Is stress turning my hair grey?
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 we start to go grey depends a lot on genetics.
Your first grey hairs usually appear anywhere between your twenties and fifties. For men, grey hairs normally start at the temples and sideburns. Women tend to start greying on the hairline, especially at the front.
The most rapid greying usually happens between ages 50 and 60. But does anything we do speed up the process? And is there anything we can do to slow it down?
You’ve probably heard that plucking, dyeing and stress can make your hair go grey – and that redheads don’t. Here’s what the science says.
What gives hair its colour?
Each strand of hair is produced by a hair follicle, a tunnel-like opening in your skin. Follicles contain two different kinds of stem cells:
- keratinocytes, which produce keratin, the protein that makes and regenerates hair strands
- melanocytes, which produce melanin, the pigment that colours your hair and skin.
There are two main types of melanin that determine hair colour. Eumelanin is a black-brown pigment and pheomelanin is a red-yellow pigment.
The amount of the different pigments determines hair colour. Black and brown hair has mostly eumelanin, red hair has the most pheomelanin, and blonde hair has just a small amount of both.
So what makes our hair turn grey?
As we age, it’s normal for cells to become less active. In the hair follicle, this means stem cells produce less melanin – turning our hair grey – and less keratin, causing hair thinning and loss.
As less melanin is produced, there is less pigment to give the hair its colour. Grey hair has very little melanin, while white hair has none left.
Unpigmented hair looks grey, white or silver because light reflects off the keratin, which is pale yellow.
Grey hair is thicker, coarser and stiffer than hair with pigment. This is because the shape of the hair follicle becomes irregular as the stem cells change with age.
Interestingly, grey hair also grows faster than pigmented hair, but it uses more energy in the process.
Can stress turn our hair grey?
Yes, stress can cause your hair to turn grey. This happens when oxidative stress damages hair follicles and stem cells and stops them producing melanin.
Oxidative stress is an imbalance of too many damaging free radical chemicals and not enough protective antioxidant chemicals in the body. It can be caused by psychological or emotional stress as well as autoimmune diseases.
Environmental factors such as exposure to UV and pollution, as well as smoking and some drugs, can also play a role.
Melanocytes are more susceptible to damage than keratinocytes because of the complex steps in melanin production. This explains why ageing and stress usually cause hair greying before hair loss.
Scientists have been able to link less pigmented sections of a hair strand to stressful events in a person’s life. In younger people, whose stems cells still produced melanin, colour returned to the hair after the stressful event passed.
4 popular ideas about grey hair – and what science says
1. Does plucking a grey hair make more grow back in its place?
No. When you pluck a hair, you might notice a small bulb at the end that was attached to your scalp. This is the root. It grows from the hair follicle.
Plucking a hair pulls the root out of the follicle. But the follicle itself is the opening in your skin and can’t be plucked out. Each hair follicle can only grow a single hair.
It’s possible frequent plucking could make your hair grey earlier, if the cells that produce melanin are damaged or exhausted from too much regrowth.
2. Can my hair can turn grey overnight?
Legend says Marie Antoinette’s hair went completely white the night before the French queen faced the guillotine – but this is a myth.
Melanin in hair strands is chemically stable, meaning it can’t transform instantly.
Acute psychological stress does rapidly deplete melanocyte stem cells in mice. But the effect doesn’t show up immediately. Instead, grey hair becomes visible as the strand grows – at a rate of about 1 cm per month.
Not all hair is in the growing phase at any one time, meaning it can’t all go grey at the same time.
3. Will dyeing make my hair go grey faster?
This depends on the dye.
Temporary and semi-permanent dyes should not cause early greying because they just coat the hair strand without changing its structure. But permanent products cause a chemical reaction with the hair, using an oxidising agent such as hydrogen peroxide.
Accumulation of hydrogen peroxide and other hair dye chemicals in the hair follicle can damage melanocytes and keratinocytes, which can cause greying and hair loss.
4. Is it true redheads don’t go grey?
People with red hair also lose melanin as they age, but differently to those with black or brown hair.
This is because the red-yellow and black-brown pigments are chemically different.
Producing the brown-black pigment eumelanin is more complex and takes more energy, making it more susceptible to damage.
Producing the red-yellow pigment (pheomelanin) causes less oxidative stress, and is more simple. This means it is easier for stem cells to continue to produce pheomelanin, even as they reduce their activity with ageing.
With ageing, red hair tends to fade into strawberry blonde and silvery-white. Grey colour is due to less eumelanin activity, so is more common in those with black and brown hair.
Your genetics determine when you’ll start going grey. But you may be able to avoid premature greying by staying healthy, reducing stress and avoiding smoking, too much alcohol and UV exposure.
Eating a healthy diet may also help because vitamin B12, copper, iron, calcium and zinc all influence melanin production and hair pigmentation.
Theresa Larkin, Associate Professor of Medical Sciences, University of Wollongong
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
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Lycopene’s Benefits For The Gut, Heart, Brain, & More
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.
What Doesn’t Lycopene Do?
Lycopene is an antioxidant carotenoid famously found in tomatoes; it actually appears in even higher levels in watermelon, though. If you are going to get it from tomato, know that cooking improves the lycopene content rather than removing it (watermelon, on the other hand, can be enjoyed as-is and already has the higher lycopene content).
Antioxidant properties
Let’s reiterate the obvious first, for the sake of being methodical and adding a source. Lycopene is a potent antioxidant with multiple health benefits:
Lycopene: A Potent Antioxidant with Multiple Health Benefits
…and as such, it does all the things you might reasonably expect and antioxidant to do. For example…
Anti-inflammatory properties
In particular, it regulates macrophage activity, reducing inflammation while improving immune response:
Lycopene Regulates Macrophage Immune Response through the Autophagy Pathway Mediated by RIPK1
As can be expected of most antioxidants and anti-inflammatory agents, it also has…
Anticancer properties
Scientific papers tend to be “per cancer type”, so we’re just going to give one example, but there’s pretty much evidence for its utility against most if not all types of cancer. We’re picking prostate cancer though, as it’s one that’s been studied the most in the context of lycopene intake—in this study, for example, it was found that men who enjoyed at least two servings of lycopene-rich tomato sauce per week were 30% less likely to develop prostate cancer than those who didn’t:
Dietary lycopene intake and risk of prostate cancer defined by ERG protein expression
If you’d like to see something more general, however, then check out:
Potential Use of Tomato Peel, a Rich Source of Lycopene, for Cancer Treatment
It also fights Candida albicans
Ok, this is not (usually) so life-and-death as cancer, but reducing our C. albicans content (specifically: in our gut) has a lot of knock-on effects for other aspects of our health, so this isn’t one to overlook:
The title does not make this clear, but yes: this does mean it has an antifungal effect. We mention this because often cellular apoptosis is good for an overall organism, but in this case, it simply kills the Candida.
It’s good for the heart
A lot of studies focus just on triglyceride markers (which lycopene improves), but more tellingly, here’s a 10-year observational study in which diets rich in lycopene were associated to a 17–26% lower risk of heart disease:
Relationship of lycopene intake and consumption of tomato products to incident CVD
…and a 39% overall reduced mortality in, well, we’ll let the study title tell it:
…which means also:
It’s good for the brain
As a general rule of thumb, what’s good for the heart is good for the brain (because the brain needs healthy blood flow to stay healthy, and is especially vulnerable when it doesn’t get that), and in this case that rule of thumb is also borne out by the post hoc evidence, specifically yielding a 31% decreased incidence of stroke:
Dietary and circulating lycopene and stroke risk: a meta-analysis of prospective studies
Is it safe?
As a common food product, it is considered very safe.
If you drink nothing but tomato juice all day for a long time, your skin will take on a reddish hue, which will go away if you stop getting all your daily water intake in tomato juice.
In all likelihood, even if you went to extremes, you would get sick from the excess of vitamin A (generally present in the same foods) sooner than you’d get sick from the excess of lycopene.
Want to try some?
We don’t sell it, and also we recommend simply enjoying tomatoes, watermelons, etc, but if you do want a supplement, here’s an example product on Amazon
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Is Fast Food Really All That Bad?
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.
Yes, yes it is. However, most people misunderstand the nature of its badness, which is what causes problems. The biggest problem is not the acute effects of one afternoon’s burger and fries; the biggest problem is the gradual slide into regularly eating junk food, and the long-term effects of that habit as our body changes to accommodate it (of which, people tend to focus on subcutaneous fat gain as it’s usually the most visible, but that’s really the least of our problems).
Cumulative effects
There are, of course, immediate negative effects too, and they’re not without cause for concern. Because of the composition of most junk food, it will almost by definition result in immediate blood sugar spikes, rising insulin levels, and a feeling of fatigue not long afterwards.
- Within a week of regularly consuming junk food, gut bacteria will change, resulting in moderate cravings, as well as a tendency towards depression and anxiety. Mood swings are likely, as are the gastrointestinal woes associated with any gut microbiota change.
- Within two weeks, those effects will be greater, the cravings will increase, energy levels will plummet, and likely skin issues may start to show up (our skin mostly works on a 3-week replacement cycle; some things can show up in the skin more quickly or slowly than that, though).
- Within three weeks, the rest of our blood metrics (e.g. beyond blood sugar imbalances) will start to stray from safe zones. Increased LDL, decreased HDL, and the beginnings of higher cardiovascular disease risk and diabetes risk.
- Within a month, we will likely see the onset of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and chronic inflammation sets in, raising the risk of a lot of other diseases, especially immune disorders and cancer.
If that seems drastic, along the lines of “eat junk food for a month and get cancer”, well, it’s an elevated risk, not a scheduled diagnosis, but the body is constantly rebuilding itself, for better or for worse, and if we sabotage its efforts by consuming a poor diet, then it will be for worse.
The good news is: this works both ways, and we can get our body back on track in fairly short order too, by enjoying a healthier diet; our body will be thrilled to start repairing itself. And of course, all these effects, good and bad, are proportional to how well or badly we eat. There’s a difference between doing a “Supersize Me” month-long 100% junk food diet, and “merely” getting a junk food breakfast each day and eating healthily later.
In short, if your diet is only moderately bad, then you will only be moderately unwell.
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 to read:
- Fix Chronic Fatigue & Regain Your Energy, By Science
- How To Unfatty A Fatty Liver
- How to Prevent (or Reduce) Inflammation
Take care!
Share This Post
-
The Salt Fix – by Dr. James DiNicolantonio
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.
This book has a bold premise: high salt consumption is not, as global scientific consensus holds, a serious health risk, but rather, as the title suggests, a health fix.
Dr. DiNicolantonio, a pharmacist, explains how “our ancestors crawled out of the sea millions of years ago and we still crave that salt”, giving this as a reason why we should consume salt ad libitum, aiming for 8–10g per day, and thereafter a fair portion of the book is given over to discussing how many health conditions are caused/exacerbated by sugar, and that therefore we have demonized the wrong white crystal (scientific consensus is that there are many white crystals that can cause us harm).
Indeed, sugar can be a big health problem, but reading it at such length felt a lot like when all a politician can talk about is how their political rival is worse.
A lot of the studies the author cites to support the idea of healthy higher salt consumption rates were on non-human animals, and it’s always a lottery as to whether those results translate to humans or not. Also, many of the studies he’s citing are old and have methodological flaws, while others we could not find when we looked them up.
One of the sources cited is “my friend Jose tried this and it worked for him”.
Bottom line: sodium is an essential mineral that we do need to live, but we are not convinced that this book’s ideas have scientific merit. But are they well-argued? Also no.
Click here to check out The Salt Fix for yourself! It’s a fascinating book.
(Usually, if we do not approve of a book, we simply do not review it. We like to keep things positive. However, this one came up in Q&A, so it seemed appropriate to share our review. Also, the occasional negative review may reassure you, dear readers, that when we praise a book, we mean it)
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
How To Avoid Age-Related Macular Degeneration
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.
Avoiding Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Eye problems can strike at any age, but as we get older, it becomes a lot more likely. In particular, age-related macular degeneration is, as the name suggests, an age-bound disease.
Is there no escaping it, then?
The risk factors for age-related macular degeneration are as follows:
- Being over the age of 55 (can’t do much about this one)
- Being over the age of 65 (risk climbs sharply now)
- Having a genetic predisposition (can’t do much about this one)
- Having high cholesterol (this one we can tackle)
- Having cardiovascular disease (this one we can tackle)
- Smoking (so, just don’t)
Genes predispose; they don’t predetermine. Or to put it another way: genes load the gun, but lifestyle pulls the trigger.
Preventative interventions against age-related macular degeneration
Prevention is better than a cure in general, and this especially goes for things like age-related macular degeneration, because the most common form of it has no known cure.
So first, look after your heart (because your heart feeds your eyes).
See also: The Mediterranean Diet
Next, eat to feed your eyes specifically. There’s a lot of research to show that lutein helps avoid age-related diseases in the eyes and the rest of the brain, too:
See also: Brain Food? The Eyes Have It
Do supplements help?
They can! There was a multiple-part landmark study by the National Eye Institute, a formula was developed that reduced the 5-year risk of intermediate disease progressing to late disease by 25–30%. It also reduced the risk of vision loss by 19%.
You can read about both parts of the study here:
Age-Related Eye Disease Studies (AREDS/AREDS2): major findings
As you can see, an improvement was made between the initial study and the second one, by replacing beta-carotene with lutein and zeaxanthin.
The AREDS2 formula contains:
- 500 mg vitamin C
- 180 mg vitamin E
- 80 mg zinc
- 10 mg lutein
- 2 mg copper
You can learn more about these supplements, and where to get them, here on the NEI’s corner of the official NIH website:
AREDS 2 Supplements for Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Take care of yourself!
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:
-
Navigating the health-care system is not easy, but you’re not alone.
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.
Hello, dear reader!
This is my first column for Healthy Debate as a Patient Navigator. This column will be devoted to providing patients with information to help them through their journey with the health-care system and answering your questions.
Here’s a bit about me: I have been a patient partner at The Ottawa Hospital and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute since 2017, and have joined a variety of governance boards that work on patient and caregiver engagement such as the Patient Advisors Network, the Ontario Health East Region Patient and Family Advisory Council and the Equity in Health Systems Lab.
My journey as a patient partner started much before 2017 though. When I was a teenager, I was diagnosed with a cholesteatoma, a rare and chronic disease that causes the development of fatty tumors in the middle ear. I have had multiple surgeries to try to fix it but will need regular follow-ups to monitor whether the tumor returns. Because of this, I also live with an invisible disability since I have essentially become functionally deaf in one ear and often rely on a hearing aid when I navigate the world.
Having undergone three surgeries in my adolescent years, it was my experience undergoing surgery for an acute hand and wrist injury following a jet ski accident as an adult that was the catalyst for my decision to become a patient partner. There was an intriguing contrast between how I was cared for at two different health-care institutions, my age being the deciding factor at which hospital I went to (a children’s hospital or an adult one).
The most memorable example was how, as a teenager or child, you were never left alone before surgery, and nurses and staff took all the time necessary to comfort me and answer my (and my family’s) questions. I also remember how right before putting me to sleep, the whole staff initiated a surgical pause and introduced themselves and explained to me what their role was during my surgery.
None of that happened as an adult. I was left in a hallway while the operating theater was prepared, anxious and alone with staff walking by not even batting an eye. My questions felt like an annoyance to the care team; as soon as I was wheeled onto the operating room table, the anesthetist quickly put me to sleep. I didn’t even have the time to see who else was there.
Now don’t get me wrong: I am incredibly appreciative with the quality of care I received, but it was the everyday interactions with the care teams that I felt could be improved. And so, while I was recovering from that surgery, I looked for a way to help other patients and the hospital improve its care. I discovered the hospital’s patient engagement program, applied, and the rest is history!
Since then, I have worked on a host of patient-centered policy and research projects and fervently advocate that surgical teams adopt a more compassionate approach with patients before and after surgery.
I’d be happy to talk a bit more about my journey if you ask, but with that out of the way … Welcome to our first patient navigator column about patient engagement.
Conceptualizing the continuum of Patient Engagement
In the context of Canadian health care, patient engagement is a multifaceted concept that involves active collaboration between patients, caregivers, health-care providers and researchers. It involves patients and caregivers as active contributors in decision-making processes, health-care services and medical research. Though the concept is not new, the paradigm shift toward patient engagement in Canada started around 2010.
I like to conceptualize the different levels of patient engagement as a measure of the strength of the relationship between patients and their interlocutors – whether it’s a healthcare provider, administrator or researcher – charted against the duration of the engagement or the scope of input required from the patient.
Defining different levels of Patient Engagement
Following the continuum, let’s begin by defining different levels of patient engagement. Bear in mind that these definitions can vary from one organization to another but are useful in generally labelling the level of patient engagement a project has achieved (or wishes to achieve).
Patient involvement: If the strength of the relationship between patients and their interlocutors is minimal and not time consuming or too onerous, then perhaps it can be categorized as patient involvement. This applies to many instances of transactional engagement.
Patient advisory/consulting: Right in the middle of our continuum, patients can find themselves engaging in patient advisory or consulting work, where projects are limited in scope and duration or complexity, and the relationship is not as profound as a partnership.
Patient partnership: The stronger the relationship is between the patient and their interlocutor, and the longer the engagement activity lasts or how much input the patient is providing, the more this situation can be categorized as patient partnership. It is the inverse of patient involvement.
Examples of the different levels of Patient Engagement
Let’s pretend you are accompanying a loved one to an appointment to manage a kidney disease, requiring them to undergo dialysis treatment. We’ll use this scenario to exemplify what label could be used to describe the level of engagement.
Patient involvement: In our case, if your loved one – or you – fills out a satisfaction or feedback survey about your experience in the waiting room and all that needed to be done was to hand it back to the clerk or care team, then, at a basic level, you could likely label this interaction as a form of patient involvement. It can also involve open consultations around a design of a new look and feel for a hospital, or the understandability of a survey or communications product. Interactions with the care team, administrators or researchers are minimal and often transactional.
Patient advisory/consulting: If your loved one was asked for more detailed information about survey results over the course of a few meetings, this could represent patient advisory/consulting. This could mean that patients meet with program administrators and care providers and share their insights on how things can be improved. It essentially involves patients providing advice to health-care institutions from the perspective of patients, their family members and caregivers.
Patient advisors or consultants are often appointed by hospitals or academic institutions to offer insights at multiple stages of health-care delivery and research. They can help pilot an initiative based on that feedback or evaluate whether the new solutions are working. Often patient advisors are engaged in smaller-term individual projects and meet with the project team as regularly as required.
Patient partnership: Going above and beyond patient advisory, if patients have built a trusting relationship with their care team or administrators, they could feel comfortable enough to partner with them and initiate a project of their own. This could be for a project in which they study a different form of treatment to improve patient-centered outcomes (like the time it takes to feel “normal” following a session); it could be working together to identify and remove barriers for other patients that need to access that type of care. These projects are not fulfilled overnight, but require a collaborative, longstanding and trusting relationship between patients and health-care providers, administrators or researchers. It ensures that patients, regardless of severity or chronicity of their illness, can meaningfully contribute their experiences to aid in improving patient care, or develop or implement policies, pilots or research projects from start to finish.
It is leveraging that lived and living experience to its full extent and having the patient partner involved as an equal voice in the decision-making process for a project – over many months, usually – that the engagement could be labeled a partnership.
Last words
The point of this column will be to answer or explore issues or questions related to patient engagement, health communications or even provide some thoughts on how to handle a particular situation.
I would be happy to collect your questions and feedback at any time, which will help inform future columns. Just email me at [email protected] or connect with me on social media (Linked In, X / Twitter).
It’s not easy to navigate our health-care systems, but you are not alone.
This article is republished from healthydebate 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!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
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’
This early sunscreen claimed you could ‘tan with ease’.
Trove/NLASunscreens 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.
This 1967 Coppertone advertisement urged you to ‘tan, not burn’.
SenseiAlan/Flickr, CC BY-SASunburn 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).
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!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-