this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2026
68 points (100.0% liked)

Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

4372 readers
158 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Federal health regulators on Tuesday signed off on the first new sunscreen ingredient for the U.S. market in more than 25 years, giving Americans access to a skin-protecting chemical long used in Europe and other parts of the world.

The Food and Drug Administration says the ingredient, bemotrizinol, met the agency’s standards for protecting from dangerous ultraviolet rays while causing little irritation or absorption into the skin. The ingredient is safe for adults and children 6 months and older, the agency stated in a release.

Bemotrizinol will initially be sold in the U.S. by the Dutch manufacturer DSM Nutritional Products under the brand name Parsol Shield, which is expected to launch later in the year. After an 18-month exclusivity period, the ingredient will be available for use by other manufacturers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Bemotrizinol (BEMT), also known as Tinosorb S or Parsol Shield, is an oil-soluble, broad-spectrum chemical UV filter that absorbs both UVA and UVB rays. It is widely celebrated in Europe and Asia for its high photostability (it does not readily break down in sunlight) and excellent safety profile

Yeah, Korean skincare is lightyears ahead of the US and this is one of the reasons. The FDA has held up sunscreen ingredients for a long time. This is good news!

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is the same country that encourages tanning beds for children.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you talking about Korea or the US? I wouldn't be shocked if the answer is both.

This is still really good news for skin care and sun protection in the US.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

US. RFK wants kids to look like old wallets by 16.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 days ago

At least now we will have more access to better sun protection!

I remember tanning beds being super popular with my peers when I was a teen. The popularity seems to be rising again along with the skinny jeans and heroin chic look.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

The most advanced sunscreen on the market is La Roche Posay's UVmune which have a proprietary ingredient called Mexoryl 400. This blocks ultra long UVA (380 to 400 nm) which penetrates deepest into the skin and makes up 30% of the UV radiation that reaches us. It is the primary culprit behind deep cellular damage, skin sagging, wrinkles, and hyperpigmentation spots like melasma.

The UVmune line contains Bemotrizinol but it also has several other UV filters including Mexoryl 400, so it cannot be sold in the US. If you want to get it in the US you have to import it from Europe. Could be worth it if you're interested in wrinkling a bit slower. It can be purchased at Soin en Nature.

As a dude so I try to keep it simple, though I know most dudes just use body lotion on their face as I once did. I combine this sunscreen with a retinol product and Korean aloe gel and have been happy with the results overall. Undid some of the accelerated aging I experienced during the pandemic.

[–] habitualcynic@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Also a dude, also a fan of La Roche Posay’s UVmune. I live on the surface of the sun, USA, and I would prefer to not look like an old leather chair by the end of the decade.

This stuff is great and quick to add in a morning routine. Do it gents, the sun is more damaging than you think.

PS it’s pretty cheap on French beauty hub.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You can smear all the chemicals you want, but the real solution is covering skin with summer clothing, hats.

Are the long term effects of these compounds known? Of course not. DHA was tested and safe in sunscreens until it wasn't.

[–] habitualcynic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Definitely on the covering skin, or be like me and hide from the sun like a cave dweller.

My understanding is the 25+ years of data (admittedly assuming I remember correctly) in Europe shows it is safe. Maybe the new chemical at least, can’t remember on the UVmune compounds. However, I trust EU testing far more than anything coming out of the US.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I didn't realize there were so many anti-sunscreen folk on Lemmy lol

[–] habitualcynic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I know right? Did not expect

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Are they endocrine disruptors though?

That is bad by the way.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

they dont contain BPA.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bemotrizinol is not an endocrine disruptor. Why are you pushing this everywhere instead of looking into this yourself?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12317922/

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It sure sounds like one. I will look it up at some point, but I don't take the government's word for it, because I wasn't born yesterday, as you seem to have been here.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You’ve completely lost the point that the FDA isn’t the first governing body to approve this ingredient and their approval of it doesn’t mean I think it’s more safe.

This has been used in other countries for decades. There’s a lot of research on it out there. Stop pushing conspiracy theories for things that help reduce cancer.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fuck all the way off on dismissing toxics as "conspiracy theories" as if our governments protect us. What fucking world do you live in?

In truth, you lost all credibility with that dumbass comment.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're the one demanding others do research for you while simultaneously casting doubt.

The info is out there, I linked you a reputable study, and you're more content to spread fear than actually learn about it.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I only expressed my own distrust. I don't give a shit what you do, I don't trust the government, or corpo mercenary science outfits, because I wasn't born yesterday.

And I am sharing my opinion. Why do you care so much? How dare someone not take the government at their word? GTFO I would say if one communicated that to me.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah now you're just being an asshole.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Creams will not reverse ageing. You know what reverses aging? Nothing.

Methoxypropylamino Cyclohexenylidene Ethoxyethylcyanoacetate

If you want to smear that compound with a reactive cyano group on your skin, good luck.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You know what else has a cyano group? Cyanocobalamin, which you may recognize as vitamin B12.

Lots of pseudoscience and baseless fearmongering online. Please try not to propagate it.

Tretinoin reverses the appearance of aging. It's efficacy was established by decades of multi-center, double-blind, vehicle-controlled human trials, supplemented by reproducible histological/microscopic evidence. It's use is supported by the gold standard of and most heavily scrutinized dermatologic evidence in the field of topical skincare.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is good news!

It's not good news because no one is regulating shit.

Scammers will claim to be selling this knowing US consumers won't ask questions if they expect it to be different. Some jackass will just use cooking oil and sell it for $20 a can.

If we got Korean quality sunscreen, yeah, that'd be great.

But if you think that's what's happening here....

[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

You can get Asian stuff which already have a trusted reputation.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With no other side effects than, what? Mimicking your bodies hormones? The name sure sounds like that's the case knowing what I know about sunscreen from Consumer Reports.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s impossible to draw “a clear line in the sand” on whether certain sunscreen ingredients are completely healthy for people or not, Addae says. But she adds that evidence has emerged that has given researchers some insight into how sunscreen filters generally interact with our bodies. Chemically, BEMT has larger chromophores—light-absorbing molecules—than other organic filters, which makes them less of a concern for adverse biological interactions, Addae says. In pharmacology and dermatology, researchers use the “500 dalton rule” in which molecules with a molecular weight of more than 500 daltons are usually too large and bulky to pass through the skin.

There's a lot of information about this ingredient out there since it's been used outside of the US for decades now.

I'd rather risk using sunscreen than risk sun exposure.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Endocrine disuptors are not the only source of suncsreen.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

neither is skin cancer and uv radiation.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago

As if endocrine disruptors are the only types of sunscreen? Your argument is flawed, and I reject it.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I didn't say they were.

Regardless of how you feel about the FDA, this is a good step in the right direction. Our sunscreen options aren't very good comparatively and this will help improve skin protection.

No one is forcing you to use this type of sunscreen.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I am saying we should get some independent analysis of this before accepting it's safe because governments said it was. But what do I know.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

No, you are pushing that this particular ingredient is an endocrine disruptor and that even though it's been in use for decades, because the FDA approved it, no one should trust it.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I said I want a reliable source before I would concede it's safe.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Like a child sitting around demanding others do your work for you.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

You are demanding others accede to your opinions with only government data to back you up.

I don't use the stupid sunscreen, so it's not my work, if anything, you are the one working here, to hype a corporate interest?

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

I am specifically pushing back against your assertion that this ingredient is an endocrine disruptor and should be avoided.

I have no vested interest in anything besides better access to health aids and cancer reduction.

I just don't like pseudo-science conspiracy theories being pushed for no apparent reason and with no apparent evidence.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

You mischaracterized what I said, and as such, go talk to someone else, you aren't in good faith, and I reject you.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Bullshit. Sounds like another endocrine disruptor.

The FDA is not a reliable source.

With no other side effects than, what? Mimicking your bodies hormones? The name sure sounds like that's the case knowing what I know about sunscreen from Consumer Reports.

Endocrine disuptors are not the only source of suncsreen.

Are they endocrine disruptors though? That is bad by the way.

I have eyes.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Another worthless comment. Stop talking to me.

[–] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 21 hours ago

They're all your comments :)