Is your sunscreen safe and effective? You might be surprised!
Posted on July 3, 2008
Filed Under skincare | Leave a Comment
It’s the height of summer vacation season, and most of us are spending a good bit of time in the great outdoors - at the pool, the lake, the beach - or just gardening in our yard, or jogging or walking around the neighborhood. Many of us will slather on sunscreen before heading out. But is that sunscreen your using really effective? Are the ingredients even safe and healthy for your skin? A study published earlier this week by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) claims that the majority of brand name sunscreens are either ineffective in blocking the sun’s radiation, or contain chemicals that may be harmful.
One issue in question is the difference between blocking both types of radiation from the sun. UVB rays are the ones that tend to cause sunburn. Everyone is familiar with the SPF rating system which has been in place for approximately 30 years. What few of us realize, though, is that this SPF rating only represents how well as sunscreen blocks these UVB rays. If you apply a sunscreen well and often enough, it will probably keep you from getting a nasty burn. But there are also UVA rays coming from the sun. A sunscreen’s SPF factor will tell you nothing about its ability to block these UVA rays. UVA rays are the ones that will cause your skin to tan. They can’t burn your skin, but they can cause collagen breakdown, wrinkles, and worst of all, skin cancer.
The FDA is currently proposing a new UVA rating system for sun-protection products that would incorporate one to four stars, with four representing the highest level of UVA protection. Read more in this Reuters article.
Another issue is the safety of chemicals used in the sunscreens. The EWG clams that many common ingredients in popular sunscreens are readily absorbed through the skin, and may be potential health hazards, possibly causing anything from aging of the skin and allergic reactions to endocrine disruption and cancer. Pretty scary!
The EWG tested almost 1000 sun protection products, and compiled the information in a ranked database. They provide a wealth of information on their sunscreen site.
The take-away seems to be that better and more information is needed on sunscreen labels, and to look for those products containing physical sun blocking ingredients, such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. Not only are these ingredients effective at blocking UV rays, but they are not readily absorbed through the skin. This is good, because other types of sun blocking ingredients, the chemical blockers tend to penetrate the skin, which is more likely to lead to the harmful, unwanted side effects.
Sub-worthy? WnW 3-of-a-Kind Twist Up Stick and NARS The Multiple
Posted on April 28, 2008
Filed Under department store/premium brands, drugstore brands, substitutes/dupes | Leave a Comment
So, the online buzz is that Wet n Wild has a worthy substitute product for my beloved NARS Multiple. Like most girls, I surely don’t mind saving money on beauty products, but ONLY if I can get the same effect as I would with the expensive stuff. I do have to admit that I’m quite the skeptic when it comes to believing that a very inexpensive product can sub or even dupe for a really pricey one. Couple that with the memories I have of earlier Wet n Wild products from my younger years - less expensive but harsh colors, smearing or gritty formulas - and you can see why I was reluctant to give this a try. I love The Multiple by NARS - the color, the feel, the versatility, the subtle sheen. How could a product one-tenth the cost possibly compare? 
But on the idea that it was so inexpensive that an error wouldn’t be a big deal, I decided to give it a go. Then the hunt began. I don’t usually pay attention to WnW displays when shopping, but I knew that they seemed to appear in most of my local drugstores. It took visits to Target, two CVS’s, and several grocery stores before I finally found a Rite Aid with the product. Yes, $3.99 was a lot easier on my wallet than the $37 I’d been paying for The Multiple. I chose the color “At the Hamptons,” since it was supposed to be a sub for the NARS South Beach Multiple. Now, admittedly, I do not yet own this particular NARS color (notice I said “yet”, ha!), so I cannot speak for color duplication, but I do own (and love) several of the others, so I feel qualified to judge the other merits of the product.
NARS describes their South Beach color as “shimmering apricot.” WnW At the Hamptons does have shimmer, and it can also be described as a nice, rich apricot. The color is very pretty and fresh-looking. It does seem to have a bit more of a shimmer than the current NARS Multiples I own (Palm Beach, Portofino, St. Barts), rather than a sheen. It’s not so over-the-top that I find it objectionable. The consistency is quite smooth and creamy, and easily blended, and I’ll have to admit quite comparable to the NARS. I try it on my cheeks, eyes (in the crease), and on my lips. Overall, I’m quite pleased with the look and ease of use. I might find it a tiny bit more subtle than most my Multiples, but that may be due to the color. 
Fast forward a few hours…it seems to have faded somewhat more than I would have expected. Some people complain about this with the NARS Multiple as well, but I usually get all-day lasting power from my Multiples, as long as applied over my normal primer/mineral foundation combo. Not so with the WnW product. This was probably the only major difference I saw, though.
Just looking at the product itself, they appear very similar. The NARS is in a modern, minimalist black case with the NARS logo in white. Very nice to pull out of your purse. The WnW is not objectionable - a sleek silver case with subdued lettering and a clear top. It doesn’t look as chic as the NARS, but not embarrassing either (if that matters to you). The NARS is fatter - and the net product weight is different (14.2 grams for the NARS, 8 grams for the Wnw).
So what’s my verdict? Well, I’m not ready to give up my NARS Multiples just yet. I don’t mind applying lipgloss throughout the day, but if I use something on my cheeks and eyes, I don’t want to have to touch it up, unless I’m going out somewhere special at night. Also, the sparkle in the WnW is not quite as pretty to me as the more classy sheen of the NARS (although I’d have to see the NARS in South Beach to make a totally fair judgement on this point). However, I can definitely see myself using this WnW some - and maybe even experimenting with another color. It’s certainly cheap enough to allow experimenting! I’ll keep using it, and you can count on me to report back any changes of heart or extra info.
keep looking »