister that I know who is concerned about proper sun protection. Everyone else I know goes in the sun and ruins themselves just because they want a tan. It can't be just the people I know...which overall makes you consider the demand of americans wanting to buy sunscreen.
I'll still stick to what I know...i use the skinceuticals physical SPF 30 formula...and its worked better than that crappy avobenzone (my sister used it in a photostable formula and still got freckles...and I got lovely rashes). What concerns me about so many chemical sunscreens is yes, people want to stay young and beautiful...but that absorbs into your skin and I wouldn't want to take a risk of getting cancer when it probably isnt sure how safe these ingredients are. It's definitely something to think about. |
_________________
Extremely fair/sensitive skin(mild rosacea)that burns very easy.acne is rare/skin is dry.27 years old. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:00 am |
| Quote: |
| I think a lot of the reason why the U.S. hasn't caught up with sunscreen is because it seems that it isnt such a big worry to most people. |
Absolutely; I completely agree with you there, and should have also incorporated this rather important point in my preceding post. Sadly, UVA protection simply is not a concern with the U.S. population. In fact, the average person here has no concept of even the distinction between UVA & UVB rays, and many truly seem to believe that they can bake until right before they burn - and that's pretty much as good for their skin as staying indoors.
Fitness and our bodies seem to be the main focus - likely due to the obesity epidemic in this country. (A whole 'nother issue!) But to be fair, UVA protection is starting to become big in the media: the news, CNN, women's magazines. Many people simply do not seem to care.
But with respect to sunscreen application, my husband (who's not fair by any means) and most of my family (many of them olive-complected) likely find my devotion to sunscreens a bit on the neurotic side. But in the U.K., the attitude to sunscreen is, "That's nice; I apply that stuff every morning, too." Love that! |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:57 am |
"But with respect to sunscreen application, my husband (who's not fair by any means) and most of my family (many of them olive-complected) likely find my devotion to sunscreens a bit on the neurotic side. "
I tell people that i wear sunscreen daily and they think im MENTAL. my family pokes fun about it...and other people joke around when they see me walking around with my hat on. They think it wouldnt "hurt" for me to get a shade or two darker...while my skin cannot tolerate the sun at all in general. I think people should open their minds up and consider maybe they should take better care of their largest organ. Its ridiculous!:P |
_________________
Extremely fair/sensitive skin(mild rosacea)that burns very easy.acne is rare/skin is dry.27 years old. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:54 am |
I forgot to add, I agree on the sunscreen issues. I find Paula has tunnel vision, she relies heavily on scientific studies and doesn't do the actual testing herself (I don't believe she does anyway). I think if it hasn't been proved in research she deems reliable, she discounts it.
But, I do think it is possible to sell your own line of products and do fair reviews. A lot of people can put their interests aside in their professional life, why couldn't she? |
_________________
V2J 6P7 |
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:12 am |
I don't know about this article. In fact nearly all of the ingredients we use (with the exception of vit C, retin A type drugs, green tea and a few for DMAE) have only been tested by interested parties. Matrixyl had one university test but I believe it was funded by the manufacturer. That's why I tend to be skeptical about most things. I know first hand that involvement can actually skew results. On the other hand
as long as bad side effects are not seen (and that's where forums are useful) we can test for ourselves assuming we want to spend the $$.
The only thing that worries me is that some things may have good short term effects but very bad long term. Sort of buyer beware. If the downside of Mexoryl is that it might not work as well as expected maybe use in mixed formulas will give us the best of all worlds? |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:39 am |
"According to researchers who have analyzed Mexoryl, both its long-term photostability and its capacity to block some UVB and all UVA rays (where most other active ingredients, such as oxybenzone, fall far short of the full UVA spectrum) are what make it so special. Mexoryl protects against UV wavelengths in the 290–400 nanometer range. In the United States, a typical, very reliable, and potent UVA-protecting ingredient is avobenzone (also called butylmethoxy dibenzoylmethane); it protects over the range of 320–400 nanometers "
This is another thing that concerns me. UVB rays start at 280 nanometers...and it seems these ingredients dont cover all of the uvb standards..which is why they are probably mixed with other active ingredients. But what makes it more confusing is the whole debate that some sunscreen agents dont work with others..and can possibly cancel out the workage of another. Unless someone else knows more than I do and can give me some insight...Which explains possibly why the avobenzone never worked on my skin..probably not blended with good sunscreen agents which cause my skin to burn and not feel so lovely. |
_________________
Extremely fair/sensitive skin(mild rosacea)that burns very easy.acne is rare/skin is dry.27 years old. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:56 pm |
If Paula would think more about how good it would be for Mexoryl to be available here as another choice for sun protection instead of trying to show what a great critic she is, she might have taken a different viewpoint and mentioned all the European sunscreens available that use Tinosorb and Mexoryl. But she didn't. Her real goal is to have everyone think she is the EXPERT of the UNIVERSE on anything skincare related.
But she's not. I think that hacks her off thus the wild bashing of ingredients/tv shows/articles etc. that don't have all the scientific proof she would like to see....I wonder what she would say if she was banned from using any products that she has dissed in the past including Mexoryl sunscreeens. Bet she'd be aging faster than her general age group.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 30, 2005 6:38 pm |
| sharky wrote: |
| I don't know about this article. In fact nearly all of the ingredients we use (with the exception of vit C, retin A type drugs, green tea and a few for DMAE) have only been tested by interested parties. Matrixyl had one university test but I believe it was funded by the manufacturer. That's why I tend to be skeptical about most things. I know first hand that involvement can actually skew results. |
Yes, most companies fund studies of there own products....they are running a business after all, but they also play an important part in the discovery of new and improved treatments. This extends to any pharmaceutical company. But lets not "shoot the developer", someone has to fund these things in order to deliver better options to us.
It's difficult to determine when studies are fully legitimate or not - I've seen studies published that are totally against the interests of the company funding them and resulted in world-wide withdrawal of a drug (and also put some companies on the brink of destruction), and furthermore, there are strict regulations and guidelines on the amount of interaction that the actual company can have in the direct study (and they have to also publish this information too) - most times companies dont hear about the results until they are publicly released and I can personally vouch for that having been in a company that was sweating on the release of the study - whatever the outcome (that was pharmaceutical though - so perhaps its different?  ).
Any product we use we are investing an amount of faith in, one in a million people will actually check the studies and make an educated decision - most will use it because of a review, or recommendation or a marketing message.
I guess we need to take everything we read or hear with a grain of salt, but don't be surprised that the information or studies we hear about are funded by the interested parties, and totally reject the results or findings based on that.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:09 am |
Hi Melissa  thank you for that very reassuring post re regulations on manufacturer-funded studies. I have a market research background and I know its possible to manipulate results in several ways. They say numbers don't lie but one can omit things while emphasizing others to present a version of the findings that is far from the truth.
For me the heart of the sunscreen issue is UVA. Yes, I am concerned about UVB and would like to get as much UVB protection as possible, but I worry more about UVA. The formulations in the US are inferior - avobenzone could be irritating and is unstable by itself, and zinc oxide/titanium, while inert and less likely to irritate skin, can be highly occlusive to a breakout-prone person like me.
Here is a discussion of Paula's article in another forum -
http://www.biochemistryofbeauty.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2894&sid=1ddb352d131
I agree that the US population has a ways to go to catch up. In general there is no sufficient education re the benefits of sunscreen. Plus most people (including me) don't enjoy using it. The reaction to being told one needs to use sunscreen is similar to the reaction to being advised to exercise (at least among my friends ). Given this situation Paula's article is dangerous! Most people do not have the time or inclination to do even a bit of research to find the truth, so they would be under the mistaken impression that they are getting adequate sun protection. |
_________________
40's; combo to oily skin recently sensitive; hormonal breakouts; rethinking skin care routine |
|
|
|
|
Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:54 pm |
I used to read Paula’s articles – before internet and long before she began pushing her own products and have to agree with crazyskin, that Paula’s article is dangerous.
After I shared the information about sunscreens found on this and other forums, the reaction in the office was, “And here we were thinking that applying expensive department store sunscreens with SPF15, was all the protection we ever needed”.
It is a crying shame that self-appointed experts like Paula are still trying to hide the truth about sunscreen from American women just so they can continue selling their inferior products  |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 02, 2005 8:12 pm |
| you know, i honestly don't even read her reviews anymore. she writes something bad if there is any possible ingrediant that could irritate anyone in the world and losses a lot of credit in my book as an independent reviewer when she started selling her own stuff. |
|
|
|
|
| Wed Apr 24, 2024 6:59 pm |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
|
