DOCSLIB.ORG

UVA: Grasping a Better Understanding of This Formidable

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UVA: Grasping a Better Understanding of This Formidable SA07_62-67_SunProtection.qxd 7/11/07 12:45 PM Page 62 UVA: GRASPING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THIS FORMIDABLE OPPONENT Leading dermatologists discuss what is now known about the harmful effects of UVA, and they highlight recent clinical advancements in photoprotection technology. BY HENRY W. LIM, M.D., AND DARRELL S. RIGEL, M.D. Back when the very first sunscreen was substantive formulations have recently effects.4 Erythema (sunburn) and the introduced in 1928, it was believed that become available in the United States.3 delayed effect of suntanning are the most the short-term harmful effects of ultravi- This article will review recent develop- familiar symptoms associated with UVB olet (UV) radiation exposure, specifically ments in photoprotection. The content is overexposure, and its association with sunburn, were all we had to fear from the based on the Clinical Council on Photo- photocarcinogenesis is well established. sun.1,2 In the succeeding decades, howev- protection, a roundtable meeting of experts Ultraviolet C poses virtually no threat er, it has become clear that sunburn is in photoprotection held on Jan. 20, 2007, in because it is absorbed by the ozone layer only the beginning of the pathologic New York,NY,and sponsored by La Roche- of the earth’s atmosphere. effects produced by solar exposure.1 Posay Laboratoire Pharmaceutique. However, research is increasingly demon- Recent years have brought a much strating that UVA is a threat, and a far fuller understanding of the effects of pho- UVA: A CURRENT FOCUS IN greater one than has generally been believed.4 toexposure, their causes, and ways to pro- PHOTODAMAGE UVA radiation is much more abundant tect against them.And, after more than 20 Ultraviolet A (UVA) rays have long than UVB in natural sunlight; it accounts years without the introduction of a single been thought to have minimal harmful for up to 95% of all UV radiation that significant new active sunscreen agent, effects, while only UVB rays were reaches Earth.4 Furthermore, whereas the new photoprotective agents and more believed to have significant deleterious amount of UVB in sunlight varies accord- 62 JULY 2007 SKIN & AGING SA07_62-67_SunProtection.qxd 7/11/07 12:45 PM Page 63 UVA: A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THIS FORMIDABLE OPPONENT ing to the season, location on the earth, and time of day, the intensity of UVA radiation is more uniform and is present all year round during all daylight hours.4 In addition, while UVB is blocked by window and automobile glass,UVA is not.5 Furthermore, UVA, which has a longer wavelength than UVB, penetrates more deeply into the skin. (See Figure 1, at right.)6 With UVB radiation, it penetrates only into the stratum corneum and is almost fully absorbed before reaching the upper dermis. On the other hand, UVA readily penetrates into the mid-dermis.7 The many negative effects of UV radia- tion on the skin, including erythema, pho- toaging, carcinogenicity, and immunosup- pression, are exhibited in both UVB and UVA by damage to DNA. Until recently, the genotoxic damage caused by UVA radiation has been thought to be less than that caused by UVB.7 But new research has called this thinking into question. In a recent study using a highly accurate quantitative assay based on high-perform- ance liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry, investigators examined the type and yield of DNA damage in human skin samples exposed to UVA and UVB radiation.8 Cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers, commonly associated with UVB- induced DNA damage, were found in sub- stantial numbers in UVA-exposed skin as Figure 1. Penetration of various wavelengths of light into human skin. well. In addition, UVA-generated dimers were removed at a much lower rate than were UVB-induced dimers. Microscopically, in normally aging tion may be unknowingly obtained. The researchers also demonstrated that skin, the dermis becomes hypocellular; The ability of UVA to penetrate glass is while human skin protects itself very effec- the epidermis atrophies; collagen forms also a factor. Figure 2, next page, tively against UVB-induced DNA damage, a stable, cross-linked matrix; and the illustrates the result of long-term it protects itself only weakly against UVA- vasculature remains intact. In photoaged indoor exposure to UVA radiation.9 induced injury.8 skin, by contrast, the epidermis thickens, the dermis becomes hypercellular (as a The Role of UVA in The Role of UVA in Photoaging result of mast cell and fibroblast propa- Immunosuppression Repeated skin exposure to UV radia- gation), and the vasculature becomes Photoimmunosuppression, a well-docu- tion produces a phototrauma referred to as dilated and twisted.2 mented phenomenon, may play an impor- “dermatoheliosis, or photoaging.Although All portions of the solar spectrum, tant role in the genesis of skin cancer; it photoaging and intrinsic aging can occur including UVA, UVB, and infrared increases the likelihood and severity of simultaneously, the two processes differ radiation, contribute to photoaging.2 infectious diseases, and reduces the effec- significantly, and photoaged skin appears However, UVA is now recognized as tiveness of vaccines.7 Immunosuppression different from intrinsically aged skin, both the single most important wavelength induced by UV appears to start with DNA macro- and microscopically. in causing photoaging.4,2 The ability of damage and trans to cis-urocanic acid iso- Macroscopically, photoaged skin is UVA to deeply penetrate the dermis merization in the stratum corneum, which characterized by fine and coarse wrin- may account for the primacy of its role is associated with the production of kling; dyspigmentation or hyperpigmen- in photoaging, as may the fact that cytokines, histamine, and neuropeptides.7 tation spots, including freckles or lentig- UVA exposure does not produce an Recent research has shown that UVA ines; laxity; sallowness; telangiectasias; erythemal “warning signal,” so that plays a key role in immunosuppression. and actinic keratoses.7,2 higher cumulative doses of UVA radia- Ultraviolet A has been shown to sup- JULY 2007 SKIN & AGING 63 SA07_62-67_SunProtection.qxd 7/11/07 12:45 PM Page 64 UVA: A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THIS FORMIDABLE OPPONENT Figure 2. Unilateral cutaneous elastosis, one of the best-known manifestations of helioderma, caused by UVA radiation. The patient had worked for 15 years in the same room with the same orientation to a window, so that the left side of her face had been con- tinuously exposed to UVA radiation, while the right side had not. Reprinted with permission from Moulin G et al. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 1994;121:721-723. press induction and elicitation of the con- It was long thought that UVB was pri- CONTEMPORARY tact and delayed-type hypersensitivity marily responsible for melanoma.12 CONSIDERATIONS IN responses to recall antigens.7 So important However, increasing evidence indicates SUNSCREEN USE: BROADENING is the impact of UVA on immunosuppres- that UVA may also play a significant role.4 OUR PATIENTS’ PROTECTION sion that a new sunscreen measure — Based on an analysis of World Health In view of the magnitude of the sun’s immune protection factor — has been pro- Organization data from 45 countries, negative impact on the skin, we might be posed for use along with the current sun Garland and colleagues found that UVA tempted to advise our patients to entirely protection factor (SPF) measure because the was associated with melanoma mortality avoid UV exposure, both outdoor and latter is not an indicator of degree of protec- rates after controlling for UVB and aver- indoor. However, given the impracticality tion from UVA.10 age skin pigmentation.12 of such advice, sunscreens are vital in pro- Limited but consistent data from studies of viding protection from the photodamag- The Role of UVA in Carcinogenesis tanning salon users also show UVA exposure ing effects of UV rays.16 Strong evidence supports the role of in these beds to be a risk factor for Since their inception, sunscreens have UV exposure in the development of skin melanoma. A recent meta-analysis of case- been known to protect against erythema, cancers, including not only non- control studies and one cohort study con- the acute effect of UV exposure. But they melanoma skin cancers such as squamous ducted between 1984 and 2004 demonstrat- are now understood to protect against many cell and basal cell carcinomas,7 but also ed a significantly increased risk of cutaneous of the long-term effects of UV exposure as malignant melanoma.11 melanoma following the use of sunbeds and well,including photoaging,actinic keratoses, In the case of melanoma, several lines sunlamps.13 These results are supported by a and some skin cancers.17 of epidemiologic evidence, in addition to prospective cohort study of 106,379 Swedish Because UVA rays, especially the other sources of evidence, point particu- and Norwegian women demonstrating that long-wavelength UVA-1, can pass larly to high, intermittent exposure to the use of tanning devices once a month or through clouds and automobile and solar UV radiation as a significant risk more is statistically significantly associated window glass, incidental exposure to factor. These data include findings that with melanoma risk.14 UVA radiation is a daily risk. In view of the incidence of the disease generally In consideration of findings such as these, research findings implicating UVA in the increases with decreasing latitude and the the American Academy of Dermatology has most severe consequences of sun expo-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GAO-18-61, SUNSCREEN: FDA Reviewed Applications For
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees November 2017 SUNSCREEN FDA Reviewed Applications for Additional Active Ingredients and Determined More Data Needed GAO-18-61 November 2017 SUNSCREEN FDA Reviewed Applications for Additional Active Ingredients and Determined More Data Needed Highlights of GAO-18-61, a report to congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Using sunscreen as directed with other The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), within the Department of Health and sun protective measures may help Human Services, implemented requirements for reviewing applications for reduce the risk of skin cancer—the sunscreen active ingredients within time frames set by the Sunscreen Innovation most common form of cancer in the Act, which was enacted in November 2014. For example, the agency issued a United States. In the United States, guidance document on safety and effectiveness testing in November 2016. sunscreen is considered an over-the- counter drug, which is a drug available As of August 2017, all applications for sunscreen active ingredients remain to consumers without a prescription. pending after the agency determined more safety and effectiveness data are Some sunscreen active ingredients not needed. By February 2015, FDA completed its initial review of the safety and currently marketed in the United States effectiveness data for each of the eight pending applications, as required by the have been available in products in act. FDA concluded that additional data are needed to determine that the other countries for more than a ingredients are generally recognized as safe and effective (GRASE), which is decade. Companies that manufacture needed so that products using the ingredients can subsequently be marketed in some of these ingredients have sought the United States without FDA’s premarket approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Sun Protection, Sunscreens and Vitamin D
    SunSun protection,protection, sunscreenssunscreens andand VitaminVitamin DD GPGP NationalNational ConferenceConference RotoruaRotorua EnergyEnergy EventsEvents CentreCentre JuneJune 20092009 Dr. Louise Reiche Dermatologist New Zealand Dermatological Society Incorporated MelanomaMelanoma SkinSkin cancercancer andand sunlightsunlight Exposure to UVR causes > 90% of skin cancers Skin cancer is commonest cancer in NZ >50,000 new cases per year ~300 deaths per year ~$33.4 NZ million per year International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Solar ultraviolet radiation. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1992. Armstrong BK. How sun exposure causes skin cancer. In: Hill D, Elwood JM, English DR, Eds. Prevention of Skin Cancer. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004. O’Dea D. The Costs of Skin Cancer to New Zealand. Wellington: Cancer Society of New Zealand, 2000. New Zealand Health Information Service. Cancer, New Registrations and Deaths. Wellington: New Zealand Health Information Service, 2004. MelanomaMelanoma 1842 new cases in 2002 328 directly attributable to severe sunburn (Sneyd and Cox 2006) Authors recommended, “to reduce burden of melanoma in NZ, need to prevent excessive sun exposure and (facilitate) early diagnosis” Whilst cancer overall is rare in adolescence, melanoma was commonest cancer MelanomaMelanoma NZ incidence and death rate among world highest 56.2/100,000 in European population of Auckland highest reported worldwide men
    [Show full text]
  • New Technology Provides Cosmetically Elegant Photoprotection Zoe Diana Draelos, MD; Christian Oresajo; Margarita Yatskayer; Angelike Galdi; Isabelle Hansenne
    COSMETIC CONSULTATION New Technology Provides Cosmetically Elegant Photoprotection Zoe Diana Draelos, MD; Christian Oresajo; Margarita Yatskayer; Angelike Galdi; Isabelle Hansenne he primary preventable cause of photoaging is United States, as there is no official rating system for exposure to UVA radiation. This wavelength UVA photoprotection yet. T emitted by the sun is present year round in all Ecamsule absorbs UVA radiation in the range of 320 to latitudes. Currently, the majority of sun-protective prod- 360 nm, but its peak absorbance occurs at 345 nm. It is ucts provide excellent UVB protection with minimal UVA typically combined with other organic sunscreen ingredi- protection. Although UVB protection is important in ents, such as avobenzone and octocrylene. Avobenzone, order to prevent sun damage to the skin from occurring, which is a photounstable photoprotectant, becomes UVA protection is equally important. New developments photostable when combined with octocrylene. These in raw material science have led to the manufacture of ingredients yield a photostable broad-spectrum sunscreen novel ingredients able to provide unprecedented photo- combination. However, the active sunscreen agents are protection COSin the UVA spectrum. DERMonly part of the formulation. Also important in sunscreen One of the most significant developments in cutaneous is the construction of the vehicle to deliver the photo- UVA protection was the discovery of ecamsule (Figure 1), protectants in an aesthetically pleasing manner, enticing also known as Mexoryl SX. Mexoryl SX, which has patients to wear the product. Sunscreens fail to be effec- the International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients tive if they remain in the bottle. name of terephthalylidene dicamphor sulfonic acid, is In order to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a water soluble.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Background and Action Requested
    June 27, 2019 Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Comments Submitted to Docket No. 1978N-0018 (Formerly Docket No. FDA–1978–N– 0038) for “Sunscreen Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use,” Regulatory Information No. 0910-AF43 DSM Nutritional Products LLC (“DSM”) is pleased to provide the following comments in response to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Tentative Final Monograph (“TFM”) for Sunscreen Drug Products Over-the-Counter (OTC) Human Use, published at 84 Fed. Reg. 6204 (February 26, 2019). As a global science-based company active in Nutrition, Health and Sustainable Living, DSM is a world leading supplier of vitamins, feed, food, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, personal care and aroma ingredients. In sunscreens, DSM is a leading world-wide provider of numerous UV filters, including Avobenzone. DSM takes human health and safety very seriously and believes that sunscreens are proven and effective interventions that help provide consumer protection against skin cancers and skin damage caused by the sun’s rays. DSM is committed to proactively supporting the safety and availability of existing and new sunscreen active ingredients that help protect public health. DSM requests that FDA modify its proposed rule taking into consideration the comments provided herein. 1. Background and Action Requested Skin cancer is a significant, and largely preventable, public health concern. Sunscreens have been widely and safely used by the general public for their photoprotective properties, including prevention of photocarcinogenesis and photoaging and management of photodermatoses for more than 40 years. FDA’s Sunscreen Monograph rule has identified the permitted active ingredients (UV-filters) for sunscreens since 1978.
    [Show full text]
  • FDA Proposes Sunscreen Regulation Changes February 2019
    FDA Proposes Sunscreen Regulation Changes February 2019 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates sunscreens to ensure they meet safety and eectiveness standards. To improve the quality, safety, and eectiveness of sunscreens, FDA issued a proposed rule that describes updated proposed requirements for sunscreens. Given the recognized public health benets of sunscreen use, Americans should continue to use broad spectrum sunscreen with SPF 15 or higher with other sun protective measures as this important rulemaking eort moves forward. Highlights of FDA’s Proposals Sunscreen active ingredient safety and eectiveness Two ingredients (zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) are proposed to be safe and eective for sunscreen use and two (aminobenzoic acid (PABA) and trolamine salicylate) are 1 proposed as not safe and eective for sunscreen use. FDA proposes that it needs more safety information for the remaining 12 sunscreen ingredients (cinoxate, dioxybenzone, ensulizole, homosalate, meradimate, octinoxate, octisalate, octocrylene, padimate O, sulisobenzone, oxybenzone, avobenzone). New proposed sun protection factor Sunscreen dosage forms (SPF) and broad spectrum Sunscreen sprays, oils, lotions, creams, gels, butters, pastes, ointments, and sticks are requirements 2 proposed as safe and eective. FDA 3 • Raise the maximum proposed labeled SPF proposes that it needs more data for from SPF 50+ to SPF 60+ sunscreen powders. • Require any sunscreen SPF 15 or higher to be broad spectrum • Require for all broad spectrum products SPF 15 and above, as SPF increases, broad spectrum protection increases New proposed label requirements • Include alphabetical listing of active ingredients on the front panel • Require sunscreens with SPF below 15 to include “See Skin Cancer/Skin Aging alert” on the front panel 4 • Require font and placement changes to ensure SPF, broad spectrum, and water resistance statements stand out Sunscreen-insect repellent combination 5 products proposed not safe and eective www.fda.gov.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical UVR Absorbers
    Chemical UVR Absorbers The names given in bold and used Diisopropyl methyl cinnamate Glyceryl ethyihexanoate dimethoxy- throughout this handbook are those of Empirical formula: cinnamate the International Nomenclature of C 6H22O2 Chemical names. Cosmetic Ingredients. Glyceryl octanoate dimethoxycinnamate; Chemical names: 2-propenoic acid, 3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-, 2-Propenoic acid, 3-12,4bis(1 diester with 1 ,3-dihydroxy-2-(2-ethyl-1 - methylethyphenyl-methyl ester; 2,5- oxohexyl)oxypropane diisopropyl methyl cinnamate _ lsoamyl-para-methoxycinnamate Ethyihexyl methoxycinnamate Empirical formula: Empirical formula: C151-12003 C 8H26O3 Chemical names: Cinnamates Chemical names: Amyl4-methoxycinnamate; isopentyl-4- 2-Ethylhexyl-4-methoxycin nam ate; methoxycinnamate; isopenlyl-para- Cinoxate 2-ethyl-hexyl-para-methoxycinnamate; methoxy-cinnamate; 3-(4-methoxyphenyl)- Empirical formula: para-methoxycinnamic acid, 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoic acid, isopentyl ester Ci4HieO4 ester; 3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoic acid, 2-ethylhexyl ester; octinoxate; octyl Trade names: Chemical names: methoxycinnamate; 2-propenoic acid, 3- Neo Heliopan type E 1000; Solarum AMC 2- Ethoxyothyl-para-methoxyci n nam ate; (4-methoxyphenyl)-2-ethylhexyl ester 2-propenoic acid, 3-(4-methoxyphery- para-A minobenzoic acids (PA BAs) 2-ethoxyethyl ester; 2-ethoxyethyl-4- Trade names: methoxycinnamate AEC Octyl Methoxycinnamate; Escalol Amyl dimethyl FABA 557; Eusolex 2292; Heliosol 3; Empirical formula: Trade names: Jeescreen OMC; Katoscreen OMC; Nec C14H21 NO2 Giv Tan F; Phiasol
    [Show full text]
  • WO 2013/036901 A2 14 March 2013 (14.03.2013) P O P C T
    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2013/036901 A2 14 March 2013 (14.03.2013) P O P C T (51) International Patent Classification: (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every A61K 8/30 (2006.01) kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, (21) International Application Number: BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, PCT/US2012/054376 DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, (22) International Filing Date: HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IS, JP, KE, KG, KM, KN, KP, 10 September 2012 (10.09.2012) KR, KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LT, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, (25) Filing Language: English NO, NZ, OM, PA, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, (26) Publication Language: English RW, SC, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, (30) Priority Data: ZM, ZW. 61/532,701 9 September 201 1 (09.09.201 1) US (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every (71) Applicant (for all designated States except US): UNIVER¬ kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, SITY OF FLORIDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION, GM, KE, LR, LS, MW, MZ, NA, RW, SD, SL, SZ, TZ, INC.
    [Show full text]
  • Les Filtres UV Dans Les Cosmétiques : Une Présence Obligatoire ?
    UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES UFR SCIENCES PHARMACEUTIQUES ET BIOLOGIQUES ____________________________________________________________________________ ANNÉE 2015 N° THÈSE pour le DIPLÔME D’ÉTAT DE DOCTEUR EN PHARMACIE par Anouk POCHAT Présentée et soutenue publiquement le 14 décembre 2015 Les filtres UV dans les cosmétiques : une présence obligatoire ? Président : Mme Laurence Coiffard, Professeur des universités, Laboratoire de Pharmacie industrielle et Cosmétologie Membres du jury : Directeur de thèse : Mme Céline Couteau, Maître de conférences, HDR, Laboratoire de Pharmacie industrielle et Cosmétologie Mme Françoise PEIGNE , Maitre de conférences à la retraite Page 1 Remerciements A mon président de jury, Professeur à la faculté des sciences pharmaceutiques de Nantes J’exprime mes profonds remerciements à Mme Coiffard, pour m’avoir fait l’honneur de présider mon jury de thèse. A mon directeur de thèse, Maître de conférences à la faculté de Pharmacie de Nantes Je remercie Mme Couteau pour m’avoir conseillée et guidée tout au long de mon travail. A Madame Françoise PEIGNE, Docteur en Pharmacie, Je remercie Mme Peigné d’avoir accepté d’assister à ma soutenance. A ma mère, Je te remercie de m’avoir soutenue et encouragée tout au long de mes études. A mon conjoint, Je te remercie pour ta patience, ton écoute et ton soutien. A mes frères, Je vous remercie pour vos encouragements Page 2 I.Introduction Une exposition prolongée aux UVA et aux UVB peut avoir de graves conséquences sur la santé comme, par exemple, la survenue de cancers cutanés (Aubin F., 2001). Les filtres UV permettent d’assurer une protection dans les domaines UVA et/ou UVB. On en trouve dans les produits de protection solaire que le public utilise ponctuellement lors des expositions prolongées au soleil.
    [Show full text]
  • OSEQUE ZSOLE DUAL SUN BLOCK- Octinoxate Avobenzone Bisoctrizole Spray SONGHAK CO., LTD
    OSEQUE ZSOLE DUAL SUN BLOCK- octinoxate avobenzone bisoctrizole spray SONGHAK CO., LTD. ---------- Active ingredients: Octyl Methoxycinnamate 7.5%, Ethylhexyl Salicylate 5%, Avobenzone 2%, Bisoctrizole 0.5% Purpose: Sunscreen Inactive Ingredients: Water, Alcohol Denat, Butylene Glycol, Glycerin, Bis-Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenyl Triazine, Niacinamide, Isononyl Isononanoate, Glacier Water, Butyloctyl Salicylate, Xanthan Gum, Decyl Glucoside, Disodium EDTA, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Fragrance Do not use: on wounds, rashes, dermatitis or damaged skin Keep out of reach of children. In case of accidental ingestion, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately Stop use: Please stop using this product and contact a dermatologist 1. If allergic reaction or irritation occurs 2. If direct sunlight affects the area as above When using this product: Do not use other than directed Warnings: For external use only. Not to be swallowed. Avoid contact with eyes. Discontinue use if signs of irritation or rash appear Uses: Spray or apply liberally over the face and body 15 minutes prior to sun exposure. Always ensure total coverage of all sun exposed areas. Re-apply every 1-2 hours and always after swimming. For spray type, shake it well before use and spray it evenly at 20cm-30cm apart from face or wherever needed. For spray type - shake it well before use For lotion type - turn a cap to use Storage: Keep in a dry or room temperature area OSEQUE ZSOLE DUAL SUN BLOCK octinoxate avobenzone bisoctrizole spray Product
    [Show full text]
  • Annex VI, Last Update: 02/08/2021
    File creation date: 03/10/2021 Annex VI, Last update: 22/09/2021 LIST OF UV FILTERS ALLOWED IN COSMETIC PRODUCTS Substance identification Conditions Wording of Reference Maximum conditions of Product Type, concentration Update date number Chemical name / INN / XAN Name of Common Ingredients Glossary CAS Number EC Number Other use and body parts in ready for use warnings preparation 2 N,N,N-Trimethyl-4-(2-oxoborn-3-ylidenemethyl CAMPHOR BENZALKONIUM 52793-97-2 258-190-8 6% 15/10/2010 ) anilinium methyl sulphate METHOSULFATE 3 Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, HOMOSALATE 118-56-9 204-260-8 10% 02/08/2021 3,3,5-trimethylcyclohexyl ester / Homosalate 4 2-Hydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone / BENZOPHENONE-3 131-57-7 205-031-5 6% Reg (EU) Not more than Contains 02/08/2021 Oxybenzone 2017/238 of 10 0,5 % to protect Benzophenone-3 February 2017- product (1) date of formulation application from September 2017 6 2-Phenylbenzimidazole-5-sulphonic acid and its PHENYLBENZIMIDAZOLE SULFONIC 27503-81-7 248-502-0 8%(as acid) 08/03/2011 potassium, sodium and triethanolamine salts / ACID Ensulizole 7 3,3'-(1,4-Phenylenedimethylene) bis TEREPHTHALYLIDENE DICAMPHOR 92761-26-7 / 410-960-6 / - 10%(as acid) 26/10/2010 (7,7-dimethyl-2-oxobicyclo-[2.2.1] SULFONIC ACID 90457-82-2 hept-1-ylmethanesulfonic acid) and its salts / Ecamsule 8 1-(4-tert-Butylphenyl)-3-(4-methoxyphenyl) BUTYL 70356-09-1 274-581-6 5% 15/10/2010 propane-1,3-dione / Avobenzone METHOXYDIBENZOYLMETHANE 9 alpha-(2-Oxoborn-3-ylidene)toluene-4-sulphoni BENZYLIDENE CAMPHOR SULFONIC 56039-58-8 - 6%(as acid)
    [Show full text]
  • Should a Toxicological Risk Assessment of Ubiquitous Chemicals Be Done Using Data from Only One Source of Exposure?
    Mini Review Open Acc J of Toxicol Volume 4 Issue 2 - January 2020 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Di Nardo JC DOI: 10.19080/OAJT.2020.04.555633 Should a Toxicological Risk Assessment of Ubiquitous Chemicals Be Done Using Data from Only One Source of Exposure? Di Nardo JC1* and CA Downs2 1Retired Toxicologist, Vesuvius, USA 2Executive Director, Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, Clifford, USA Submission: January 09, 2020; Published: January 23, 2020 *Corresponding author: Di Nardo JC, Retired Toxicologist, Vesuvius, USA Keywords: Toxicological; Chemicals; Dioxybenzone; Octocrylene; Oxybenzone; Sulisobenzone Introduction consumers to believe that there is no further risk associated with the After much discussion and petitioning by several individuals, chemical. non-governmental organizations and scientists alike, the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) re-opened the sunscreen drug monograph Data on February 26, 2019 to review the safety of sunscreen actives In October of 2018 the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) banned considered Generally Recognized as Safe and Effective (GRASE) the chemical benzophenone from use in foods and/or in plastic food since 1978 [1]. After their review, the FDA concluded that the public wraps [3], because it was found to cause cancer in rodents according to a study conducted by the National Institute of Environmental safety of a dozen drug actives currently in use (several of which record “does not” currently contain sufficient data to support the Health Sciences in May 2007 [3]. In June 2012 the state of California are benzophenone based chemicals - avobenzone, dioxybenzone, added benzophenone to their Proposition 65 list recognizing it as octocrylene, oxybenzone and sulisobenzone) and, therefore, are a carcinogen and came to an agreement that a sunscreen product requesting industry to provide additional data (mainly toxicokinetics, should not contain any more that 50 parts per million [4].
    [Show full text]
  • Ultraviolet Radiation
    Environmental Health Criteria 160 Ultraviolet Radiation An Authoritative Scientific Review of Environmental and Health Effects of UV, with Reference to Global Ozone Layer Depletion V\JflVV ptiflcti1p cii ii, L?flUctd EnrrcmH Prormwe. Me World Haah6 Orgniri1ion and Fhc nIrrHbccrlT Ornrn)is5ion on Nfl-oflizirig Raditiori Prioiioii THE Ef4VIRONMEF4FAL HEALTH CI4ITERIA SERIES Acetonitrile (No. 154, 1993) 2,4-Dichloroplierioxyaceric acid (2 4 D) (No 29 Acrolein (No 127, 1991) 1984) Acrylamide (No 49, 1985) 2,4.Dichlorophenoxyucetic acd - erivirorrmerrtul Acr5lonilrile (No. 28, 1983) aspects (No. 54, 1989) Aged population, principles for evaluating the 1 ,3-Dichloroproperte, 1,2-dichloropropane and effects of chemicals (No 144, 1992) mixtures (No. 146, 1993( Aldicarb (No 121, 1991) DDT and its derivatives (No 9 1979) Aidrin and dieldrin (No 91 1989) DDT and its derivatives - environmental aspects Allethrins (No 87, 1989) (No. 83, 1989) Alpha-cypermethrirr (No 142, 1992) Deltamethrin (No 97, 1990) Ammonia (No 54, 1985) Diamirrotoluenes (No 74, 1987( Arsenic (No 18. 1981) Dichiorsos (No. 79, 1988) Asbestos and other natural mineral fibres Diethylhexyl phthalate (No. 131, 191112) (No. 53, 198€) Dirnethoate (No 90, 1989) Barium (No. 137 1990) Dimethylformnmde (No 114, 1991) Benomy( (No 143, 1993) Dimethyf sulfate (No. 48. 1985) Benzene (No 150, 1993) Diseases of suspected chemical etiology and Beryllium (No 106, 1990( their prevention principles of studies on Biommkers and risk assessment concepts (No. 72 1967) and principles (No. 155, 1993) Dilhiocarbsmats pesticides, ethylerrvthiourea, and Biotoxins, aquatic (marine and freshmaterl propylerrethiourea a general introdUCtiori (No 37, 1984) NO. 78. 1958) Butanols . four isomers (No. 65 1987) Electromagnetic Fields (No 1 '37 19921 Cadmiurrr (No 134 1992) Endosulfan (No 40.
    [Show full text]