It is summertime in the Northern hemisphere and a time of anxiety for people who suffer chronic skin hyperpigmentation like melasma or worry about skin aging.

Finding the right sunscreen is difficult. The only sun filters considered to be safe (GRASE) by the FDA are zinc oxide and titanium dioxide. These are the mineral filters that most often leave a white cast. Chemical filters feel and look more pleasant but none of them come without safety concerns. In the past, evidence emerged that sun filters penetrate into the bloodstream and cause hormone and immune system disruption.

The chemical sun filter oxybenzone has received the most heat because of evidence to cause menstrual cycle disruptions, an increased risk of uterine fibroids and endometriosis. It is still not banned nationwide in the US (only Hawaii and Florida), although slowly phased out from the market (still used in LaRoche Posay Anthelios Cooling Water Sunscreen Lotion SPF 60).

Many sun filters on the market swim in a grey zone of FDA Category III—not considered safe due to insufficient data. If we believe that sun filters should be sold, despite a lack of long-term data, then we may also conclude that when someone doesn’t have a criminal record, then that person is automatically law-abiding and innocent.

Apart from hormone disruption, allergy risk and genotoxicity, sun filters are often not even safe to use in the sun due to their instability to light (how ironic). Hence, they need to be reapplied every 2h, which is very unpractical.

And there is the issue that not every sun filter covers the entire spectrum of UV. What recently came to my attention outraged me. Before 2022, all the chemical sunscreens on the market that promised broad spectrum filters experienced a drop-off in protection beyond 370 nm and had to rely on physical filters like zinc oxide to cover the 370–400 nm range. This means, if you were using a chemical sunscreen that didn’t contain zinc oxide, you were not protected by the entire UV range and photoaging, despite your best efforts to use sun protection at all times.

The first chemical filter specifically designed to protect against the ultra-long UVA range (370–400 nm) was brought to market by L’Oréal in 2022. This filter is called methoxypropylamino cyclohexenylidene ethoxyethylcyanoacetate (MCE), commercially branded as Mexoryl 400, and available in European formulations, for example La Roche-Posay Anthelios UVmune 400.

If you live in the US or Canada, you still don’t have access to chemical sunscreens that protect you from that particular UVA 380–400 nm range, because the FDA hasn’t approved it yet.

A reason for the FDA’s decision on this filter, is lacking testing. Even though new sun filters have to pass rigorous testing to get approval by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS), which regulates cosmetics in the European Union, there is no other data that proves the safety of this particular filter. I want to remind you that the sun filter oxybenzone, which I mentioned before and is identified as an endocrine disruptor since 2001, was once approved for the European market under the EU Cosmetics Regulation in the late 1990s. The European Chemicals Agency officially identified oxybenzone as an endocrine disruptor in September 2025. 25 years too late. For decades, women were in good faith to do the right thing for their skin. Because if it is approved for sale, it must be okay? Not knowing their sunscreen could be the reason for their hormonal mayhem.

It is needless to say, the sun care industry is messy, misleading and fails to build a trustworthy relationship with consumers.

I am breaking down the safety of the 3 most popular sunscreens in the US and Europe.

US 

EltaMD UV Clear Broad-Spectrum SPF 46

The EltaMD UV Clear Broad-Spectrum SPF 46 is the most sold drugstore sunscreen and most recommended by US dermatologists.

Synthetic and mineral sun filters:

1. Octyl methoxycinnamate(Octinoxate): UVB filter, endocrine disruptor (estrogenic, affects the thyroid, suppresses androgens), banned for sale in Maui due to concerns for marine life

2. Zinc Oxide: Mineral sun filter, considered safe (GRASE) by the FDA, covers the entire UV spectrum.

My verdict:

The EltaMD UV Clear Broad-Spectrum SPF 46 has only two active sun filters. One of them is a known endocrine disruptor. And I wonder why they put it in the first place.

Neutrogena® Ultra Sheer Dry-Touch Sunscreen Lotion Broad Spectrum SPF 55

The second most popular facial sun screen in the US.

Synthetic sun filters:

1. Avobenzone (3%): The only FDA-approved UVA filter (310-400 nm) but not considered safe (GRASE) because of insufficient data, not photostable (breaks down when exposed to light), low allergy concerns, relatively low skin absorption, although detected in the blood after application, environmental concerns for marine life (banned in Maui), causes photo allergy in some people, low acute toxicity profile (from one application), no evidence on immune or endocrine disruption (no long-term testing has been done), not safe for pregnant women (impacts placental development).

1. Homosalate (10%): UVB filter, found in blood and breast milk after skin application, according to the report by the SCCS, homosalate does affect the reproductive system depending on the dose (10% are considered safe), the same report mentions it accumulates and stays 3 weeks in the system after one application.

Note: If you use the product daily and the ingredient accumulates, you will reach a threshold where it does affect your hormonal health.

2. Octisalate (5%): UVB filter, absorbed through the skin, no evidence of endocrine disruption, falls under Category III on safety according to the FDA because of lacking sufficient data.

3. Octocrylene (10%): Degrades into the byproduct benzophenone—a known carcinogen, no long term studies on immune or endocrine disruption available.

Europe 

La Roche-Posay Anthelios UVmune 400

Synthetic Sun filters:

2. ETHYLHEXYL TRIAZONE: Water resistant and photostable UVB filter, not approved in the US, environmental concerns due to toxic byproducts.

3. BUTYL METHOXYDIBENZOYLMETHANE (Avobenzone): The only FDA-approved UVA filter (310-400 nm) but not considered safe (GRASE) because of insufficient data, not photostable (breaks down when exposed to light), low allergy concerns, relatively low skin absorption, although detected in the blood after application, environmental concerns for marine life (banned in Maui), causes photo allergy in some people, low acute toxicity profile (from one application), no evidence on immune or endocrine disruption (no long-term testing has been done), not safe for pregnant women (impacts placental development).

4. BIS-ETHYLHEXYLOXYPHENOL METHOXYPHENYL TRIAZINE (Bemotrizinol, other names Escalol S, Parsol Shield, and Tinosorb S): Broad-spectrum UV filter, absorbs both UVA and UVB rays across the 280–400 nm range, exceptional photo stability, no long-term data on safety available to this date, no hormone disrupting effects detected, approved by the FDA in 2026.

5. DIETHYLAMINO HYDROXYBENZOYL HEXYL BENZOATE (also DHHB or Uvinul A Plus): Blocks the entire UVA range, photostable, recent investigations by the European Union's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) revealed that DHHB manufacturing can result in trace contamination by di-n-hexyl phthalate (DnHexP), an ingredient linked to reproductive toxicity and hormone disruption.

6. METHOXYPROPYLAMINO CYCLOHEXENYLIDENE ETHOXYETHYLCYANOACETATE (Mexoryl 400): Fills a critical protective UVA gap between 370 nm and 400 nm, a case of severe contact dermatitis has been recorded (do a patch test if you have sensitive skin), positive results regarding photoaging and UV-related hyperpigmentation, approval by the FDA is still pending, no endocrine or genotoxicity was observed in short term exposure to rats, no long-term studies available yet, molecule size is 322.41 g/mol (322 Da)—can penetrate the skin, although at a low rate (1.6%), the board of the SCCS raised concerns about carcinogenic metabolites (nitrosamines) when Meseroxyl 400 reacts with nitrosating agents (nitrates and nitrogen oxide for example, nitrogen oxide is a gas naturally present in your blood).

7. DROMETRIZOLE TRISILOXANE (Mexoryl XL): Covers UVB and UVA, photostable and water resistant, not approved in the US due to insufficient data on health safety.

8. 2-MERCAPTONICOTINOYL GLYCINE (Melasyl): Not an active sun filter but active ingredient: skin pigmentation inhibitor, disrupts melanin production.

9. TEREPHTHALYLIDENE DICAMPHOR SULFONIC ACID (Ecamsule, Mexoryl SX): Absorbs primarily in the UVA spectrum (between 320 and 400 nm), photostable, can cause skin irritation, redness, allergies or increase sun sensitivity, low skin penetration (562.7 Da), data about safety is lacking.

After reading this, do you think chemical sunscreens are safe?

I approached this topic with an open mind because of the excitement of other skin and melasma experts about this new La Roche Posay sunscreen. However, after spending hours scrutinizing the ingredients regarding safety, I am not convinced that even the newest and promising sun filters are truly safe. Part of me believes that scientists genuinely try to develop safe ingredients, and the other part of me thinks new ingredients just come with a fresh paint but the same potential for health risks and uncertainty.

Chemical sun filters harbor so many potential dangers. In contrast, we can mitigate the dangers of UV easily with the appropriate behaviour with the sun (wearing hats, seeking shade, avoidance during peak hours, building a healthy tan gradually, zinc oxide, etc).

What I found shocking when I went through the ingredient list of the La Roche Posay Mune 400, is to find a synthetic ingredient that disrupts the natural melanin cascade. While people who want to get rid of excess pigmentation might find that interesting, I argue it goes beyond what customers aware of intervening. And it also reveals what the sun care industry believes in. The absolute protection from nature and prevention of natural processes.

In fact, hyperpigmentation isn’t a disease, it is a healthy biological response from your body. Only when the skin hyperpigmentation is mottled, there is an indication this process has gone awry. But trying to disrupt the pigmentation cascade altogether is a sledge-hammer approach.

If you are wondering which sunscreen you should use, maybe you have to become clear about what you believe in. Do you want to submit to human intervention, or do you choose to learn how to live in sync with nature? I’d like to give you an analogy. Just like UV-light, fire is a form of energy with the potential to heal and to destruct. However, even though fire can burn you, does that stop you from sitting by a fire to warm yourself up?

I believe in sunlight in the right doses and I believe in sun protection in certain situations. I don’t believe in man-made chemicals to shield from nature.

I am repeating myself, but the appropriate behaviour with sunlight is the safest protection from adverse reactions with UV rays. This mantra also allows you to get benefits from sunlight like vitamin D for better immunity and healthy hormone production for overall well-being (sleep, happiness,…).

I understand that some situations require sun protection, for example sitting in the car (lots of UV-A comes through window shields), or water sports, winter sports, windy conditions, etc.

I know that the sunscreen safety concerns are daunting for people with chronic hyperpigmentation like melasma. It feels for them like they are trapped in a space where neither the sun nor sun protection feels safe. If that is you, here are my favourite safe and natural sun protection methods.

Thank you for reading this far. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.