Sunscreen makers sued for misleading health claims

http://www.reutershealth.com/en/index.html



Really, really good way to combat false health claims..........

Or your case has the potential to win a lot of money/prestige FOR your lawyers.

There's no money or prestige involved in taking out the snake-oil peddlers.

Using fraud statutes is another way. But lawsuits will catch the big ones. If false advertising of a product is a really big problem, with lots of people believing it and buying the product, this will be reflected in the balance sheet of a company. If there is a small fly by night operation that makes false claims, and few people actually buy the product, it is much less of a public health issue. In those cases, the state attorney general can determine whether to prosecute using fraud statutes.

But, this can deter the offenders that are really successful at fraud, thus impacting many consumers.

or other places our fraud laws cannot reach. Those operations can get to be huge yet are totally immune from having to pay for damages they cause.

Way to get around all kinds of laws..........I wonder if sunscreens are made in Mexico.

Over exposure to the sun, more specifically BURNS, can cause cancer. Otherwise all the cave dwellers out hunting and gathering all day would have all died from skin cancer and we would fail to be.

We need sun. Vitamin D is not a vitamin, but a hormonal pre-cursor which affects all kinds of systems in our body, most importantly our immune systems.

Read: Naked at Noon

I thought SADD was a load of bunk to sell sun lamps till I moved to OH from very very south and lo and behold--every winter I feel it. And every spring (beams at the bright windows) lil old prefers-to-stay-fishcolored gothy me goes out and BASKS in the fantastic sun. I can feel myself getting, better, in some indefinable way, as the sunlight each day becomes brighter and more "normal"

I got burned plenty getting FORCED to go to the beach all day both weekend days for most of my childhood. I hated sand, ocean-filled-with-stinging-jerk-wildlife, and sun, but I had no choice. I've had several odd little moles/things removed thus far. Too much of ANYTHING is bad, I guess.

I heard someone who said he tried everything for depression and fatigue and nothing worked. Finally his mainstream doctor told him to go to a tanning bed twice a week. He does it for seven minutes each time--not really enough to make a big difference in the color of his skin, but it has transformed his life. Others use light boxes, etc.

for not hurting anyone else, of course. : ) How lovely that something so simple would do that after probably tons of expensive (and dangerous) pharmaceuticals....

And I do wonder about sunscreens being effective against one type of exposure, and not another......Maybe it spawns a "light" imbalance. We don't know everything, after all, and most living organisms have evolved to handle the entire spectrum of light, not just the part the sunscreens allow through.

I used to be one of those that bought the claim that you had to protect all exposed skin 100% of the time at all times during daylight! I wore hats, long sleeved shirts, long pants in the Summer, as well as dousing myself in SPF 30 all the time. Come to find out as I have educated myself that a little sun exposure is good for you. It can help with everything from helping weight loss to osteoporisis to alleviating skin conditions like eczema and psoriasis. Do I bake in the sun? No, of course not. That is foolish. But I think a lot of people have been convinced that they need to not allow themselves exposure to a single ray of sunshine. Not getting any at all is not good. We need the sunlight for our health. A little exposure---about 10-15 minutes a day is good for the health. Its overexposure that is bad.

As for those cave dwellers... most of them died of other causes long before skin cancer would have been a concern for most of them.

For example, water-borne bacteria that cause diarhea.

It is unlikely that of all the things that could kill them, neolithic man would have had a serious problem with skin cancer.

But if skin cancer was a complete non-issue, we would all be albinos.

wait unitl people fall prey to them, becoming sick or die because of them, and then sue?

Umm. Doesn't sound so great to me.

Do you have any statistics on that? Generally it is just stuff that says it will help something and then it doesn't. People go on and get other treatments and then decide to waste their money on something for which there is a misleading ad and get no benefit.

Now, the sunscreen is in a whole other ballpark because it is a HUGE industry, affecting probably tens of millions of people, who may be falsely led to believe that sunscreen protects them from skin cancer. Since they believe that, they forego other measures to avoid sun exposure, like sitting under an umbrella or a tree. There is no telling how many people have fallen victim to this fraud, and got skin cancer as a result. This is a public health issue of the HIGHEST order.

Some radio ad for some supplement that implies it cures fatigue is of zero concern compared to the implications of something this huge.

As I said, this is ONE way to combat false health claims. Another is for the state attorney general to bring suit.

Note: editied for typos

let the snake oil salesman have their day, so they can skip town with the money later. Consequences for other be damned.

Sorry, but consumers deserve better than to go back to the 1800s pure laissez faire mode of health care.

Fraud is against the law. I am saying--ENFORCE THE LAW!! *If* the sunscreen makers committed fraud, causing large numbers of people to get cancer that otherwise would not have (this would need to be proven in court), I feel that criminal fraud statutes should be brought against the company and individuals.

Likewise, if some supplement is falsely advertised as treating some condition, and ultimately causes many people to become ill, particularly with something as life threatenting as melanoma, then I feel criminal fraud charges should be brought.

Let's enforce the laws we have, and get the people that are causing the MOST health damage to the citizens.

It doesn't actually change the reality of your dangerous stance on this issue, but you did a good job of trying to say green is purple. I congratulate you on that. Still, you continue to argue for snake oil salesmen and against the safety of consumers. Spin it any way you want. That is the end result of your stance. People get hurt, and there is no justifiable reason for it.

Don't you think our law enforcement resources should be allocated to the places that cause the most harm and where it is easiest to prove the crime? Anyone who uses fraudulent advertising on something that harms people physically should be held responsible CRIMINALLY. I think that is a tough stance. And I don't care what it is--herbal, pharmaceutical, or cosmetic.

For worthless stuff that is overhyped but not harmful--aack, well, it is like, do we go after someone who steals pens and paperclips from the company or do we try to get Ken Lay? We probably should at least investigate the possiblity of someone being criminally liable for the Vioxx scandle, as an example, since evidence *seemed* to be purposefully kept out of the studies. I don't really know enough to know the merits of the case, but there are a lot of people dead now because they were not told the risks. So someone should look into it. Again, this is not an alternative vs. allopathic thing AT ALL. The same standards should apply to both.

I know you will, even though you know perfectly well what I'm talking about.

(Another fine job of spinning your real stance by avoiding some big parts of the story, and by acting as if you haven't continued to argue against consumer protection elsewhere, by the way. Sorry, but the fact that you use the term allopathic medicine shows what's underneath it all.)

I always thought that burning showed significant damage and that darkening of the skin was a reaction to wild damage. If you have slathered your body with high SPF sunscreen and don't burn and perhaps not even darken, are you being significant damaged enough to increase your chances of skin cancer?
I've only burned once using high SPF sunscreen. It was on an organized spring break trip in March to Florida (I live in WI). We had to check of our hotel early and spend from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on the beach. It was the first time that I wore a revealing bikini. I burned parts that had never seen sunlight before. I knew the behavior was risky and should have put on more normal clothing if I had to sit out there the whole time.
The biggest mistake that I see with people with sunscreen is not putting it on before sun exposure or reapplying it often when wet or excessive sweating. They should also be more careful the first time that they are exposed for significant periods of time or go on vacations during the winter in cold climates to warm climates.

Our ancestors would have had a laugh!

I almost never use sunscreen. When the weather starts heating up, I slowly soak up around 15 minutes a day, gradually develop a tan over a couple of weeks. Once my skin has a good tan built, I can stay out for a couple of hours if need be.

I burn extremely easily on sunny summer days. Sunscreen sure as hell works or I wouldn't be going outside much in the summer.

Everytime (which doesn't happen anymore) I have forgotten to wear sunscreen in a situation that I would be exposed to sun for a significant period of time in the late spring or summer, I have become crispy and miserable later, especially exposed areas that normally wouldn't get sun, like my shoulders. Everytime, except the case I noted above, that I have worn sufficient sunscreen I have not burned at all.

However, I am pretty sure it allows through the rays that cause melanoma--even without a burn.