A short history of sunscreen, from basting like a chook to preventing skin cancer

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Australians have used commercial creams, lotions or gels to manage our skin’s sun exposure for nearly a century.

But why we do it, the preparations themselves, and whether they work, has changed over time.

In this short history of sunscreen in Australia, we look at how we’ve slathered, slopped and spritzed our skin for sometimes surprising reasons.

At first, suncreams helped you ‘tan with ease’

Advertisement for Hamilton's Sunburn Vanishing Cream
This early sunscreen claimed you could ‘tan with ease’.
Trove/NLA

Sunscreens have been available in Australia since the 30s. Chemist Milton Blake made one of the first.

He used a kerosene heater to cook batches of “sunburn vanishing cream”, scented with French perfume.

His backyard business became H.A. Milton (Hamilton) Laboratories, which still makes sunscreens today.

Hamilton’s first cream claimed you could “
Sunbathe in Comfort and TAN with ease”. According to modern standards, it would have had an SPF (or sun protection factor) of 2.

The mirage of ‘safe tanning’

A tan was considered a “modern complexion” and for most of the 20th century, you might put something on your skin to help gain one. That’s when “safe tanning” (without burning) was thought possible.

Coppertone advertisement showing tanned woman in bikini
This 1967 Coppertone advertisement urged you to ‘tan, not burn’.
SenseiAlan/Flickr, CC BY-SA

Sunburn was known to be caused by the UVB component of ultraviolet (UV) light. UVA, however, was thought not to be involved in burning; it was just thought to darken the skin pigment melanin. So, medical authorities advised that by using a sunscreen that filtered out UVB, you could “safely tan” without burning.

But that was wrong.

From the 70s, medical research suggested UVA penetrated damagingly deep into the skin, causing ageing effects such as sunspots and wrinkles. And both UVA and UVB could cause skin cancer.

Sunscreens from the 80s sought to be “broad spectrum” – they filtered both UVB and UVA.

Researchers consequently recommended sunscreens for all skin tones, including for preventing sun damage in people with dark skin.

Delaying burning … or encouraging it?

Up to the 80s, sun preparations ranged from something that claimed to delay burning, to preparations that actively encouraged it to get that desirable tan – think, baby oil or coconut oil. Sun-worshippers even raided the kitchen cabinet, slicking olive oil on their skin.

One manufacturer’s “sun lotion” might effectively filter UVB; another’s merely basted you like a roast chicken.

Since labelling laws before the 80s didn’t require manufacturers to list the ingredients, it was often hard for consumers to tell which was which.

At last, SPF arrives to guide consumers

In the 70s, two Queensland researchers, Gordon Groves and Don Robertson, developed tests for sunscreens – sometimes experimenting on students or colleagues. They printed their ranking in the newspaper, which the public could use to choose a product.

An Australian sunscreen manufacturer then asked the federal health department to regulate the industry. The company wanted standard definitions to market their products, backed up by consistent lab testing methods.

In 1986, after years of consultation with manufacturers, researchers and consumers, Australian Standard AS2604 gave a specified a testing method, based on the Queensland researchers’ work. We also had a way of expressing how well sunscreens worked – the sun protection factor or SPF.

This is the ratio of how long it takes a fair-skinned person to burn using the product compared with how long it takes to burn without it. So a cream that protects the skin sufficiently so it takes 40 minutes to burn instead of 20 minutes has an SPF of 2.

Manufacturers liked SPF because businesses that invested in clever chemistry could distinguish themselves in marketing. Consumers liked SPF because it was easy to understand – the higher the number, the better the protection.

Australians, encouraged from 1981 by the Slip! Slop! Slap! nationwide skin cancer campaign, could now “slop” on a sunscreen knowing the degree of protection it offered.

How about skin cancer?

It wasn’t until 1999 that research proved that using sunscreen prevents skin cancer. Again, we have Queensland to thank, specifically the residents of Nambour. They took part in a trial for nearly five years, carried out by a research team led by Adele Green of the Queensland Institute of Medical Research. Using sunscreen daily over that time reduced rates of squamous cell carcinoma (a common form of skin cancer) by about 60%.

Follow-up studies in 2011 and 2013 showed regular sunscreen use almost halved the rate of melanoma and slowed skin ageing. But there was no impact on rates of basal cell carcinoma, another common skin cancer.

By then, researchers had shown sunscreen stopped sunburn, and stopping sunburn would prevent at least some types of skin cancer.

What’s in sunscreen today?

An effective sunscreen uses one or more active ingredients in a cream, lotion or gel. The active ingredient either works:

  • “chemically” by absorbing UV and converting it to heat. Examples include PABA (para-aminobenzoic acid) and benzyl salicylate, or

  • “physically” by blocking the UV, such as zinc oxide or titanium dioxide.

Physical blockers at first had limited cosmetic appeal because they were opaque pastes. (Think cricketers with zinc smeared on their noses.)

With microfine particle technology from the 90s, sunscreen manufacturers could then use a combination of chemical absorbers and physical blockers to achieve high degrees of sun protection in a cosmetically acceptable formulation.

Where now?

Australians have embraced sunscreen, but they still don’t apply enough or reapply often enough.

Although some people are concerned sunscreen will block the skin’s ability to make vitamin D this is unlikely. That’s because even SPF50 sunscreen doesn’t filter out all UVB.

There’s also concern about the active ingredients in sunscreen getting into the environment and whether their absorption by our bodies is a problem.

Sunscreens have evolved from something that at best offered mild protection to effective, easy-to-use products that stave off the harmful effects of UV. They’ve evolved from something only people with fair skin used to a product for anyone.

Remember, slopping on sunscreen is just one part of sun protection. Don’t forget to also slip (protective clothing), slap (hat), seek (shade) and slide (sunglasses).The Conversation

Laura Dawes, Research Fellow in Medico-Legal History, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Knitting helps Tom Daley switch off. Its mental health benefits are not just for Olympians
  • Thai Green Curry With Crispy Tofu Balls
    Feast on plant diversity with our recipe: savory tofu balls in fragrant coconut sauce, a phytochemical powerhouse coupled with crunchy nuts and herbs.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Considering taking Wegovy to lose weight? Here are the risks and benefits – and how it differs from Ozempic

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    The weight-loss drug Wegovy is now available in Australia.

    Wegovy is administered as a once-weekly injection and is approved specifically for weight management. It’s intended to be used in combination with a reduced-energy diet and increased physical activity.

    So how does Wegovy work and how much weight can you expect to lose while taking it? And what are the potential risks – and costs – for those who use it?

    Let’s look at what the science says.

    Halfpoint/Shutterstock

    What is Wegovy?

    Wegovy is a brand name for the medication semaglutide. Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA). This means it makes your body’s own glucagon-like peptide-1 hormone, called GLP-1 for short, work better.

    Normally when you eat, the body releases the GLP-1 hormone which helps signal to your brain that you are full. Semaglutides enhance this effect, leading to a feeling of fullness, even when you haven’t eaten.

    Another role of GLP-1 is to stimulate the body to produce more insulin, a hormone which helps lower the level of glucose (sugar) in the blood. That’s why semaglutides have been used for several years to treat type 2 diabetes.

    Pack of Wegovy injections
    Wegovy is self-injected once a week. S Becker/Shutterstock

    How does Wegovy differ from Ozempic?

    Like Wegovy, Ozempic is a semaglutide. The way Wegovy and Ozempic work in the body are essentially the same. They’re made by the same pharmaceutical company, Novo Nordisk.

    But there are two differences:

    1) They are approved for two different (but related) reasons.

    In Australia (and the United States), Ozempic is approved for use to improve blood glucose levels in adults with type 2 diabetes. By managing blood glucose levels effectively, the medication aims to reduce the risk of major complications, such as heart disease.

    Wegovy is approved for use alongside diet and exercise for people with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or greater, or 27 or greater but with other conditions such as high blood pressure.

    Wegovy can also be used in people aged 12 years and older. Like Ozempic, Wegovy aims to reduce the risk of future health complications, including heart disease.

    2) They are both injected but come in different strengths.

    Ozempic is available in pre-loaded single-dose pens with varying dosages of 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, 1 mg, or 2 mg per injection. The dose can be slowly increased, up to a maximum of 2 mg per week, if needed.

    Wegovy is available in prefilled single-dose pens with doses of 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, 1 mg, 1.7 mg, or 2.4 mg. The treatment starts with a dose of 0.25 mg once weekly for four weeks, after which the dose is gradually increased until reaching a maintenance dose of 2.4 mg weekly.

    While it’s unknown what the impact of Wegovy’s introduction will be on Ozempic’s availability, Ozempic is still anticipated to be in low supply for the remainder of 2024.

    Is Wegovy effective for weight loss?

    Given Wegovy is a semaglutide, there is very strong evidence it can help people lose weight and maintain this weight loss.

    A recent study found that over four years, participants taking Wevovy as indicated experienced an average weight loss of 10.2% body weight and a reduction in waist circumference of 7.7cm.

    For those who stop taking the medication, analyses have shown that about two-thirds of weight lost is regained.

    Man leans against a bridge rail
    Wegovy can help people lose weight and maintain their weight loss – while they take the drug. Mladen Mitrinovic/Shutterstock

    What are the side effects of Wegovy?

    The most common side effects are nausea and vomiting.

    However, other serious side effects are also possible because of the whole-of-body impact of the medication. Thyroid tumours and cancer have been detected as a risk in animal studies, yet are rarely seen in human scientific literature.

    In the four-year Wegovy trial, 16.6% of participants who received Wegovy (1,461 people) experienced an adverse event that led to them permanently discontinuing their use of the medication. This was higher than the 8.2% of participants (718 people) who received the placebo (with no active ingredient).

    Side effects included gastrointestinal disorders (including nausea and vomiting), which affected 10% of people who used Wegovy compared to 2% of people who used the placebo.

    Gallbladder-related disorders occurred in 2.8% of people who used Wegovy, and 2.3% of people who received the placebo.

    Recently, concerns about suicidal thoughts and behaviours have been raised, after a global analysis reviewed more than 36 million reports of adverse events from semaglutide (Ozempic or Wegovy) since 2000.

    There were 107 reports of suicidal thoughts and self-harm among people taking semaglutide, sadly including six actual deaths. When people stopped the medication, 62.5% found the thoughts went away. What we don’t know is whether dose, weight loss, or previous mental health status or use of antidepressants had a role to play.

    Finally, concerns are growing about the negative effect of semaglutides on our social and emotional connection with food. Anecdotal and scientific evidence suggests people who use semaglutides significantly reduce their daily dietary intake (as anticipated) by skipping meals and avoiding social occasions – not very enjoyable for people and their loved ones.

    How can people access Wegovy?

    Wegovy is available for purchase at pharmacists with a prescription from a doctor.

    But there is a hefty price tag. Wegovy is not currently subsidised through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, leaving patients to cover the cost. The current cost is estimated at around A$460 per month dose.

    If you’re considering Wegovy, make an appointment with your doctor for individual advice.

    Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland and Emily Burch, Accredited Practising Dietitian and Lecturer, Southern Cross University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Peach vs Passion Fruit – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing peach to passion fruit, we picked the passion fruit.

    Why?

    It wasn’t close!

    In terms of macros, passion fruit has more than 2x the protein, 2x the carbs, and 7x the fiber. That’s a big difference!

    In the category of vitamins, peach has more of vitamins B1, B5, E, and K, while passion fruit has more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, C, and choline. Again, not close.

    When it comes to minerals, peach has more manganese and zinc, while passion fruit has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium—and most of those margins are “by multiples”, not just a fraction more. Again, a clear winner here.

    Adding up these three overwhelming wins for passion fruit makes for an obvious total win for passion fruit.

    As ever, enjoy both, but if you’re going to pick one, then one of these fruits is extra passionate about bringing you nutrients.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Top 8 Fruits That Prevent & Kill Cancer ← peaches are on this list!

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Cows’ Milk, Bird Flu, & You

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    When it comes to dairy products, generally speaking, fermented ones (such as most cheeses and yogurts) are considered healthy in moderation, and unfermented ones have their pros and cons that can be argued and quibbled “until the cows come home”. We gave a broad overview, here:

    Is Dairy Scary?

    Furthermore, you may recall that there’s some controversy/dissent about when human babies can have cows’ milk:

    When can my baby drink cow’s milk? It’s sooner than you think

    So, what about bird flu now?

    Earlier this year, the information from the dairy industry was that it was nothing to be worried about for the time being:

    Bird Flu Is Bad for Poultry and Dairy Cows. It’s Not a Dire Threat for Most of Us — Yet.

    More recently, the latest science has found:

    ❝We found a first-order decay rate constant of −2.05 day–1 equivalent to a T99 of 2.3 days. Viral RNA remained detectable for at least 57 days with no degradation. Pasteurization (63 °C for 30 min) reduced infectious virus to undetectable levels and reduced viral RNA concentrations, but reduction was less than 1 log10.

    The prolonged persistence of viral RNA in both raw and pasteurized milk has implications for food safety assessments and environmental surveillance❞

    You can find the study here:

    Infectivity and Persistence of Influenza A Virus in Raw Milk

    In short: raw milk keeps the infectious virus; pasteurization appears to render it uninfectious, though viral RNA remains present.

    This is relevant, because of the bird flu virus being found in milk:

    World Health Organization | H5N1 strain of bird flu found in milk

    To this end, a moratorium has been placed on the sale of raw milk, first by the California Dept of Public Health (following an outbreak in California):

    California halts sales of raw milk due to bird flu virus contamination

    And then, functionally, by the USDA, though rather than an outright ban, it’s requiring testing for the virus:

    USDA orders testing of milk supply for presence of bird flu virus

    So, is pasteurized milk safe?

    The official answer to this, per the FDA, is… Honestly, a lot of hand-wringing and shrugging. What we do know is:

    • the bird flu virus has been found in pasteurized milk too
    • the test for this is very sensitive, and has the extra strength/weakness that viral fragments will flag it as a positive
    • it is assumed that the virus was inactivated by the pasteurization process
    • it could, however, have been the entire virus, the test simply does not tell us which

    In the FDA’s own words:

    ❝The pasteurization process has served public health well for more than 100 years. Even if the virus is detected in raw milk, pasteurization is generally expected to eliminate pathogens to a level that does not pose a risk to consumer health❞

    So, there we have it: the FDA does not have a reassurance exactly, but it does have a general expectation.

    Source: US Officials: Bird flu viral fragments found in pasteurized milk

    Want to know more?

    You might like this mythbusting edition we did a little while back:

    Pasteurization: What It Does And Doesn’t Do ← this is about its effect on risks and nutrients

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Knitting helps Tom Daley switch off. Its mental health benefits are not just for Olympians
  • Huperzine A: A Natural Nootropic

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Huperzine A: A Natural Nootropic

    Huperzine A is a compound, specifically a naturally occurring sesquiterpene alkaloid, that functions as an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. If that seems like a bunch of big words, don’t worry, we’ll translate in a moment.

    First, a nod to its origins: it is found in certain kinds of firmoss, especially the “toothed clubmoss”, Huperzia serrata, which grows in many Asian countries.

    What’s an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor?

    Let’s do this step-by-step:

    • An acetylcholinesterase inhibitor is a compound that inhibits acetylcholinesterase.
    • Acetylcholinesterase is an enzyme that catalyzes (speeds up) the breakdown of acetylcholine.
    • Acetylcholine is a neurotransmitter; it’s an ester of acetic acid and choline.
      • This is the main neurotransmitter of the parasympathetic nervous system, and is also heavily involved in cognitive functions including memory and creative thinking.

    What this means: if you take an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor like huperzine A, it will inhibit acetylcholinesterase, meaning you will have more acetylcholine to work with. That’s good.

    What can I expect from it?

    Huperzine A has been well-studied for a while, mostly for the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease:

    However, research has suggested that huperzine A is much better as a prevention than a treatment:

    ❝A central event in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the accumulation of senile plaques composed of aggregated amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides.

    Ex vivo electrophysiological experiments showed that 10 μM of Aβ1-40 significantly decreased the effect of the AChE inhibitor huperzine A on the synaptic potential parameters. ❞

    ~ Dr. Irina Zueva

    Source: Can Activation of Acetylcholinesterase by β-Amyloid Peptide Decrease the Effectiveness of Cholinesterase Inhibitors?

    In other words: the answer to the titular question is “Yes, yes it can”

    And, to translate Dr. Zueva’s words into simple English:

    • People with Alzheimer’s have amyloid-β plaque in their brains
    • That plaque reduces the effectiveness of huperzine A

    So, what if we take it in advance? That works much better:

    ❝Pre-treatment with [huperzine A] at concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 µg/mL completely inhibited the secretion of PGE2, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β compared to post-treatment with [huperzine A].

    This suggests that prophylactic treatment is better than post-inflammation treatment. ❞

    ~ Dr. Thu Kim Dang

    Source: Anti-neuroinflammatory effects of alkaloid-enriched extract from Huperzia serrata

    As you may know, neuroinflammation is a big part of Alzheimer’s pathology, so we want to keep that down. The above research suggests we should do that sooner rather than later.

    Aside from holding off dementia, can it improve memory now, too?

    There’s been a lot less research done into this (medicine is generally more concerned with preventing/treating disease, than improving the health of healthy people), but there is some:

    Huperzine-A capsules enhance memory and learning performance in 34 pairs of matched adolescent students

    ^This is a small (n=68) old (1999) study for which the full paper has mysteriously disappeared and we only get to see the abstract. It gave favorable results, though.

    The effects of huperzine A and IDRA 21 on visual recognition memory in young macaques

    ^This, like most non-dementia research into HupA, is an animal study. But we chose to spotlight this one because, unlike most of the studies, it did not chemically lobotomize the animals first; they were and remained healthy. That said, huperzine A improved the memory scores most for the monkeys that performed worst without it initially.

    Where can I get it?

    As ever, we don’t sell it, but here’s an example product on Amazon for your convenience

    Enjoy!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • 3 Secrets Behind The Healing Power Of Plants

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    It’s well-established that whole food plant-based diets including fruits, vegetables, beans, whole grains, nuts, and seeds can reverse chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, obesity, and more.

    Dr. Laurie Marbas explains how it works:

    Three ways plant-based diets heal

    There’s a lot to be said for plants, from their fiber to their beneficial phytochemicals. For example:

    Reversing insulin resistance: plant-based diets help reverse insulin resistance, a major factor in type 2 diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and many other maladies. Particularly high-fiber foods like beans and oats stabilize blood sugar by slowing sugar absorption and reducing insulin spikes. These diets are also naturally low in saturated fats, which are linked to insulin resistance, and include phytonutrients from colorful fruits and vegetables that improve insulin sensitivity. Studies demonstrate that plant-based diets lower HbA1C levels (glycated hemoglobin, a measure of how sugary your blood has been on average in the past 2−3 months) and can even reverse type 2 diabetes for most* people.

    *Scientists are very reluctant to claim absolutes such as “all”, “every”, etc, since it cannot be proven that it will work for all people (there are over 8 billion of us after all, and any one of us could get in theory get type 2 diabetes and then try reversing it, so it’s hard to speak for all 8 billion-odd of us) but it is well-established that it usually does indeed reverse it, and for what it’s worth, the confidence interval in such studies is always at least 95% sure, usually higher, which multiplied by countless studies can indeed give us quite some confidence.

    Reducing chronic inflammation: chronic inflammation, linked to diseases like arthritis, heart disease, and cancer, can also be reduced through a plant-based diet. Foods rich in antioxidants, such as berries, leafy greens, and nuts, neutralize inflammation-causing free radicals. Omega-3-rich plant foods like chia seeds, flax seeds, and walnuts further balance inflammation. Additionally, fiber fosters healthy gut bacteria, which produce vital compounds that reduce systemic inflammation (and do a lot more good things besides, but we’re limiting ourselves to talking about inflammation here). Research shows that plant-based diets can significantly lower inflammation markers within weeks (almost certainly you’ll notice the difference yourself, too).

    Synergy of whole foods: perhaps the biggest power of a plant-based diet lies in the synergy of its components. Nutrients like the fiber and phytonutrients we mentioned work together to combat inflammation and remove waste products that could fuel disease. For example, magnesium, found abundantly in leafy greens (which is why most Americans are deficient in magnesium), supports over 300 enzymatic processes, including blood sugar and inflammation regulation. This holistic approach ensures the whole body receives all the tools it needs to repair, regenerate, and thrive, thus once you’re on the right track, it’s “the gift that keeps on giving” when it comes to health, as each part helps the other parts to work better, which help the other parts to work better, which… (etc)

    For more on all of this, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Celery vs Radish – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing celery to radish, we picked the celery.

    Why?

    It was very close! And yes, surprising, we know. Generally speaking, the more colorful/pigmented an edible plant is, the healthier it is. Celery is just one of those weird exceptions (as is cauliflower, by the way).

    Macros-wise, these two are pretty much the same—95% water, with just enough other stuff to hold them together. The proportions of “other stuff” are also pretty much equal.

    In the category of vitamins, celery has more vitamin K while radish has more vitamin C; the other vitamins are pretty close to equal. We’ll call this one a minor win for celery, as vitamin K is found in fewer foods than vitamin C.

    When it comes to minerals, celery has more calcium, manganese, phosphorus, and potassium, while radish has more copper, iron, selenium, and zinc. We’ll call this a minor win for radish, as the margins are a little wider for its minerals.

    So, that makes the score 1–1 so far.

    Both plants have an assortment of polyphenols, of which, when we add up the averages, celery comes out on top by some way. Celery also comes out on top when we do a head-to-head of the top flavonoid of each; celery has 5.15mg/100g of apigenin to radish’s 0.63mg/100g kaempferol.

    Which means, both are great healthy foods, but celery wins the day.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Celery vs Cucumber – Which is Healthier?

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: