Michael Scaturro | KFF Health News (TNS)

When dermatologist Adewole “Ade” Adamson sees people spritzing sunscreen as if it’s cologne at the pool where he lives in Austin, Texas, he wants to intervene. “My wife says I shouldn’t,” he said, “even though most people rarely use enough sunscreen.”

At issue is not just whether people are using enough sunscreen, but what ingredients are in it.

The Food and Drug Administration’s ability to approve the chemical filters in sunscreens that are sold in countries such as Japan, South Korea, and France is hamstrung by a 1938 U.S. law that requires sunscreens to be tested on animals and classified as drugs, rather than as cosmetics as they are in much of the world. So Americans are not likely to get those better sunscreens — which block the ultraviolet rays that can cause skin cancer and lead to wrinkles — in time for this summer, or even the next.

Sunscreen makers say that requirement is unfair because companies including BASF Corp. and L’Oréal, which make the newer sunscreen chemicals, submitted safety data on sunscreen chemicals to the European Union authorities some 20 years ago.

Steven Goldberg, a retired vice president of BASF, said companies are wary of the FDA process because of the cost and their fear that additional animal testing could ignite a consumer backlash in the European Union, which bans animal testing of cosmetics, including sunscreen. The companies are asking Congress to change the testing requirements before they take steps to enter the U.S. marketplace.

In a rare example of bipartisanship last summer, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, thanked Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) for urging the FDA to speed up approvals of new, more effective sunscreen ingredients. Now a bipartisan bill is pending in the House that would require the FDA to allow non-animal testing.

“It goes back to sunscreens being classified as over-the-counter drugs,” said Carl D’Ruiz, a senior manager at DSM-Firmenich, a Switzerland-based maker of sunscreen chemicals. “It’s really about giving the U.S. consumer something that the rest of the world has. People aren’t dying from using sunscreen. They’re dying from melanoma.”

Every hour, at least two people die of skin cancer in the United States. Skin cancer is the most common cancer in America, and 6.1 million adults are treated each year for basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The nation’s second-most-common cancer, breast cancer, is diagnosed about 300,000 times annually, though it is far more deadly.

(Lydia Zuraw/KFF Health News)

Dermatologists Offer Tips on Keeping Skin Safe and Healthy

– Stay in the shade during peak sunlight hours, 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. daylight time.– Wear hats and sunglasses. – Use UV-blocking sun umbrellas and clothing. – Reapply sunscreen every two hours.You can order overseas versions of sunscreens from online pharmacies such as Cocooncenter in France. Keep in mind that the same brands may have different ingredients if sold in U.S. stores. But importing your sunscreen may not be affordable or practical. “The best sunscreen is the one that you will use over and over again,” said Jane Yoo, a New York City dermatologist.

Though skin cancer treatment success rates are excellent, 1 in 5 Americans will develop skin cancer by age 70. The disease costs the health care system $8.9 billion a year, according to CDC researchers. One study found that the annual cost of treating skin cancer in the United States more than doubled from 2002 to 2011, while the average annual cost for all other cancers increased by just 25%. And unlike many other cancers, most forms of skin cancer can largely be prevented — by using sunscreens and taking other precautions.

But a heavy dose of misinformation has permeated the sunscreen debate, and some people question the safety of sunscreens sold in the United States, which they deride as “chemical” sunscreens. These sunscreen opponents prefer “physical” or “mineral” sunscreens, such as zinc oxide, even though all sunscreen ingredients are chemicals.

“It’s an artificial categorization,” said E. Dennis Bashaw, a retired FDA official who ran the agency’s clinical pharmacology division that studies sunscreens.

Related Articles

Forget ringing the button for the nurse. Patients now stay connected by wearing one

Energy drinks can lead to serious heart issues in kids and teens, health experts say

Aldi recalls cream cheese in several states, including Minnesota, due to salmonella fears

‘You saved my life,’ German 3M manager tells St. Paul firefighters who treated him last visit

Could better inhalers help patients, and the planet?

Still, such concerns were partly fed by the FDA itself after it published a study that said some sunscreen ingredients had been found in trace amounts in human bloodstreams. When the FDA said in 2019, and then again two years later, that older sunscreen ingredients needed to be studied more to see if they were safe, sunscreen opponents saw an opening, said Nadim Shaath, president of Alpha Research & Development, which imports chemicals used in cosmetics.

“That’s why we have extreme groups and people who aren’t well informed thinking that something penetrating the skin is the end of the world,” Shaath said. “Anything you put on your skin or eat is absorbed.”

Adamson, the Austin dermatologist, said some sunscreen ingredients have been used for 30 years without any population-level evidence that they have harmed anyone. “The issue for me isn’t the safety of the sunscreens we have,” he said. “It’s that some of the chemical sunscreens aren’t as broad spectrum as they could be, meaning they do not block UVA as well. This could be alleviated by the FDA allowing new ingredients.”

Ultraviolet radiation falls between X-rays and visible light on the electromagnetic spectrum. Most of the UV rays that people come in contact with are UVA rays that can penetrate the middle layer of the skin and that cause up to 90% of skin aging, along with a smaller amount of UVB rays that are responsible for sunburns.

The sun protection factor, or SPF, rating on American sunscreen bottles denotes only a sunscreen’s ability to block UVB rays. Although American sunscreens labeled “broad spectrum” should, in theory, block UVA light, some studies have shown they fail to meet the European Union’s higher UVA-blocking standards.

“It looks like a number of these newer chemicals have a better safety profile in addition to better UVA protection,” said David Andrews, deputy director of Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that researches the ingredients in consumer products. “We have asked the FDA to consider allowing market access.”

The FDA defends its review process and its call for tests of the sunscreens sold in American stores as a way to ensure the safety of products that many people use daily, rather than just a few times a year at the beach.

“Many Americans today rely on sunscreens as a key part of their skin cancer prevention strategy, which makes satisfactory evidence of both safety and effectiveness of these products critical for public health,” Cherie Duvall-Jones, an FDA spokesperson, wrote in an email.

D’Ruiz’s company, DSM-Firmenich, is the only one currently seeking to have a new over-the-counter sunscreen ingredient approved in the United States. The company has spent the past 20 years trying to gain approval for bemotrizinol, a process D’Ruiz said has cost $18 million and has advanced fitfully, despite attempts by Congress in 2014 and 2020 to speed along applications for new UV filters.

Bemotrizinol is the bedrock ingredient in nearly all European and Asian sunscreens, including those by the South Korean brand Beauty of Joseon and Bioré, a Japanese brand.

D’Ruiz said bemotrizinol could secure FDA approval by the end of 2025. If it does, he said, bemotrizinol would be the most vetted and safest sunscreen ingredient on the market, outperforming even the safety profiles of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide.

As Congress and the FDA debate, many Americans have taken to importing their own sunscreens from Asia or Europe, despite the risk of fake products.

“The sunscreen issue has gotten people to see that you can be unsafe if you’re too slow,” said Alex Tabarrok, a professor of economics at George Mason University. “The FDA is just incredibly slow. They’ve been looking at this now literally for 40 years. Congress has ordered them to do it, and they still haven’t done it.”

(KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.)

©2024 Kaiser Health News. Visit khn.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

“Bridgerton” returns this week with a racy third season. Meanwhile, in theaters, “Babes,” with its well-deserved R rating, is worthy of your time.

And then there’s the metaphorical, trance-like “I Saw the TV Glow.”

Here’s our roundup.

“Bridgerton Season 3”

Will that shrewd purveyor of Regency-era gossip — Lady Whistledown (voice of Julie Andrews) —  finally get her comeuppance and be unmasked as the one and only Penelope Featherington (Nicola Coughlan)? That’s the question dangling over Netflix’s extra-spicy third season, which has the audacity of giving us a cliffhanger, albeit one you can foresee from the start of the first episode, before Part 2 resumes June 13.

Luke Newton, left, as Colin Bridgerton and Nicola Coughlan as Penelope Featherington in “Bridgerton.” (Liam Daniel/Netflix/TNS)

Oh, dearest readers, the injustice of that!

Related Articles

TV for summer 2024: ‘The Bear’ and ‘Couples Therapy,’ but few chances taken

‘The Bachelor’ promises true love. So why does it rarely work out?

‘Judge Judy’ Sheindlin sues for defamation over National Enquirer, InTouch Weekly stories

‘Bodkin’ review: A true crime podcast descends upon rural Ireland, with mediocre results

What to watch: Pay attention in ‘Dark Matter,’ you’ll be glad you did

There’s some good news indeed worth sharing that would meet with even the persnickety Whistledown’s approval: That new showrunner Jess Brownell is bringing a bit of tartness to the series’ comfort-food dish, elements that were somewhat absent from sexy Season 2.

The big wedge — there’s always at least one — between Season 3’s two main lovers comes from Penelope not ‘fessing up about her double life as the feared anonymous missive writer Whistledown or her own crush on suitor Colin Bridgerton (Luke Newton, more than fulfilling the hunk and acting requirements). As in previous seasons, much happens away from the fumbling about of its two starry-eyed lovebirds, and proves just as interesting, including the unresolved dustup between Eloise (Claudia Jessie) and Penelope, a welcome love interest (finally!) for Violet Bridgerton (the enchanting Ruth Gemmell), the reappearance of the so-in-love Anthony Bridgerton (Jonathan Bailey) and Kate Sharma (Simone Ashley) from Season 2, and my personal favorite — a cnew character, the introvert Lord John Stirling (Victor Alli), who takes a quite the shine to Francesca Bridgerton (Hannah Dodd). Toss in an invitation to engage in a threesome, and this racier season, which, of course, is resplendent with gorgeous costumes, period details and classical-contemporary music, is just as much of a great escape from wretched reality as, says, a corker of a romance novel.

Details: 3 stars out of 4; four episodes drop May 16, four more drop June 13.

“Babes”

When presented as a comedy and even sometimes as a drama, portrayals of pregnancy and motherhood tend to get sanitized, even idealized. That’s not the case with this hilarious, uninhibited comedy about two New York best friends — single yoga teacher Eden (Ilana Glazer, who co-wrote the screenplay with Josh Rabinowitz ) and married dentist Dawn (Michelle Buteau) — dealing with the pangs and joys of both as their friendship gets tested. Eden is needier than Dawn and overly relies on her to be there every step of her pregnancy since the father of her unborn child died just after conception. Director Pamela Adlon navigates a raucous screenplay that robustly brings up lactation, sexual urges when pregnant and babysitting fails (one of the biggest laughs pertains to “The Omen”). But beyond those laughs and a suspension of belief (a yoga salary could cover the rent of that New York apartment?), there are authentic and beyond-the-standard observations and interactions here. That is particularly true when Eden meets with her casually and conditionally involved father (Oliver Platt). Those revealing scenes and the relatable, anything-goes exchanges between Glazer and Buteau and Buteau and Hasan Minhaj — acing his part as Dawn’s very likable husband — make “Babes” a rather revolutionary comedy that is a big bundle of joy (and lactation) from start to finish.

Details: 3½ stars; in theaters May 17.

“Back to Black”

The short, turbulent life of talented British singer/songwriter Amy Winehouse, who died at 27 in 2021 from alcohol poisoning, remains seared in the public’s consciousness, perhaps due to the incessant paparazzi that hounded and humiliated her at every move. And that’s part of the reason why director Sam Taylor-Johnson’s biopic starring a committed Marisa Abela seems unnecessary, adding little of anything new to the story while holding back even when it addresses the ugly side of being in the public eye. To its credit, “Back to Black” never feels exploitative and regards its subject respectfully. But the storytelling is disjointed and cycles through important markers in life — her ascendancy, her recording sessions, her volatile relationship and marriage to Blake Fielder-Civil (Jack O’Connell, giving his all in a narrowly focused role) and her untimely demise — without accomplishing much more than reminding us of how horribly sad this all is. We knew that going in.

Details: 2 stars; in theaters May 17.

“The Blue Angels”

The aerial acrobatics of the Blue Angels — the Navy’s Flight Demonstration Squadron that’s again set to dazzle Bay Area spectators Oct. 11-Oct. 13 during Fleet Week — are indeed a sight to behold and experience, either firsthand or on IMAX. And those scenes are the high point of Amazon MGM Studios’ ordinary documentary about them. It’s when director Paul Crowder’s salute to this team touches ground that it loses all of its momentum and energy, offering a cursory, one-dimensional look at the service people behind this tireless program. When it’s up in the air, it does soar.

Details: 2 stars; opens May 17 in IMAX theaters and May 23 on Prime.

“I Saw the TV Glow”

A generic synopsis explaining what writer/director Jane Schoenbrun’s unconventional sophomore feature is all about would do it a disservice. That’s because Schoenbrun’s metaphorical genre blender feels like it’s going to stay in the popular coming-of-age lane, and then detours into bold, original directions. Schoenbrun’s trance-like storytelling — their calling card —  centers on two suburban ‘90s teens. There’s  uncertain Owen (Ian Foreman first and later Justice Smith, in his best, most soul-wrenching performance yet) and rebellious teen Maddy (Brigette Lundy-Paine), who bond over an obsessed-about and cheesy TV series titled “The Pink Opaque.” Laden with pop-culture references (from “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” to “Twin Peaks”) and actors/musicians (Fred Durst and Phoebe Bridgers), “I Saw the TV Glow”  captures the awkward, outcast feeling of finding more meaning and context within a TV show than one’s life struggling to break free from an assigned gender and identity that isn’t who one is inside.

Details: 3½ stars, in select theaters,  expanding May 17 into additional theaters.

“Bodkin”

Neither too dark nor too light, this seven-episode Netflix mystery series makes a enjoyable watch and opens the door for a season 2. (I’d walk through it). But by no means does it approach the twisted brilliance of a quirky movie or play from Martin McDonagh (“The Banshees of Inisherin”), which it seems to want to emulate. That Oscar winner juggles humor and tragedy expertly, while this Higher Grounds Production (the Obamas production company) drops the ball occasionally on both. You won’t care since it’s the three central characters and the actors who portray them that pick them up  and put them back up in the air and keep us engaged. Lafayette native Will Forte stars as out-of-his-element American podcaster Gilbert who gets in over his head (no surprise) when he and his assistant Emmy (Robyn Cara) enlist the aid of bullish and under-investigation journalist Dove (Siobhan Cullen) to investigate the disappearance of three Bodkin townspeople during an annual celebration. The town isn’t so happy about them being there. There are numerous red herrings and even nuns doing yoga. Maybe next time – if there is indeed a next time – the case itself will be juicier.

Details: 2½ stars; now available on Netflix.

Contact Randy Myers at soitsrandy@gmail.com.

“IF” may get by. It’s sincere. As the song from “The Music Man” asks: How can there be any sin in that?

It’s also maudlin enough to force you into a defensive emotional crouch for an hour and 44 minutes. I speak for an audience of one here. Others may experience an entirely different set of side effects to a movie with a weirdly groggy and medicinal aura.

As his popular success with the first two “Quiet Place” monster movies asserted, writer-director John Krasinski knows how to balance thrills and miles and miles and miles of heart. He’s a pro at prolonging and screw-tightening a scene where something enormous and potentially scary is about to leap into frame. The same thing happens in “IF,” a lot, this time to mild “gotcha!” comic effect.

The fantasy this time concerns Bea, a wise, empathetic, privately grieving 12-year-old played by the first-rate and periodically movie-saving Cailey Fleming (of “The Walking Dead”). Bea’s mother has been dead for some time. The girl visits her grandmother (Fiona Shaw), while her practical joke-addicted father (Krasinski, seriously misjudging the average human’s tolerance for practical jokes) undergoes tests for heart trouble in the very same hospital where Bea’s mother died.

In Brooklyn, New York, on magically shining streets and in sun-drenched interiors provided by cinematographer and frequent Steven Spielberg collaborator Janusz Kaminski, Bea finds herself beset by a series of imaginary friends, most of them long separated from their human companions of old. “IF” sets up a scenario in which Bea and former clown Cal, now a testy, sullen lost soul played by Ryan Reynolds in a similarly thwarted limbo state, start a matchmaking agency to reunite the IFs with their now-adult companions, or else find suitable new matches. Their IF colleague is Blossom, an animated early Disney-esque creation voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge. There are some promising ideas afoot. The IFs, the most prominent being the purple goofball Blue voiced by Steve Carell, reside beneath Coney Island in a magical retirement home. The voice casting boasts plenty of talent and fame, from George Clooney (as an astronaut IF) to Emily Blunt (as a unicorn IF) to the late Louis Gossett Jr., as a wise and mellow Teddy bear, Lewis. It’s genuinely sweet to hear Gossett Jr.’s easygoing delivery one more time.

Krasinski hasn’t overplotted his story, exactly, but it’s heavily padded and dangerously light on actual jokes. Reynolds’ Cal is all impatience with next to no story reason for being, besides one big reason sprung at the end. At its core, “IF” deals with rampant anxieties coated in honey, a one-two combination deployed in countless stories beloved by both children and adults. But whimsy that periodically goes for the throat is not easy to pull off. “IF” reminds us how certain key ingredients — charm, wit, clarity, emotional tact and resonance — cannot be willed into narrative existence, or fixed in post.

At one crucial juncture Bea, promised earlier by her father that he will not die on her, is put through the wringer not knowing if he’s dead or alive, even though the saintly nurse perpetually on call (Liza Colón Zayas of “The Bear”) makes it super clear in the preceding scene that he’ll be fine. I mean, anything’s possible in a health crisis. But I’m not sure Krasinski was clear on his own intentions at this point, other than to jack us around a little for sport.

The larger issue is one of messaging. “IF” caters to a young audience, of course, and to fathers and daughters everywhere, as well as parents and adult guardians who’ve given up on the wonderment of childhood and the sweet innocence of made-up friends and the tonic of pure imagination. Character to character, the script sells everyone’s emotional lives short. It’s a strangely scold-y sort of heart-yanker, calling out the ignorance of grown-ups who ditched their IFs and childhood treasures as they grew up. Pixar digs this idea the most, as we know, and the best Pixar films brake right at the edge of shameless pathos while surprising us with little details and larger, deeper emotional crossroads. “IF” feels like well-meaning guesswork, with an eye toward the suspiciously familiar. When humans and IFs find each other again, it’s the heart-light routine from “E.T.” When the sadness of the abandoned IFs dominates the narrative, it’s like watching “Inside Out” populated entirely by Bing Bongs.

Not that it was written for kids, but millions of us adored the Mary Chase stage fantasy “Harvey” at a young age, or any age, the one about tippler and philosopher Elwood P. Dowd and his undeniable 6-foot invisible rabbit friend. Krasinski loves it, too; twice in “IF,” we’re shown scenes from the 1950 James Stewart film version. The lack of harsh language in “IF” may be reassurance enough for families today, though the general, nattering sourness of the banter in Krasinski’s story is something of a drag.

The biggest surprise? The great film composer Michael Giacchino gives “IF” a cruelly insistent childlike musical theme that may be the first substandard leitmotif he has ever written. By the 90-minute mark, that theme — and the movie it captures all too well — may have you wishing upon a star for a cameo appearance by one of the extraterrestrials from “A Quiet Place.”

‘IF’

1.5 stars (out of 4)

MPA rating: PG (for thematic elements and mild language)

Running time: 1:44

How to watch: In theaters May 17

Ryan Jeffers got the Twins’ offense started on the right note in the first inning on Tuesday night, smacking the first leadoff home run of his career. It would be the only run the Twins would score in 27 innings against the New York Yankees.

Another slow day at the plate on Thursday led the Twins to their third straight loss, this one a 5-0 defeat to cap the Yankees’ three-game sweep at Target Field.

There was almost no offense to speak of Thursday against Yankees starter Clarke Schmidt, who threw seven innings and allowed just three hits while striking out eight.

Until Carlos Correa’s double in the sixth inning, no Twins (24-19) baserunner had even advanced past first base. He was the only one to touch second in the loss.

The Yankees (30-15) had no such issues. Leadoff hitter Anthony Volpe hit a home run on a Joe Ryan fastball, helping set the tone for the day.

The Yankees would collect another two runs in the first inning, one on a ball that Alex Kirilloff got a glove on but could not snag. It was ruled a double, though easily could have been charged as an error. Another run scored on a groundout.

Ryan would give up one more run in his 5⅓ innings of work, settling in after the difficult first inning.

Yankees superstar Aaron Judge was in the middle of things once again, hitting a pair of doubles and walking and scoring once. After he went 4 for 4 with a walk a day earlier, a Twins pitcher, Ryan, finally retired him in the fifth inning.

That out? A flyball that traveled 409 feet out to center and would have been a home run in 18 of 30 parks.

Related Articles

St. Paul Saints strike out 12 times in 6-0 loss to Omaha Storm Chasers

Twins collect same number of hits as Aaron Judge in loss to Yankees

After long rehab, thoughts of giving up, Twins’ Josh Staumont returns to majors

Twins starter Paddack tagged early in 5-1 series-opening loss to Yankees

Twins’ center fielder Byron Buxton to rehab knee in St. Paul