Guest guest Posted April 5, 2002 Report Share Posted April 5, 2002 It is a 1% metrondiazonal cream with an SPF of 15. Clinical results look good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > broad based UVA protection You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory alternatives like the sunblocks. What do you and others think? Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > broad based UVA protection You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory alternatives like the sunblocks. What do you and others think? Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > broad based UVA protection You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory alternatives like the sunblocks. What do you and others think? Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 I'm glad you brought this up, Marjorie. I did a bit of research on the web and found an article that seems to say that two chemical sunscreens - Octyl methoxycinnamate and Benzoate-4 methylbenzylidene camphor (Mexoryl SX belongs to this family of sunscreens) - have caused endocrine disruptions in mice. Here's the link if anyone is interested: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/7949/7949sunscreens.html Although we're not mice, and the researcher exposed these mice to amounts of chemical sunscreen that humans would not be close to using, I think I'll stay away from Mexoryl SX and stick with Zinco. Take care, Matija > > > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > > broad based UVA protection > > You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use > of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in > normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose > into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not > clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these > breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. > > I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that > even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that > any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when > there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory > alternatives like the sunblocks. > > What do you and others think? > > Marjorie > > Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 I'm glad you brought this up, Marjorie. I did a bit of research on the web and found an article that seems to say that two chemical sunscreens - Octyl methoxycinnamate and Benzoate-4 methylbenzylidene camphor (Mexoryl SX belongs to this family of sunscreens) - have caused endocrine disruptions in mice. Here's the link if anyone is interested: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/7949/7949sunscreens.html Although we're not mice, and the researcher exposed these mice to amounts of chemical sunscreen that humans would not be close to using, I think I'll stay away from Mexoryl SX and stick with Zinco. Take care, Matija > > > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > > broad based UVA protection > > You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use > of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in > normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose > into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not > clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these > breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. > > I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that > even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that > any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when > there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory > alternatives like the sunblocks. > > What do you and others think? > > Marjorie > > Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 I'm glad you brought this up, Marjorie. I did a bit of research on the web and found an article that seems to say that two chemical sunscreens - Octyl methoxycinnamate and Benzoate-4 methylbenzylidene camphor (Mexoryl SX belongs to this family of sunscreens) - have caused endocrine disruptions in mice. Here's the link if anyone is interested: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/7949/7949sunscreens.html Although we're not mice, and the researcher exposed these mice to amounts of chemical sunscreen that humans would not be close to using, I think I'll stay away from Mexoryl SX and stick with Zinco. Take care, Matija > > > it has spf 15 protection by the inclusion of Parsol 1789 and > > Mexoryl SX (or Mexoryl XL), both chemical sunscreens which have > > broad based UVA protection > > You and others here may be familiar with the controversy over the use > of sunscreens (vs sunblocks like titanium dioxide or zinc oxide) in > normal skin, principally because the sunscreen molecules decompose > into new molecules within skin cells when exposed to sun -- it's not > clear if the sunscreen then remain active, and/or whether these > breakdown molecules cause irritation or harm. > > I don't know much about this controversy. But it seems to me that > even if not ultimately deemed important, I don't see much good that > any chemical absorbed into rosacean skin can do, especially when > there are safe, non-absorbing, even mildly anti-inflammatory > alternatives like the sunblocks. > > What do you and others think? > > Marjorie > > Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.