Study Claims Sunscreen Killing Coral Reefs

[Papa Bear]

Did you read what I had said about encasing spent rods in glass and dropping them in the deepest part of the ocean where the background radiation is the same level! Just not PC! But a major solution to our needs! Japan gets 95% plus power fro nuclear plants! Pretty safe considering we lose cool miners all the time to produce power! All things in life have a price, are we willing to pay? If Hillary or Obama get in look for $6.00 dollar a gallon gas! Or maybe higher! California is talking about raising the gas tax!

What are we willing to pay?

[hbh2oguard]

yes I read it, and it will never happen anytime soon. Eventually it might since a lot of our waste ends up in the ocean. I'm not too sure I'm a fan of the gas tax especially since now it does next to nothing. Compare the price of fuel to other places around the world, it's still pretty cheap, not great though. Of course I would like to see it less, just like everyone else, but it's not terrible. If gas went to $6/gal it would make everyone conserve a little and think harder about other sources of fuel, maybe something renewable and something that's better for our earth.

[swimmergrl]

Hey all!

Finally got out of college algebra. Evil class! Thankfully, we are getting into graphing, because numbers that only have value for the purpose of the equation confuse me to death! (Note to self- don't put math class off until senior year when you've forgotten everything from high school!)

Anyway, back on subject.

About the sh*t, comment. Working in vet office and agricultural settings, I've had some pretty nasty substances on me. You know it is bad when you wish it was only urine or feces. People tend to categorize industrial waste and human waste on a different level than animal waste. I could never be human doctor or nurse! I was pointing out the industrial and human wastes being dumped into the ocean.

I have a question for you Papa Bear. What do you mean when you are talking about giving up freedom? Who is trying to imprison you? This finding isn't exactly the end of the world as we know it. The government isn't going to pass a law saying "Thou shalt not apply sunscreen to thy body!"

Findings like this are actually pretty common. Human uses 'x' chemical, puts it in tons of stuff, then finds out 'x' chemical is toxic, etc. the government procrastinates dealing with it for awhile until enough people die/sue, then legislation finally goes through, then companies reformulate, then there is a new product, and the cycle starts over. Asbestos, lead, DDT, and mercury come to mind.

Humans screw up the environment all the time, and it is documentable. Sometimes it is land management, sometimes chemical toxicity, radioactivity, overhunting, introduction of invasive species, introduction of old world disease, etc.

Katrina wouldn't have been nearly as bad if the wetlands hadn't been drained and built on, the dust bowl in the 1930s wouldn't have been nearly as bad if the government hadn't given incentives to farm every last bit of land, getting rid of native vegetation that would have held some of the soil in place. Abandoned lead mines have lead to serious problems with lead toxicity in the environment; skyscrapers, radio towers, and other tall structures account for about 28,000 migratory bird losses a year; and market hunting through to the early 1900s sent passenger pigeons to extinction and bison nearly disappeared as well. Deer nearly disappeared, but with the loss of their natural predators, and hunting regulations, they are actually severely over populated, causing billions of dollars in damage a year to agricultural crops, landscaping, and collisions. (Deer are actually the most dangerous animal in the US.) Urban sprawl has worsened the problem, because now there is suitable deer habitat in areas with too many people to hunt. When they finally get around to trying sharpshooters to thin the population, people freak out about killing Bambi! Just wait until they are in an accident with a deer! Not to mention, Bambi tastes really good...

What are we supposed to do with all the nuclear waste? What about the greenhouse gases released during the burning of coal? How do we justify using a food crop for fuel, when there are millions of people starving every day? How are we changing an area's ecology by damming up a river? Humans may not understand how the Earth systems work, but it isn't really that difficult to see how humans have affected the environment.

My personal theory about where the world is headed is based off history. It has a habit of rolling around. There will probably be a severe drought, maybe even during my lifetime. They've happened before, so it shouldn't be too unexpected. Underground water that is already incredible low will be used up, and then there will be even more problems with water law, because the northern states will keep more water in their dams if they can. Southern states will get mad. Mexico will probably be really mad that the US is using up all the water before it gets to Mexico, since most of their water is difficult to access underground.

There will also probably be a huge pandemic in my lifetime. It may or may not happen around the same time as the drought. I'm not going to even try to guess times! My guess is avian influenza, H5N1. All it needs to do is mutate to spread from human to human. This will be reminiscent of 1918-1920 influenza pandemic. I believe current death estimates are around 50-100 million for that pandemic. The current common flu virus going around is the worst the doctors I've talked to have seen, and it wasn't foreseen to even make it into the flu shot this year. Our student health center generally has an average of 200 students a day coming in with the flu. Not that bad with a student base of over 18,000. This winter that number jumped to over 700 students a day. Doesn't bode well for us against bird flu. I don't know if increasing obesity levels would help or hurt in that situation. It isn't a happy picture, but the truth isn't always happy.

Now that I'm done with that tirade...

My analysis of the study, "Sunscreens Cause Coral Bleaching by Promoting Viral Infections" (Danovaro 2008)

Things I found questionable:
1) The use of plastic bags.
2) The use of such a small simulated environment in situ.
3) I would like to know if the lab experiments the mentioned had any larger sample environments.
4) The study mentions even the smallest concentration used was above those detected in natural environments. I would like to know what those levels were, and why they didn't run any experiments at those levels.
5) The study mentions that most commercial sunscreens have 20 or more ingredients. Why did they only test 7?
6) Table 1 shows an apparent lack of experiments. I would like a stronger base to make decisions from.
7) Their information indicates they only tested spf 8 and 15. I use at least 30 spf, and you can get as much as 70spf in stores. How would that change the results?
8) The "sunscreen" used was actually a mix of the 7 ingredients in the concentrations used in the US. Why not also use the entire sunscreen product?

Information I found interesting:
1) The estimates of how much sunscreen is actually released into the ocean by tourists. I assume these ingredients are common in many other products, and would like to know how much they would add to the figure. I would also like to know how much of these products is deposited in the coean from freshwater sources.
2) The noted effects of butylparaben, ethylhexylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and 4-methylbenzylidene camphor on the coral.

Hopefully, more studies will be done on this subject. I took a little bit of time to look up each chemical, not really know what they are, or why they are used.

Butylparaben- "used as a preservative in cosmetics (e.g., baby products, manicuring preparations, and deodorants and other cleanliness products), drug formulations (local anesthetic solutions and estrogen tablets), and some foods."

"Parabens (esters of 4-hydroxybenzoic acid [4-HBA], also known as alkyl p-hydroxybenzoates) have been recently reported to have estrogenic activity in experimental cell systems and animal models." Other studies say no, I'd have to read up more to have an opinion.

I got all that information from a 65 page study done by the government to assess the health risks of butylparaben. I didn't read all of it, only the first couple of pages. I may or may not go back and read the rest.

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/files/Butylparaben.pdf

ethylhexylmethoxycinnamate- Not much information, other than that it is widely used in sunscreen. MSDS link below is all I could find.

http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/ET/2-...cinnamate.html

benzophenone-3- Used as a broad spectrum spf. Two links below are interesting.

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/c...sccp_o_078.pdf

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/56091.php

4-methylbenzylidene camphor- Also used as an ultraviolet filter in cosmetics and sunscreens. Link about it below.

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/c...sccp_o_075.pdf


All in all, very interesting. I think more studies should be run in this area. The study isn't all out proof, however, there is strong evidence that the use of these chemicals could be highly detrimental to coral reef environments. I would really like to know how similar tests with whole sunscreen would turn out, how fast they break down, and what problems that could cause, the actual concentrations found in the environment, and estimates as to how it will or will not build up. I would also like to know how these chemicals function when combined with other chemicals found to cause coral bleaching. There was only slight mention of it in the study.

If other studies done in the area support these findings, I can see some major impacts on sunscreen formulation and regulation. I would like to see the industry move to more natural biodegradable formulas as it is. I would also like to know how many ingredients in sunscreens are fillers. I'm not a big fan of fillers in products. My skin doesn't like them. I don't want to pay for stuff if it isn't doing anything.

Lots of stuff to look into and think about, but time for bed now!

Rachel

[hbh2oguard]

Hey Rachel you finally sounded like a scientists, not just some wack trying to argue a point they are passionate about. I enjoyed reading your last post and agreed with 99% of it. I fully agree that a drought is very likely, but not too sure about avian influenza, but that's just my opinion. Very well documented and informative. Thanks

[Papa Bear]

Really? They tell what windows in your house, what toilet, what car, what gas mixture, what is to be in your trash, how many dogs and cats you can have and even that they must be fixed, they tell you how much insulation, soon what kind of light bulb, and freedom is more than not being in prison! I could go on for days! Read my suggested reading then we will talk!

No over hunting, not in years! Not enough! No evidence that man isn't a part of nature and what we do maybe meant to happen? I don't buy the liberal "Man is evil" we fix more than we destroy if we can! Asbestos is a great example, the north American kind doesn't case any problems at all! It was like Global warming a fraud! The South African type is the problem type! Used only in navy ship yards! DDT, not a problem! Freon! not a problem! We invent problems so the solution can be sold!

[Papa Bear]

Here is the answer that man is bad and needs to get off the planet! So I am packing my bag and leaving for La La Land where all is just dreamy! Earth to swimmer reality check!

You need to stop and read DLR now! You can't afford to wait!

[hbh2oguard]

No over hunting, not in years! Not enough! No evidence that man isn't a part of nature and what we do maybe meant to happen? I don't buy the liberal "Man is evil" we fix more than we destroy if we can! Asbestos is a great example, the north American kind doesn't case any problems at all! It was like Global warming a fraud! The South African type is the problem type! Used only in navy ship yards! DDT, not a problem! Freon! not a problem! We invent problems so the solution can be sold!

Huh

[bottlefish]

Papa, you'll be telling is that the earth is flat soon!

IMHO, the fact that we are screwing up the world is a mute point, studies like these show us where we may be going wrong. Of course we should question them, we can't just follow every single paper written blindly, however in order to question we need to look at them completely and with an open mind, then make our decision. To prejudge based on a second line synopsis published in a magazine is hardly scientific!

There are those that prefer to take the lazy view, that we are an integral part of natures wheels, our current methods are by design, carry on cocking it up without a second thought, revel in their right to destroy as they please, or of course cloud themselves in denial and pretend that it's not actually happening, but hopefully the rest of the world is starting to take a more intelligent and responsible stance.

[Papa Bear]

You might be screwing it up, but I haven't! I am telling the truth even if it's not popular! Unless you have evidence that anything I have said is not true it is ONLY your humble opinion! We can't afford to make decision based on how we feel! We need to understand science that is real and not all warm and fussy!

We do know that a lot of movies are made and dollars exchanged based on bad science! And who we? That's the inconvenient truth!

I would suggest to you that you read Trashing the Planet and then tell me the earth is flat will be my next statement? Is there something telling the world that it is round when everyone else believes it's flat?

[bottlefish]

Papa, show me your research to back the truth as you state it, I'll keep an open mind

But at the moment, my vote goes with the large group of top international scientists who spent a long time talking about environmental issues last December in Bali.

As for fluffy ideas? If you think that asking the whole world to completely change their methods of consumption, transport and fuel, try and redirect the progression who's rate has increased exponentially since the industrial revolution to use more sustainable methods, try and persuade the people who control and make millions by keeping the problem going to admit they are wrong, is fluffy, then you really are a few sandwiches short of a picnic!

Nah, sitting back in your big gas guzzling 4 x 4 with the heating on full blast believing the suits who are getting rich off your spending when they tell you the problem doesn't exist, pretending that everything is just A OK even though the evidence is righ there in fromt of your eyes if you just open them, because it's too much hassle or requires too much thought to do anything else, that's what I call fluffy.