Looking for sunscreen advice? Listen to the experts, not social media | Canada Voices

Spending less time on your phone could be better for your skin.

“There’s a huge group of people that are walking away from sunscreen because of online naysayers, and worried that sunscreen is more of a risk than sun exposure,” says Dr. Sonya Cook, a dermatologist and co-owner of Compass Dermatology in Toronto. Sun-care misinformation continues to proliferate on social media, increasing people’s uncertainty over a range of issues including whether sun exposure is needed as a source of vitamin D, and the environmental impact of reef-safe sunscreen formulas.

Questioning ingredient safety is a leading headline. “There is a very anti-chemical-sunscreen movement that’s happening in North America,” says Dr. Julian Sass, adding that the movement is strongest in the United States. The Montreal-based cosmetic chemist has a website featuring a searchable database of more than 500 sunscreen reviews.

Categorized by the type of filters used to minimize the damage of UV exposure, sunscreens are commonly described as either mineral or chemical. Mineral ingredients include zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, while chemical filters encompass a larger lineup, such as avobenzone, homosalate, octocrylene and Mexoryl.

In the past few years, irritation associated with the chemical filter oxybenzone has led many brands to remove it or distance themselves from the ingredient. It has also emboldened some in the clean-beauty movement to spread mistrust.

In a recent case of fearmonger marketing, L.A.-based company Primally Pure launched its debut mineral sun-care range with the tagline “poison-free SPF.” However, the experts in skin health are firm that evidence is lacking. “We have over 50 years of data that sunscreen reduces your risk of skin cancer, especially non-melanoma, and photo aging,” says Cook. “There’s no evidence the ingredients are harmful, and many of them are known to be completely safe.”

A key difference between the categories is the composition of the lotion, cream or gel and how it looks on skin once applied. “With chemical sunscreens you just have to dissolve the filters well and it’s a lot easier to get a decent SPF without a white cast,” explains Sass. Minerals, on the other hand, require powders that are challenging to disperse well into a product. The result often leaves skin looking ghostly, especially among those with medium to dark complexions. “Making a cosmetically elegant mineral sunscreen takes a lot more time, which is more money, but it’s what a lot of people who are clean-beauty-conscious are asking for,” says Sass. “So the market has to fit the demands of the consumer, no matter how misinformed it is.”

“If someone has more sensitive skin, I might steer them toward a mineral product, but I use a blend of both mineral and chemical sunscreens,” says Dr. Julia Carroll, a dermatologist and co-owner of Compass.

When applying, use more than you think you need (a teaspoon for face, neck and chest, one ounce for the body). “Put your sunscreen on when you’re naked, and don’t skip going right up to the hair line, on the ears or back of the neck,” she says. Whichever type you prefer, the experts agree that a higher price tag doesn’t mean you’re getting a better product. “If it has broad-spectrum protection, it’s SPF 30 or higher, and it’s a formulation that you’re happy to use, then there’s no need to spend more money,” says Carroll.

Six buys to try

Affordable sun protection from head to toe, starting at $14.