Has anyone here done any research into this ?
I have only heard short discussions on radio about this .
It was mentioned that manufacturers of sunscreen don't have to label the ingredients as including nano particles as the law stands at the moment .
But some manufacturers of NON nano sunscreens are labeling as such.
I haven't bothered looking into it as yet , no time to busy playing in the sun!!!!!
But boat maintenance today for me , and waiting for glue to dry, it's blowing it tits off so no surf for me today, hence this post
"

I don't wear sun screen... that crap if it's waterproof will give a hard to pronounce condition.

Sun burn = free dermabrasion.

hey galah its not fishing its fair dinkum science !

every time you put nano sunscreen on all the the little nano dudes are small enough to go straight through your skin and no ones knows what they do once they are in there !! hey nano party time !!!!

I think zink is ok... non nano. zink has some healing properties as well as good sun protection.

I think its the most of the clear or invisible sun screen that may be NANO NASTY but i will check the brands on the super market shelves and report back.


I,m not trying to scare monger or fish i was just thinking about how much sunscreen must have been used in the last few days. !!! Theres a good estimation for simondo to calculate when he is bored sh!!T less .

GalahOnTheBay said...

Cue cisco and/or petermac33 in 3...2...1...

What??

Over simplifying the subject: Sun doesn't cause cancer, the Sun will damage your skin if over exposed and in the damaged areas leukocytes will attend...

Sun = good
Sunburn = dermabrasion/bad
Sunscreen = better than sunburn
No sunscreen absorption = better than sunscreen absorption
Slip slop slap, stop look listen, dah dah dah = Worldwide Melanoma of Skin Cancer Incidence - 2008


I know a lot of South Americans, most don't use sunscreen.

Wild ...... Wonder how it would affect the speed of a vessel traveling though the water .

FlySurfer said...

Over simplifying the subject: Sun doesn't cause cancer, the Sun will damage your skin if over exposed and in the damaged areas leukocytes will attend...

Sun = good
Sunburn = dermabrasion/bad
Sunscreen = better than sunburn
No sunscreen absorption = better than sunscreen absorption
Slip slop slap, stop look listen, dah dah dah = Worldwide Melanoma of Skin Cancer Incidence - 2008


I know a lot of South Americans, most don't use sunscreen.

i also know a lot of south americans are not anglo saxon descent. whats the ozone hole like over that side anyway? there is ALWAYS more to a graph than at 1st glance!

GreenPat said...

This looks interesting

i saw something like this stuff once and it was based on a type of lilly (i think) leaf.

FlySurfer said...

Over simplifying the subject: Sun doesn't cause cancer, the Sun will damage your skin if over exposed and in the damaged areas leukocytes will attend...

Sun = good
Sunburn = dermabrasion/bad
Sunscreen = better than sunburn
No sunscreen absorption = better than sunscreen absorption
Slip slop slap, stop look listen, dah dah dah = Worldwide Melanoma of Skin Cancer Incidence - 2008


I know a lot of South Americans, most don't use sunscreen.

Useless graph, how many South Americans have had their teeth checked, let alone had a full medical check up.

You could swap the graph around and list Australia as having the worlds lowest rate of death caused by "old age" (given its always dianoised to something)
Whilst in South America, I'm sure 2/3ds are still labled to natural causes and old age.

[b]FlySurfer said.....

Fine, take the Greeks, they don't use sunscreen either... same life expectancy.

They take siesta from 12 to 4.

They sleep inside when aussies are sleeping off a hangover on the the beach outside.

Within the link that was in my last post, there is a section where you can simply clickon our ministers names and it auto writes an email to the relevant ministers asking that legislation be implemented regarding the labeling of products using nano,s .