It will come as no surprise to you that our sunscreen contains a UV filter based on zinc oxide. This makes it a mineral sunscreen. We made the choice for zinc oxide very deliberately, because zinc oxide has many advantages! We therefore believe that sunscreen with a UV filter based on zinc oxide is the best option and we would like to explain to you why.
First of all, mineral sunscreen then. But what about the non-mineral UV filter that we added to our formula this year as a booster? We believe in constantly innovating our products. As the first Dutch brand with mineral sunscreen, we take steps every year to develop the ideal sunscreen. This year we added this booster. It is important to know that our product contains roughly eight times more zinc oxide than Bis-ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine. Therefore, we can confidently say that zinc oxide is the main component of our UV filter. Do you want to know why we added this booster? You can read that here. We would also like to explain to you why we now believe in a non-mineral UV filter after all (and why we no longer talk about mineral vs chemical).
In the field of sunscreen, we believe that zinc oxide is the best choice. Is it perfect? No, but we do think it is the least harmful. We are happy to explain why. It is a somewhat technical story, so bear with us.
We consider zinc oxide the safest option because it breaks down into Zn2+ ions, which occur naturally in the sea. Is it completely safe? Well, everything we do has an impact, but we always strive for the least harmful option. Some studies have shown possible negative effects of zinc oxide on coral, algae and fish. But these studies suggest that the observed effects are more related to a local increase in the concentration of zinc ions than to the presence of zinc oxide itself.
It is important to note that most studies use concentrations of zinc oxide that are much higher than what realistically could end up in the ocean. Real and realistic effects of zinc oxide on the environment, as well as exposure and risk matrices, have been extensively investigated. Even if we all start using zinc oxide and the concentration of zinc ions in the water naturally increases as a result, zinc oxide in sunscreen creams does not pose a threat to sea life. Our research suggests that it is still less harmful than the use of some other UV filters.
Why we think zinc oxide is the best option:
Zinc is a natural element with a complex cycle. It is present in soils and water, and the concentration varies naturally through natural events, the local ecosystem, interactions with other chemicals and physical parameters such as pH. Of course, human activities also influence the distribution of zinc on earth. Although we don't create zinc, we actively mine it and make it more available in our environment. Various industries use zinc or zinc-derived materials, such as mining, automotive industry, paint, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. In 2023, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals represented approximately 10-12% of the global zinc oxide market. Zinc oxide is just one of the industrially used zinc sources. The impact of sunscreen creams on total human zinc use is relatively small, but we take this seriously and thoroughly investigate the potential risks of our sunscreen to the ecosystem.
Various studies report an increase in zinc content in local waters and soils, with human activities seeming to play a role. Some analyses can show that part of the zinc increase in specific locations can be traced back to mining activities since the beginning of the industrial revolution, with virtually no impact from current activities. Zinc plays an important role in the physiological processes of most species, including humans.
In investigating the role of zinc oxide and sunscreen creams, some studies have shown possible negative effects of zinc oxide on coral, algae and fish. These studies suggest that observed effects are more likely attributable to a local increase in the concentration of zinc ions as a result of zinc oxide breakdown in water, than to the presence of zinc oxide itself. From our literature review, we found that zinc oxide can have an impact on sea life, especially on species that are already sensitive to zinc. The form of the sunscreen (nano or non-nano zinc oxide) does not appear to affect these species more than other forms. The contribution to the local increase of zinc in soil and water is likely negligible compared to other industries, both in the past and now.
Notably, many more studies have been conducted on the environmental effects of mineral sunscreens (75%) than non-mineral (25%), which may exaggerate negative conclusions about these filters. To get a complete and clear picture, it is important to also investigate other UV filters and their impact on the ecosystem.
There are few UV filters active in the UVA1-range. Protection against UVA1 radiation is important because it contributes the most to long-term sun damage to the skin, including skin cancer. Therefore, sunscreens must contain some UVA1 filters to provide broad-spectrum protection, including:
Avobenzone (Butyl Methoxydibenzoylmethane)
Ecamsule (Terephthalylidene dicamphor sulfonic acid) – unique to L'Oréal due to patents
Oxybenzone
Octocrylene
Zinc oxide
BEMT (Bis-ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine) – new generation filter
MBBT (Methylene bis-benzotriazolyl tetramethylbutylphenol) - new generation filter
DHHB (Diethylamino hydroxybenzoyl hexyl benzoate) – new generation filter
Each filter has its own specifications in terms of formulation and permitted maximum amount, which affects how many filters need to be added together to achieve the desired protection. Until now, only zinc oxide could be added alone as a broad-spectrum UV filter.
Avobenzone
Avobenzone, or Butyl Methoxydibenzoylmethane, is the most common UVA1 filter in non-mineral sunscreens. Some studies show that this filter affects specific marine species and may have hormone-disrupting effects. A risk of avobenzone is its photo instability, which means it must be associated with other compounds to be stable, which can cause skin reactions. It is a synthetic molecule that bioaccumulates in the environment, meaning the concentration increases and is difficult to remove in our water treatment facilities. EWG reported that this ingredient was in the FDA's 2019 proposal to not list it as safe and effective due to existing results and lack of strong data.
Oxybenzone
Oxybenzone, also known as benzophenone-3, is extensively studied for its role in coral bleaching and risk to some marine species. Therefore, since 2021, it has been included in Hawaii's ban to protect their coral reefs. It is also a synthetic molecule that bioaccumulates and is difficult to remove from our wastewater. It also has health issues, with it suspected of being a hormone disruptor. However, it is important to note that it has been assessed by the SCCS and declared safe within the conditions of use in sunscreen.
Octocrylene
Octocrylene is recently being investigated for an extension of the Hawaii ban. Some studies report accumulation and potential hormone-disrupting effects on some marine species. Recently, the SCCS published their opinion on octocrylene for human consumption and concluded that it is safe at the concentration in sunscreen, as the findings were not convincing enough.
From our research into BEMT and DHHB, no health or environmental risks have been reported with use of this filter.
BEMT
Our literature review of BEMT showed no reported health or environmental risks with the use of this filter. It is a stable filter and remains on the skin due to its size, minimizing the risk of skin irritation. On its own it can already provide an SPF20 at maximum use, making it a suitable booster for other UVA filter protection. It is also expected to be approved by the FDA in 2025, which is known for its strict guidelines for accepting new UV filters, making BEMT the first new UV filter to be approved in the US in more than 20 years.
From our initial screening of MBBT and DHHB, no reported health or environmental risks have emerged with the use of these filters. So far we have not conducted an in-depth investigation of MBBT and DHHB, but they are on our radar to determine our position on these two new filters.
Our conclusion
After carefully reviewing various options, we have had to make some compromises. Because protection against UVA1 is important, at least one of the UVA1 filters must be included in the formula. Based on our current knowledge and with an eye toward environmental and human safety, we have chosen not to use avobenzone, octocrylene and oxybenzone in our sunscreens. We have focused on zinc oxide as our best option.
New generation filters such as BEMT and DHHB offer possibilities for hybrid formulas based on zinc oxide. Unfortunately, they cannot be used on their own for UVA protection, and therefore must always be combined with another UV filter. In our case, zinc oxide is therefore the only option.
We do believe in hybrid sunscreen formulas with these new generation UV filters, because they don't penetrate the skin and are therefore suitable for sensitive skin. Based on the studies so far, they also show no harmful effects for humans and the environment. Zinc oxide-based sunscreen always needs a booster. Bis-ethylhexyloxyphenol methoxyphenyl triazine is known for its high effectiveness at low concentrations, making it popular for high SPF levels. It is also praised for its excellent photostability and because it improves the stability of other sunscreen ingredients. And that stability is precisely what matters with mineral sunscreen.
We especially believe that we must continue to evolve and act with the knowledge we have now. This means we don't think there is one perfect way, but we can do our best every year to make the best choices with the knowledge available by then. That's what good care means to us, and we will always communicate this as transparently as possible.
