Questions About Hot Weather Hoodies

[gim]

3 minutes ago, DaubsNU1 said:

Like @gimruis I don't wear gloves. If it's really cold in the spring, I put on a pair of fishing gloves...but don't like it one bit.

 

I do keep a pair in my rain jacket which stays in the boat all season and I wear them when I'm motoring from point A to point B if the air temp is below about 50.

 

I never wear them when I'm fishing.  Full gloves or fingerless, can't stand them.

[TheBaitMonkey]

I’d recommend the bamboo ones. Free Fly makes a really nice hoodie that I find to be comfortable on the 90+ degree days. I think 6th Sense came out with a bamboo sun hoodie too that mimics what Free Fly came out with that’s a cheaper alternative

[GetFishorDieTryin]

I find the button up double caped shirts are more comfortable in extreme heat.  They weight virtually nothing, and they have a ton of airflow.  Its worth paying a few more $ for higher quality polyester.

[BassCats]

Do you wear a buff around your neck or just lather on sunscreen multiple times a day? 

[RRocket]

23 minutes ago, BassCats said:

Do you wear a buff around your neck or just lather on sunscreen multiple times a day? 

The hoodies I like have a built in buff.

 

I still put some sunscreen on my face, however.

[BrianMDTX]

1 hour ago, RRocket said:

The hoodies I like have a built in buff.

 

I still put some sunscreen on my face, however.

I have one but it’s too darned hot for me. With a hood, a hat and sunscreen on my face, I’m comfortable and protected without sweating my patoot off. 

[Koz]

I was pleasantly surprised by the Kast King UPF 50 shirt that I bought a few weeks ago for only $32.

 

It has the hoodie, integrated gaiter, and the thumb loops. I wore it the other day on the lake when the temperature was in the mid to upper 90’s. I did not feel overheated at all. I’m sure I’ll buy another one.

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B09TT8TLGT?psc=1&ref=ppx_pop_mob_b_asin_title

[Fishingmickey]

     I have been tournament kayak fishing in Texas for about 10 years now. It is not uncommon to have 100° days from May forward. 

     I cover up completely!  My gear is, light weight quick dry fishing pants, I wear one of the stretchy performance shirts under a vented w/front pockets fishing shirt, a buff (I prefer a looser buff) where I can pretty much pull it up over my head and where it is almost like a tunnel. I wear a Tilley hat over the sun glasses. I coat my nose, cheeks and side burn area before I get on the water with the Neutregena spf 70 or 100 sunblock. I wear NRS sun gloves to protect my hands. I have a Engel cooler with four rod holders. It carries three one liter bottles of water and usually a quart of Gatorade. Most of the time I have a left over bottle of water at the end of the day.

     The Tilley hat gets dunked from time to time. The buff if I am feeling "it" will get dunked in the ice chest and reapplied. The dunking above usually happens later in the day.

Stay hydrated and covered up and you'll find it is a lot cooler then not doing it.

FM

[MediumMouthBass]

It amazes me how many people (especially in America) are almost addicted to dousing themselves in chemicals made with things they have no clue about, and names they cant pronounce.

Spend an afternoon looking up the actual ingredients in the products youre using, and then look at all the studies, hospitalizations, long term cancer causes, among other health issues they cause, youll probably switch to a sun hoodie that day. Even as a child, sunscreen always gave me an unpleasant feeling. Now i know why. And didnt they just release a study about how only 1 out of 4 sunscreens work? And even if they were safe, and actually effective, the feeling, look, and smell? No thanks.

 

Now sun hoodies, shirts, neck gaiters, and gloves are the present, and the future. And not just for fishing, golfing, other sports, mobile outdoor auto detailing, mountain biking, among many other outdoor activities are either using them now, or will eventually. The UV protection they offer, without any potential side effects, long term use causing health concerns, or having to use all kinds of bad chemicals on you, along with keeping you cool while doing so. Not to mention, theres nothing smeared on your skin, your skins not sticky, and no smell.

 

Columbia PFG and Aftco along with Simms and Huk are my favorites. Theres really 0 reasons to buy anything cheaper, i got my Columbia and Aftco's on sale between $12-35 each (most being $12-20).... And they are tried, trusted, proven. The budget, off brand, knock offs will be made with subpar materials, and over promised descriptions. And like i said, the good quality ones are often cheaper then them on sale too. Buying anything on Amazon that is for any type of protection really confuses me....

 

Aftco Samurai Jason Christie is probably my #1 worn hoodie/shirt for 1 reason and 1 reason only.

The material its made with makes me feel cooler than any other brand. And Simms also offers ones with insect protection for those who need it, ill stick to vinegar for that, but thats just me. The Aftco Samurai also has a built in area that clips into your hat, on those windy days or going fast in a boat it really helps. I also like Huk and Columbia, they have nice shirts and hoodies, but those Columbias are very warm, even inside with the AC on. The Aftco feels like its always cool, even on hot days.

 

(i know ill get some negativity for being anti sunscreen, but using products that cause cancer to prevent cancer doesnt seem like a great idea to me)

[Johnbt]

First I bought a long sleeve Columbia sun shirt. It's great. And was on sale. Then I bought a couple of lesser known long sleeve shirts on sale. They are great. I use them in the sun fishing, at the beach and on the riding mower.

 

Then I bought a light gray Jason Christie hoodie from Aftco. That's all I wear now for fishing. Yeah it was on sale.

 

www.aftco.com/products/jason-christie-fishing-bass-long-sleeve-performance-shirt?variant=21395277512809

 

"Bigger hood with closure and hat visor sleeve"

 

"Jason's direct feedback was instrumental to fine tune our already popular Samurai hooded performance shirt. Jason took additional measures to modify the hood of his Samurai shirts to improve the sun protection coverage on his face and prevent glare."

 

I'm an XL and wear an XL or XXL hat. The hood is roomy and big ball hat fits nicely under the hood and the bill pocket holds the outfit together. When I'm not using the hood I don't even know it's hanging behind me.

 

________

 

AFTCO. The company that brought us the roller guide for saltwater fishing.

"1958: J.C. Axelson Founds the Axelson Fishing Tackle Company (AFTCO)

Axelson Tackle Co. was a large company with over 1,000 employees that manufactured products including aircraft landing gear, tooling for the oil industry, and even the famous Axelson machine lathe. The man who built the company, J.C. Axelson, not only loved the manufacturing process, but fishing as well. As an angler, he could not find roller guides to match his quality standards, so he decided to make his own. After selling his business, he purchased a waterfront home on Lido Island in Newport Beach, California. To indulge his passion for inventing and manufacturing, he built a full-fledged machine shop in the basement, and this is where the AFTCO roller guides were born."

[RRocket]

5 hours ago, MediumMouthBass said:

 

 

(i know ill get some negativity for being anti sunscreen, but using products that cause cancer to prevent cancer doesnt seem like a great idea to me)

I forwarded this post to a dermatologist this evening. He said the following:

 

"If that person knew how to interpret data, they'd know that you are many, many, many MANY times more likely to get cancer from the sun rather than actual sunscreens. The data is conclusive. And, as far as I'm aware, there has been no large peer reviewed study that suggests sunscreens are a statistically significant cause of cancer. And, in fact, most cancer societies and dermatologists suggest the use of sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk."

 

"And if they are avoiding using sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk, I would suggest they stop putting gas/oil into their car/truck/boat IMMEDIATELY as the data is conclusive that the cancer risk from this is magnitudes worse than any sunscreen devised by man."

 

After the fact, he sent this link:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447210/

 

As with all things, YMMV.

[flyfisher]

On 6/15/2024 at 3:29 PM, Captain Phil said:

Summer temperatures here in Central Florida are running in the mid to high 90s.   I see TV anglers fishing in long sleeve hoodies that I assume are protection against UV rays?   I have have heard these shirts are not hot and some are designed to keep you cool.  Most seem to be made of polyester, which doesn't sound that cool to me.  Any feedback? 

it isn't the polyester you think of during old school disco days.  I have worn the long sleeve ones for a while an dbought some of the hoodies this year and they are great.  I got Simms and they are warmer than not wearing them but I will take the tradeoff for constant sun protection without having to spray or anything.  I got mine on sale at sierra trading post and wish I bought more.  I wear them even at my kids soccer games in the sun.  

[MediumMouthBass]

3 hours ago, RRocket said:

I forwarded this post to a dermatologist this evening. He said the following:

 

"If that person knew how to interpret data, they'd know that you are many, many, many MANY times more likely to get cancer from the sun rather than actual sunscreens. The data is conclusive. And, as far as I'm aware, there has been no large peer reviewed study that suggests sunscreens are a statistically significant cause of cancer. And, in fact, most cancer societies and dermatologists suggest the use of sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk."

 

"And if they are avoiding using sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk, I would suggest they stop putting gas/oil into their car/truck/boat IMMEDIATELY as the data is conclusive that the cancer risk from this is magnitudes worse than any sunscreen devised by man."

 

After the fact, he sent this link:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447210/

 

As with all things, YMMV.

I actually dont care about the cancer part (i mean i do, but thats not the concern for sunscreen) , as a human living in 2022 that drinks tap water, eats fast food, ultra processed foods, and breathes in who knows what these days ill more than likely get cancer, as will most people since theres data now showing cancer cases skyrocketing in recent years, especially in younger people (me).

What i care about, and why i have a hatred for it is read the ingredients, the warnings, and the problems, side effects, hospitalizations, they cause. And these companies want you to put it on your skin? And on the face near the eyes? Not all are bad but most are made with a few things that have absolutely no place being near a human, let alone on one.

And if you look up "study showing 1 in 4 sunscreens work" on google there will be many different sources going into detail on that, and also from it "contain ingredients that could harm consumers health".

So they barely work if at all? But put something made with harmful ingredients on my skin anyways? No thanks.

A cheap, affordable sun hoodie is the way to go, it actually works, isnt made with 50 different chemicals, keeps the body cool, keeps bugs away too even.

 

Oh and by the way, most sunscreens contain benzene. Benzene causes cancer.

Edited June 19, 2024 by MediumMouthBass

[RRocket]

29 minutes ago, MediumMouthBass said:

"contain ingredients that could harm consumers health".

 

We run into that on a daily basis, actually. And we consume many, many of these. Among our favorites are caffeine, alcohol, nicotine. And a char on a steak? Yep..carcinogenic. 

Virtually everything in a multi vitamin (or medicine) could harm (or kill you) consumed in enough quantity. Even drinking perfectly clean, safe drinking water could kill you. And that's the caveat. We typically see this stuff if minute (or safe) levels. 

 

And as pointed out, you run a greater risk pumping gas than you do wearing sunscreen...and I have a feeling you won't be gasoline free moving forward.

 

The American Cancer Society as well as the American Medical Association both recommend sunscreen to mitigate the risk of skin cancer. And that's based on significant studies, statistics and data.

 

IMO, you'd have to be an enthusiastic conspiracy theorist to think both of those organizations would be advocating the use of something cancer-causing to otherwise healthy adults and children.

 

Once again, YMMV.

 

I do agree with you in that some of these don't feel great on the skin. I am glad I've found one that feels darn near like water going on. Much more pleasant than the ones that feel like paste.

 

[MediumMouthBass]

3 hours ago, RRocket said:

We run into that on a daily basis, actually. And we consume many, many of these. Among our favorites are caffeine, alcohol, nicotine. And a char on a steak? Yep..carcinogenic. 

Virtually everything in a multi vitamin (or medicine) could harm (or kill you) consumed in enough quantity. Even drinking perfectly clean, safe drinking water could kill you. And that's the caveat. We typically see this stuff if minute (or safe) levels. 

 

And as pointed out, you run a greater risk pumping gas than you do wearing sunscreen...and I have a feeling you won't be gasoline free moving forward.

 

The American Cancer Society as well as the American Medical Association both recommend sunscreen to mitigate the risk of skin cancer. And that's based on significant studies, statistics and data.

 

IMO, you'd have to be an enthusiastic conspiracy theorist to think both of those organizations would be advocating the use of something cancer-causing to otherwise healthy adults and children.

 

Once again, YMMV.

 

I do agree with you in that some of these don't feel great on the skin. I am glad I've found one that feels darn near like water going on. Much more pleasant than the ones that feel like paste.

 

The AMA is nothing but a joke these days, so no i dont believe a single thing they say or do.

And im going to assume you have no clue how much these corporations, doctors, medical companies, pharmaceutical companies, and so called "organizations" are making from people getting cancer. Theres been plenty of times, no actually way too many times these types have stated something was safe, and then years later had mass lawsuits, for their stuff causing severe problems. Remember when cigarettes were safe? How about those pesticides on the news every other commercial? Those were safe a decade ago too.

 

And if its now proven that 3 out of 4 sunscreens do nothing why have these organizations you cling to for your knowledge claim they are so great for all these years?

Money.

 

And you arent even denying that they are harmful, and now know they dont even work, but you still will defend them 100%.

And my car needs gas, or it wont work.

And believe me, i dont like gas getting on me, or my clothes either.

But thats a necessity

My body doesnt need sunscreen, and it doesnt work even if i used it.

Where a sun hoodie does, and no downsides.

 

Im sure you would love to keep arguing back and forth for hours if you could, about how something thats not even effective, usefull, or actually works is great and all, but no thanks.

Nice talking to you

Edited June 19, 2024 by MediumMouthBass

[RRocket]

20 minutes ago, MediumMouthBass said:

 

And if its now proven that 3 out of 4 sunscreens do nothing

 

Link to said "study", so I may be further educated.

[MediumMouthBass]

3 hours ago, RRocket said:

Link to said "study", so I may be further educated.

Google it, its exactly 1 of 4 sunscreens work. Should give alot of sources/results

[RRocket]

1 hour ago, MediumMouthBass said:

Google it, its exactly 1 of 4 sunscreens work. Should give alot of sources/results

That's definitely not what the "study" said to me. Did you read the "study" by chance or just the headline? This "study" tested a grand total of 51 products BTW.

 

I'll Cliff Notes this so people can decide for themselves if this "study" is relevant and applies to them.

 

The "study" tested 51 products that were formulated to meet the US sun protection standards. And those products met the US standard to the tune of 94 percent. That is the opposite of "they don't work" IMO.

 

However, when testing the products designed under the US standard to meet the European standard only 35 percent met that standard; hardly a surprising result given they were not made to meet the European standard. Nor are some of the ingredients used to meet the European standard LEGAL for use/sale in the USA. Over 50 percent of the approved European chemicals (18 of 34) ARE NOT approved for use or sale in the US. FWIW, the products I use meet/exceed both standards, but are not legal for sale in the USA because of those ingredients. One has Japan origins, the other European.

 

So in effect, some US products that easily meet/exceed the US standard are being pilloried because they don't meet a standard they were never made for using chemicals that are not allowed in US sunscreens. European sunscreens are classified as "cosmetics" with more lax regulation whereas US  sunscreens are classified as "non prescription drugs" and subject to stricter regulations. Oh..And the group that did the "study" will gladly put you on their approved sunscreen list if you send them your sunscreen to test with a nice cheque. I have emailed them to see how much this privilege costs.

 

 To see what the great difference is between the 2 standards, it appears  that how the UVA standard is measured is what differs the most. And that led me to another study (I fell down the sunscreen rabbit hole!! ).

 

The lead author of the study, Dr. Steven Wang, formerly of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and now Director of Dermatologic Surgery and Dermatology at MSK Basking Ridge is an expert (to say the least) in skin cancer. And in no uncertain terms says:

 

"I work with melanoma patients every day, and I’m a big believer in sunscreen use. When used correctly, daily use decreases skin cancer and prevents signs of early aging." Enough said.

 

I know this is long winded, but there are people on this forum affected by skin cancer and, IMO, more information on the topic is better than less information.

 

So yes! Cover up! Use sunscreen! Stay safe! 

 

 

 

 

[MediumMouthBass]

13 hours ago, RRocket said:

That's definitely not what the "study" said to me. Did you read the "study" by chance or just the headline? This "study" tested a grand total of 51 products BTW.

 

I'll Cliff Notes this so people can decide for themselves if this "study" is relevant and applies to them.

 

The "study" tested 51 products that were formulated to meet the US sun protection standards. And those products met the US standard to the tune of 94 percent. That is the opposite of "they don't work" IMO.

 

However, when testing the products designed under the US standard to meet the European standard only 35 percent met that standard; hardly a surprising result given they were not made to meet the European standard. Nor are some of the ingredients used to meet the European standard LEGAL for use/sale in the USA. Over 50 percent of the approved European chemicals (18 of 34) ARE NOT approved for use or sale in the US. FWIW, the products I use meet/exceed both standards, but are not legal for sale in the USA because of those ingredients. One has Japan origins, the other European.

 

So in effect, some US products that easily meet/exceed the US standard are being pilloried because they don't meet a standard they were never made for using chemicals that are not allowed in US sunscreens. European sunscreens are classified as "cosmetics" with more lax regulation whereas US  sunscreens are classified as "non prescription drugs" and subject to stricter regulations. Oh..And the group that did the "study" will gladly put you on their approved sunscreen list if you send them your sunscreen to test with a nice cheque. I have emailed them to see how much this privilege costs.

 

 To see what the great difference is between the 2 standards, it appears  that how the UVA standard is measured is what differs the most. And that led me to another study (I fell down the sunscreen rabbit hole!! ).

 

The lead author of the study, Dr. Steven Wang, formerly of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and now Director of Dermatologic Surgery and Dermatology at MSK Basking Ridge is an expert (to say the least) in skin cancer. And in no uncertain terms says:

 

"I work with melanoma patients every day, and I’m a big believer in sunscreen use. When used correctly, daily use decreases skin cancer and prevents signs of early aging." Enough said.

 

I know this is long winded, but there are people on this forum affected by skin cancer and, IMO, more information on the topic is better than less information.

 

So yes! Cover up! Use sunscreen! Stay safe! 

 

 

 

 

Its amazing how far you have to go to "be right" and argue on a bass forum.

Its really sad but great job.

 Im not sure if you work for one of these companies or just own stock in them but alright then, or maybe you are just so obsessed with huge corporations. That have proven time and time again they will do anything to make a dollar, and have proven time and time again that they will produce hazardous products and sell them to the people, and if something happens they just use their money and people like you to make them look good.

You still ignored the part about some of them containing benzene (not all but some). Benzene has been proven time and time again to cause cancer. Also oxybenzone, there was a study showing it stayed on the skin for weeks after it was applied too, so oxybenzone, and octinoxate are "sadly super common in sunscreens, are cause for concern" both are very bad to humans along with coral bleaching, Hawaii atually tried doing a sunscreen ban awhile ago too because of that.

Neutrogena was recalled a few years ago and told customers to throw it away because it contained benzene.... Once again benzene causes cancer, but like usual with you im sure youll ignore that and praise these giant companies causing people to get sick because you love them so much.

Its interesting that you keep arguing back and forth but dont acknowledge any of their ingredients, isnt that something.

Oh and some of these products can also harm marine life, but im sure youll ignore that too.

 

Heres some quotes im sure they will upset you since they are the opposite of you trying to preach that these chemicals are "safe"

"CHICAGO (Reuters) - Scientists at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have shown that active chemicals in sunscreens can readily soak into the bloodstream, confirming the need for more testing on whether these products are safe, the researchers said on Tuesday"

 

"

“Consumers deserve better,” said Emily Spilman, a program manager for Healthy Living Science at EWG. “Many of the products we reviewed don’t offer balanced UVA and UVB protection.

“And some ingredients commonly found in sunscreens have been linked to both human and environmental concerns. But they’re still widely used in hundreds of products, even though they have not been tested adequately for safety. It’s outrageous that shoppers may be slathering these potentially harmful chemicals on their skin every day without the reassurance of those safety tests,” said Spilman.

The Food and Drug Administration has asked sunscreen manufacturers for more safety data about the non-mineral filters in sunscreens. It’s been more than two decades since the FDA approved a new active ingredient for use in SPF products, which leaves U.S. consumers behind in the global sunscreen innovation race.

“The rest of the world is light years ahead in sunscreen innovation, leaving American consumers behind,” said Homer Swei, Ph.D., EWG’s senior vice president of Healthy Living Science. “We need 21st century FDA regulations to ensure the safety of sunscreen products.

“Companies have repeatedly ignored their responsibility to provide essential safety studies to the FDA. And with the FDA constantly shifting its deadlines, the industry is stuck in regulatory limbo, leaving consumers in the dark about the risks they might be taking,” said Swei."

 

"Neutrogena sunscreen, particularly the chemical-based varieties, often contains ingredients like oxybenzone and octinoxate. These chemicals have been found to contribute to coral bleaching and can harm marine life when they wash off swimmers or are released into the water through wastewater streams."

 

"

You can also advocate for local legislation that bans the sale and use of toxic sunscreens. For instance, in 2018, Hawaii passed the first ever statewide ban on oxybenzone and octinoxate sunscreens, soon after, island nations including Palau, Bonaire and Aruba followed suite"

 

So to recap, these sunscreens can cause eye and skin irritation, hormone issues, marine life and coral reef issues, and also have ingredients that are proven to cause cancer.

 

13 hours ago, RRocket said:

I know this is long winded, but there are people on this forum affected by skin cancer and, IMO, more information on the topic is better than less information.

 

Skin cancer is horrible, but now there are better ways to to prevent it, #1 would be sun hoodies, neck gaiters, and gloves. They are affordable, easy to clean and maintain, keep you cool, and cover almost all the body.

With 0 downsides, and im not 100% against sunscreen. Im just 100% against these bigger brands with loads of money that get to bypass any actual testing of their products for safety, and then using actual harmful ingredients. And they have no responsibility at all, as long as they have money the FDA and everyone else like you just support them still 100%.

 

But heres the thing, there are smaller brands out now making sunscreens that they actually TEST. Made with safer ingredients too. This is interesting to me that after decades people are actually starting to care about their customers health and safety. I will be doing some research on these brands and so should everyone else.

 

Might as well add this too, so all these sunscreens on the market right now containing all these horrible ingredients, lets say just for an example that a stores selling sunscreen and 90% of the ones they are selling have these chemicals in them. Or someone wants to go fishing so they just buy whatever is on the shelf at the store.

Do your research people, if you want to use sunscreen use it, if you want to wear sun hoodies use them, but if you chose sunscreen make sure you know what products and ingredients to avoid. There are so many out there now that are very unsafe, find the ones that are tested and safe.

Edited June 19, 2024 by MediumMouthBass

[Tennessee Boy]

I’ve done some reading on sun screens.  I always try to get my information from peer reviewed scientific studies even though they make for dry reading.  When you read news articles that reference these journal articles they often misrepresent what’s in them.   For example,  it’s a fact that people who use sun screen are more likely to get skin cancer than those that don’t.  That’s alarming right?  Put that in the title of your article and you’ll get some clicks. The reality is that people that use sunscreen get more exposure to the sun than people that don’t.   When you control for sun exposure in the data analysis,  sun screen clearly helps reduce the risk of skin cancer.   What about the chemicals in sun screen?   There are reasons for concern. What I’ve read suggests the need for more study.   I don’t buy the conspiracy theories or need for panic.  The spray on sun screens are more concerning than the lotions.  If I had a kid that lived at the pool all summer I would be concerned about sun screen exposure.   I would want them to use lotions not sprays.  I think pregnant women should be concerned about some of these chemicals.

 

I personally try to get most of my protection from clothing.  On very hot days I wear shorts and use spray on sun screen on my legs.  I use less than one can a year so I’m not worried about any small temporary effects it might have on my hormones levels.  One thing we should all be able to agree on is sun exposure is dangerous.

[RRocket]

3 hours ago, MediumMouthBass said:

Its amazing how far you have to go to "be right" and argue on a bass forum.

 

 

 

The point here is not to be "right" but to dispel the falsehood that sunscreens "don't work". That's patently false. They work. And that's supported by large, peer reviewed data. Both here and around the world.

 

Are there chemicals one might want to avoid for personal reasons? Just as I pointed out earlier, we are surrounded by a myriad of chemicals (or ingredients) on a daily basis that may be questionable, unethical, toxic or downright carcinogenic. And despite that, we make choices to use and/or consume these....or avoid them altogether. We look at the ingredients list, assess the risk and use (or avoid) as needed. 

 

Such is the case here. As you point out, if you find Oxybenzone or Octinoxate personally objectionable (study below, more conclusive research needed) they can be avoided by merely looking at the ingredient list, such as we do with food ingredients we choose to avoid. Not every sunscreen contains these chemicals. One needs to perform personal risk management to determine if the risk (in this case skin cancer) outweighs other potential risk.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7648445/

 

But that is definitely not the same as "they don't work" which is what I was objecting to.

 

[MediumMouthBass]

3 hours ago, RRocket said:

 

The point here is not to be "right" but to dispel the falsehood that sunscreens "don't work". That's patently false. They work. And that's supported by large, peer reviewed data. Both here and around the world.

 

Are there chemicals one might want to avoid for personal reasons? Just as I pointed out earlier, we are surrounded by a myriad of chemicals (or ingredients) on a daily basis that may be questionable, unethical, toxic or downright carcinogenic. And despite that, we make choices to use and/or consume these....or avoid them altogether. We look at the ingredients list and use (or avoid) as needed. 

 

Such is the case here. As you point out, if you find Oxybenzone or Octinoxate personally objectionable (study below, more conclusive research needed) they can be avoided by merely looking at the ingredient list, such as we do with food ingredients we choose to avoid. Not every sunscreen contains these chemicals. One needs to perform personal risk management to determine if the risk (in this case skin cancer) outweighs other potential risk.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7648445/

 

But that is definitely not the same as "they don't work" which is what I was objecting to.

 

If they work so well then why when i did use them i still got sunburn? Whereas i never once got even a slight burn with a sun hoodie? And still making excuses to get around the ingredients in them. Nice talking to you. Enjoy your stock in sunscreen companies, maybe one day youll be able to make some money on them!

 

Its honestly pathetic that you are saying its "Such is the case here. As you point out, if you find Oxybenzone or Octinoxate personally objectionable" Yes im sure its a personal choice, some people just absolutely love toxic chemicals! A good rule of thumb for most people, actually all people is to avoid things that are PROVEN to be harmful.

 

Also by the way, all these chemicals around us you keep talking about we dont directly, purposely put on our skin and face. But sunscreen you do.

And isnt it easier, quicker, and more effective at the point you are even making just to use sun protective clothing? Dont have to research the chemical ingredients, no worries, no potential side effects or reactions either.

Also the sunscreen wears off from sweat/water after so long, and needs to keep being applied.

And like ive said about the clothing, they keep you cool and dont let your skin get burnt either.

 

Youve just sold me on buying some more hoodies, thanks!

[RRocket]

1 hour ago, MediumMouthBass said:

If they work so well then why when i did use them i still got sunburn?

That's an excellent question, but one I can't answer for you, sadly. Per dermatological studies, it's typically misapplication or insufficient reapplication in a timely manner. Most require a reapplication after a few hours, swimming, heavy sweating, etc I simply cannot answer to your situation. But your situation is known as anecdotal evidence which does not invalidate volumes of scientific research and evidence. And that evidence says they work and work well to prevent sun damage and skin cancer.

 

And yes, not only are we surrounded by questionable/dangerous/carcinogenic chemicals pbut many of us knowingly consume them...daily. Read up on alcohol. Or char on BBQ foods. Or nitrates in processed meats. Or plastics on food storage that makes it into food. Chemicals on produce that has been washed. Heck, there's even a chemical in pizza boxes that's can make its way into pizza!  So yes, we knowingly ingest such things daily, let alone put them on our skin.

 

And I'm thrilled you're buying more sun protection gear for yourself. That's means you're mitigating sun damage to yourself....truly a great thing! I'm happy you'll be safer on the water.

 

Stay safe, friends! 

[txchaser]

I've moved entirely to zinc-based sunscreen, and I'm pretty sure I'm avoiding the potential for funky chemicals, and the stick version of it stays on really well. 

[Captain Phil]

I was not aware that sunscreen was so controversial?   All I know is this.  If I wear sunscreen I don't burn.  If I don't, I do.  That said, sunscreen is a mess.  I hate the stuff.  My hoodie was just delivered and I can't wait to try it out.  Thanks for the all the great feedback!