So, what are the popular brands that meet the criteria?
Kinda missing the most important piece of information in this article.
“…still, I trust their reviews on self published books”
That joke would still work just fine if you omitted the “self published” part.
I rate sunscreens based on objective standards, like flavor.
Wrapping yourself in aluminum foil would make for a very effective sunscreen.
Should it be shocking to learn that there are other considerations that take priority for many shoppers?
Why do you care how popular your sunscreen is?
Popularity is a useful vector when seeking value.
Reminds me of:
Sunscreen basics, apply and apply often. It’s the standard I strictly adhere to. As for the best on the market, go back to the basics, apply and…
Given the powerful coconut aroma given off by assorted brands, you may have something there.
My wife’s research resulted in us using Badger for our kids. SPF 30, water-resistant for 40 minutes, UVA and UVB protective. Plus cruelty-free, organic, biodegradable, all that shit.
But I hate it. Greasy and stinky as fuck. I’m gonna roast in a living cancerous hell, no doubt, but I won’t use it on me. I’d sooner stay indoors. I try to have my wife apply it to our kids just so I don’t have to touch it. (But I will grumblingly put it on them if she’s not available to do so.)
I’ve got really sensitive skin and I can’t stand greasy sunscreen. As a consumer that is probably the most important criteria to me, although I do make sure I’m buying SPF 30+. I would usually get water resistant sunscreen as well, although that is usually greasier, and if I’m not planning on swimming and I can reapply it, I might sacrifice that.
I’m not really clear on what this study is supposed to show. To me it shows that the researchers are kind of dumb robots who are discovering for the first time that consumers value products for a variety of reasons beyond their most basic stated function.
For God’s sake, nobody tell them about watches. They’ll be all like “The watch that synced automatically with the atomic clock and was therefore the most effective watch was really unpopular. What the fuck is up with you people???!!!”
Oddly, most don’t taste like coconut. They’re flavored with lies.
The picture of that kid they used in the article looks like a young Alfred E Newman of MAD magazine fame. Does that mean if you smear on the wrong flavor of sunblock you’re gonna end up looking like Alfred? I kinda take the “What Me Worry?” approach to the whole thing. I never knew I was supposed to worry about this until I was middle-aged. I’m just gonna follow Alfred’s wisdom and not worry too much. I’m headed for the Amazon River in August. I damn sure don’t want to walk around in the jungle smelling like some bug’s favorite snack.
I use a zinc oxide/titanium oxide sunscreen with SPF 40. It’s a physical blocker, rather than a chemical one (but you don’t have to spread it thick like zinc oxide of decades ago). It’s greasy, but it has no scent.
Wish I’d had this as a kid (and used it): red hair, loved to swim, lived in Hawaii for a few years. Sigh.
Is it? See headline.
Thanks for the tip but does it make you smell like snack time to bugs? My kids are going to high altitudes (Cuzco) and it’s super easy to get burned there. I’m heading straight to the jungle myself. It’s far more civilized there.
Speaking as someone who works in the Australian outdoors, but who prefers not to have to slather myself with sunscreen five times per day: long-sleeved shirt and a broad-brimmed hat.
Cheaper, non-greasy, and probably healthier in the long run.
Hawaii resident here, so this is a constant concern. One problem in the US is that the best UVA screening ingredients are not FDA-approved in products here. For example, in many European sunscreens you will find Mexoryl XL, which is a great UVA block. US versions contain the inferior Mexoryl SX (or “mexoryl technology”, good grief). The only really good UVA block approved for use in the US is zinc in suspension, which can be greasy and chalky.
If you can get European sunscreen, the L’Oreal Ombrelle absorbs quickly and works well. Just avoid the US version. When we run out of Euro-sunscreen we like the Neutrogena Ultra Sheer, which isn’t as good/needs frequent reapplication but doesn’t stink and absorbs OK.
To be fair, why would the reviews focus on the “effectiveness” (which here just seems to be a proxy for SPF) when it’s right there in the title? “5 stars because it says it’s SPF 40, like it says” doesn’t make much sense, any more than “5 stars because this ‘calcium-enriched juice’ is calcium enriched,” or “5 stars because it’s a toothbrush, and people should brush their teeth.”
Reviews are for the facets of a product that aren’t immediately obvious from the title.