Should you stop using chemical sunscreen?

Paul Gregory SaladinoMD · physician and animal-based nutrition creator

Yes. Chemical filters are absorbed systemically at levels far above the FDA's own threshold and disrupt the endocrine system; use a physical zinc-oxide barrier and build sun tolerance instead.

What it rests onHe cites the FDA maximal-usage trial in which a single application to 75% of the body produced blood concentrations up to 258.1 ng/ml for oxybenzone against an FDA safety threshold of 0.5 ng/ml (PMID: 31961417), endocrine-disruption evidence (PMID: 40222174), and the European Commission's conclusion that oxybenzone and homosalate are not safe at commonly used concentrations. He separately argues dietary linoleic acid rather than sunlight drives modern skin cancer rates.

Leslie BaumannMD · dermatologist, cosmetic dermatology and appearance medicine

No. Absorption is not harm, and the most controversial sunscreen still beats no sunscreen. She nonetheless prefers mineral filters, and would most avoid oxybenzone.

What it rests onA dermatologist reporting the same FDA work and reading it differently: 'just because an ingredient is absorbed into the bloodstream does not necessarily mean that it is harmful or unsafe', the finding 'supported the need for additional research' rather than proving danger, and 'even the most controversial sunscreens are still better than using no sunscreen at all'. She treats UV damage as the settled harm against which every ingredient concern is weighed, then lands on 'play it safe and choose a mineral sunscreen', naming oxybenzone as her own concern especially in pregnancy and breastfeeding.