Report: Most Sunscreens Are Bad, But These 7 Brands Are the Worst

And we have bad news about spray-on sunscreen.

Melissa Lyttle/Tampa Bay Times/Zumapress

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Memorial Day is the unofficial kick off to summer, when our calendars fill up with beach days and we begin the obligatory slopping on of sunscreen.

Whether you’re putting it on yourself or someone else, the importance of sunscreen has been drilled into most of us from an early age. But choosing a bottle to throw in your beach bag can be pretty overwhelming. We have more products to choose from, each with different claims such as “broad spectrum” or “UVB protection.” For 10 years, the Environmental Working Group has published a list of the best and worst products for shielding against the sun’s harsh rays. Here are some key takeaways, followed by the 2016 list.

Many products offer poor protection. This year, the group looked at more than 750 products and concluded that nearly 75 percent of them offered poor protection or had ingredients the group found “worrisome.” For example, oxybenzone is a sunscreen additive that the working group says is a hormone disrupter and allergen.

Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst for the Environmental Working Group, says it’s a good thing that the number of mineral-only products has doubled since 2007, rising from 17 percent of products to 34 percent in 2016. These sunscreens, which offer protection against both UVA and UVB,  generally don’t contain harmful additives.

We are still waiting for those SPF 50+ rules. While we no longer see claims like “sweat proof” and “waterproof” on sunscreen (the FDA said they were too far-reaching), the agency’s proposed regulation that would cap SPF numbers at 50+ hasn’t kicked in yet. In 2011, the FDA stated that anything higher than that number is “inherently misleading.” In this year’s report, the Environmental Working Group found that 61 sunscreen products had an SPF higher than 50, as opposed to just 10 products in 2007. (We’ve reported about sunscreen companies’ misleading claims in the past, and my colleague Kiera Butler wrote about some ingredients that may actually speed up the development of skin cancer.)

Spray-on sunscreen may offer less protection. Because  spray-on sunscreens evaporate quickly, Lunder said, it’s hard to tell if you’ve covered your whole body.

“We think, ‘I can get it on my kids faster,'” she said. “But that really doesn’t hold up in the real world, there’s evidence that they aren’t using as much and aren’t getting that thickness on their skin.” 

The important thing to remember, the group says, is that sunscreen alone won’t do the job, and that we tend to give it more importance than we should. Hats, sunglasses, time in the shade and other essentials are also key for protecting against sun damage.

Here’s is the group’s list of the best and worst sunscreens of 2016:

(In no particular order)

The Best Beach and Sport sunscreens

The organization rated sunscreens from 1 to 10 (products with 1’s were excellent and ones with 10’s were the worst). Just over 60 brands received a score of 1 or 2. These were designated “low hazard” for their ingredient list and because they had a good balance of SPF and UVA protection. Find the full list here.

  • All Good Sunscreen and Sunstick, SPF 30 and 50
  • All Terrain Aqua and TerraSport Sunscreens, SPF 30
  • Babo Botanicals Clear Zinc Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • Badger Sunscreen Cream and Lotion, SPF 25, 30, and 35
  • Bare Belly Organics, SPF 34
  • Beauty Without Cruelty, SPF 30
  • Kiss My Face Organics Mineral Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • Nature’s Gate Face Sunscreen, SPF 25
  • Tropical Sands Sunscreen and Facestick, SPF 30
  • Releve Organic Skincare, SPF 20
  • Star Naturals Sunscreen Stick, SPF 25

The Best for Kids

  • Adorable Baby Sunscreen lotion, SPF 30
  • All Good Kid’s Sunscreen, SPF 33
  • All Terrain KidSport Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 30
  • ATTITUDE Little Ones 100% Mineral Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • BabyHampton Beach Bum Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • COOLA Suncare Baby Mineral Sunscreen, unscented moisturizer, SPF 50.
  • Belly Button & Babies Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 30.
  • Blue Lizard Australian Sunscreen, SPF 35.
  • BurnOut Kids Physical Sunscreen, SPF 35
  • California Baby Super Sensitive Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • Goddess Garden Kids Sport Natural Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 30
  • Jersey Kids Mineral Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 30
  • Kiss My Face Organics Kids Mineral Sunscreen, SPF 30
  • Nurture My Body Baby Organic Sunscreen, SPF 32
  • Substance Baby Natural Sun Care Creme, SPF 30
  • Sunology Natural Sunscreen, Kids, SPF 50
  • Sunumbra Sunkids Natural Sunscreen, SPF 40
  • Thinksport for Kids Sunscreen, SPF 50
  • TruKid Sunny Days Sport Sunscreen, SPF 30

The Worst for Kids

On the 1 to 10 scale, the below products scored a 7 or higher (with 10 being the worst) because they made high SPF claims or had higher amounts of the additives oxybenzone and retinyl palmitate.

  • Banana Boat Kids Max Protect & Play Sunscreen Lotion, SPF 100**
  • Coppertone Water Babies Sunscreen Stick, Wacky Foam, and Sunscreen lotion, SPF 55
  • CVS Baby Sunstick Sunscreen and Spray, SPF 55
  • Equate Kids Sunscreen Stick, SPF 55
  • Hampton Sun Continuous Mist Sunscreen For Kids, SPF 70
  • Neutrogena Wet Skin Kids Sunscreen Spray and Stick products, SPF 70
  • Up & Up Kids Sunscreen Stick, SPF 55

**This was the only product that got a 10.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate