The sunscreen that snorkelers, beachgoers and children romping in the waves lather on for protection is killing coral and reefs around the globe. And a new study finds that a single drop in a small area is all it takes for the chemicals in the lotion to mount an attack.
Not only did the study determine that a tiny amount of sunscreen is all it takes to begin damaging the delicate corals – the equivalent of a drop of water in a half-dozen Olympic-sized swimming pools – it documented three ways that the ingredient oxybenzone breaks the coral down, robbing it of life-giving nutrients and turning it ghostly white.
Adverse effects on coral started on with concentrations as low as 62 parts per trillion. Yet measurements of oxybenzone in seawater within coral reefs in Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands found concentrations ranging from 800 parts per trillion to 1.4 parts per million. That's 12 times the concentrations needed to harm coral.
Oxybenzone is used in more than 3,500 sunscreen products worldwide. Common brands including Coppertone, Baby Blanket Faces, L'Oreal Paris, Hawaiian Tropic and Banana Boat all use the Oxy.
There are alternative sunscreens with no oxybenzone. The trouble is that nobody really knows about this threat to the reefs, and they take a fair bit of convincing.
This story appeared in the Portland Press Herald
(Score: 4, Informative) by Nerdfest on Thursday October 22 2015, @12:44PM
Whether they need convincing or not isn't really relevant. Something that's that toxic to the environment should be banned immediately, especially if there are less harmful alternatives.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Hyperturtle on Thursday October 22 2015, @01:20PM
I am going to guess that someone with a profit motivation will decry government regulation and champion our freedom to poison the environment because its good business and downright unAmerican to express concern for some underwater rock in another country.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday October 22 2015, @01:56PM
No. This is a simple case of Think of the Children. The government wants your children to get sun burned and skin cancer!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by That_Dude on Thursday October 22 2015, @05:05PM
I read up on benzophenone-3, aka oxybenzone, and found that it is not recommended for children under 2. There are other types of sunscreen ingredients which aren't known to be toxic - titanium dioxide for instance - it's used as a coloring agent; in pastry glaze for instance. As for children under 2, they are generally vulnerable because there is a lot of biological development going on - especially to substances that mimic hormones.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @10:12PM
I was reading the coverage at the Center for American Progress [thinkprogress.org] at just about the same time that frojack was submitting this.
-- gewg_
(Score: 5, Funny) by ikanreed on Thursday October 22 2015, @02:34PM
... What country do you think Hawaii is in exactly?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @02:31PM
> Something that's that toxic to the environment should be banned immediately
I think these results really need to be independently verified before that.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday October 22 2015, @04:39PM
Whether they need convincing or not isn't really relevant. Something that's that toxic to the environment should be banned immediately, especially if there are less harmful alternatives.
Unless oxybenzone is not as harmful as claimed. A claimed toxicity threshold of 1 part in 10 billion is remarkably low for a chemical that you can absorb through your skin without serious consequence aside from the occasional allergic reaction. I want to see some evidence backing up the assertions that this chemical is toxic at the concentrations found in the wild.
(Score: 3, Funny) by frojack on Thursday October 22 2015, @10:19PM
A claimed toxicity threshold of 1 part in 10 billion is remarkably low for a chemical that you can absorb through your skin without serious consequence aside from the occasional allergic reaction.
Somewhere, Homeopaths are dancing.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by gringer on Thursday October 22 2015, @09:36PM
There may not be any less harmful alternatives, just less tested alternatives. See the BPA-free debate [ehjournal.net] for more details of a similar situation.
Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]