In these months that bring us closer to summer, sun protection returns to being one of the most important products to always have with us, especially if we have children. Their skin, in fact, is thinner, more sensitive and still developing, which means that it burns more easily and that the damage caused by UV rays can be more significant and long-lasting than that of adults.
It’s not just about avoiding rashes after a day at the beach or in the park. Repeated and unprotected exposures during childhood are one of the factors that, according to the scientific community, increase the risk of skin problems in the long term. This is why sunscreen is a prevention tool in all respects.
But which one to choose? Precisely to better understand what is hidden inside the products intended for the little ones, The Lifesaver carried out a comparison of 11 sunscreens for children (in milk, cream or spray). Ingredients, UV filters and substances considered critical from a health and environmental impact point of view were analysed.
The results? As many as six products do not reach the sufficiency mark, confirming important differences between the various formulations which, at least on paper, all promise the same thing: effective protection and maximum delicacy.
What the test found
First the experts of Lifesaver recall the differences between UV filters, which are essentially divided into two broad categories: mineral (or physical) and chemical.
Physical filters, such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, remain on the surface of the skin and reflect the sun’s rays like a “screen.” They are often considered more delicate, especially for sensitive skin, because they do not penetrate the epidermis. In the sample analyzed, however, this type is almost absent: it only appears in a Chicco brand product. In this case the mineral filters are not in nanometric form, therefore with particles that are too small to cross the skin barrier.
Even these ingredients, however, are not without environmental problems: zinc oxide is considered toxic to aquatic organisms, while titanium dioxide still raises ecotoxicological issues and, as a food additive, has been subject to restrictions at European level.
Most of the sunscreens analyzed instead use chemical filters, molecules that absorb UV rays, transforming them into heat. They are very popular because they allow lighter textures, less white effect on the skin and are often easier to apply, a practical advantage especially with children.
In the test, one to five chemical filters were detected per product. However, not all of them have the same safety profile. Some substances are currently under scientific observation for possible endocrine interference effects, i.e. the ability to influence the hormonal system, which is particularly delicate in developmental age.
Among the molecules considered most critical is, for example, ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate, present in one of the products analyzed and reported for its controversial profile.
In addition to UV filters, the judgment on sunscreens also depends on a series of accessory substances, often used to preserve the product, improve its texture or perfume. And this is precisely where many products have lost points.
One of the most penalizing ingredients is phenoxyethanol, found in 5 sunscreens, an antimicrobial preservative used to prevent the proliferation of bacteria and mold. Although authorized in cosmetics, it is at the center of debate due to its potential irritant and sensitizing effect, especially in products intended for children.
Another family of substances under observation is that of PEGs (polyethylene glycols), derivatives of petrochemical processing. Their function is to improve the consistency and promote the penetration of the active ingredients, but this very characteristic can increase the permeability of the skin, making it easier to absorb even unwanted substances. It was found in 2 solars.
No less important is the presence of perfumes, often inserted to make the product more pleasant but considered unnecessary in children’s cosmetics, where they can increase the risk of allergies.
Finally, compounds such as EDTA, used as a chelator, were also detected. While it has a useful technological function, it is considered problematic for the environment because it can contribute to the dispersion of metals in water.
The general picture in the end is clear: all sunscreens protect from UV rays, but not all do so with truly “clean” formulations.
The main difference between the various sun creams therefore lies not only in the SPF, which in children’s products is almost always high (SPF 50 or 50+), but in the quality of the overall formulation: type of filters, presence of controversial preservatives, perfumes and other non-essential ingredients.
Children’s sunscreens worse than the test
From the overall analysis of the 11 children’s sun creams examined, 6 obtained insufficient or mediocre ratings, mainly due to the combination of controversial chemical filters and the presence of accessory ingredients that are not suitable for delicate skin.
In particular, these 3 products showed the most critical issues:
La Roche-Posay Dermo-Pediatrics Lotion SPF 50+
Despite a good protective capacity, the formulation contains several chemical filters and retains the use of phenoxyethanol and PEG (specifically PEG-8 laurate), as well as the presence of EDTA. Score 4.7
Eucerin Sensitive Protect Kids SPF 50+
The formulation uses a large number of chemical filters and includes several accessory ingredients reported as non-ideal, including EDTA and other substances functional to the texture of the product. Also in this case the score is reduced for the overall composition rather than for the shielding effectiveness. Score 4
Bottega Verde Sol Bimbo SPF 50+
Also in this case there is a combination of several chemical filters, including ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate which we talked about above, as a possible endocrine disruptor. Phenoxyethanol and EDTA are present, while there is no PEG. The final evaluation is affected precisely by the presence of controversial substances in the filtering and preservative system. Score 3
For complete test results and to learn about the best products, refer to the May issue of Lifesaver.
As you may have understood, choosing a sunscreen for children not only means avoiding sunburn in the short term, but also reducing exposure to potentially problematic substances in a particularly delicate phase of life.
The test highlights how, behind very similar labels, important differences can hide. And how reading the INCI, often complex for those who are not experts in the field, remains one of the most useful tools for orienting oneself in an increasingly crowded market.
