Want to Kill A Coral Reef? Go Swimming With Sunscreen, Study Says

John Keefer

Devilish Rogue
Aug 12, 2013
630
0
0
Want to Kill A Coral Reef? Go Swimming With Sunscreen, Study Says



If you like to pile on the sunscreen at the beach to protect yourself against cancer, a new study says you should think twice about going into the water with it on.

Putting sunscreen on at the beach is as necessary as staying hydrated and cleaning up after yourself before you leave, unless you are into the pain of sunburn. But if you use sunscreen, read on about the potential ramifications of going into the surf.

A new study [http://www.researchgate.net/publication/283077578_Toxicopathological_Effects_of_the_Sunscreen_UV_Filter_Oxybenzone_%28Benzophenone-3%29_on_Coral_Planulae_and_Cultured_Primary_Cells_and_Its_Environmental_Contamination_in_Hawaii_and_the_U.S._Virgin_Islands] released earlier this week suggests that even one drop of sunscreen could hurt the coral reefs. With that in mind, the study says that more than 14,000 tons of the stuff wind up in the reefs of the world each year. Well, just the ingredient oxybenzone is the problem.

"The use of oxybenzone-containing products needs to be seriously deliberated in islands and areas where coral reef conservation is a critical issue," said team leader and co-author of the report Craig Downs, executive director and researcher of the non-profit scientific organization Haereticus Environmental Laboratory in Virginia. "We have lost at least 80 percent of the coral reefs in the Caribbean. Any small effort to reduce oxybenzone pollution could mean that a coral reef survives a long, hot summer, or that a degraded area recovers. Everyone wants to build coral nurseries for reef restoration, but this will achieve little if the factors that originally killed off the reef remain or intensify in the environment."

Apparently, the oxybenzone not only kills coral, but can deform the DNA of the creature [https://today.ucf.edu/lathering-up-with-sunscreen-may-protect-against-cancer-killing-coral-reefs-worldwide/] so that it cannot form properly.

The study happened as a coincidence, when several members of the team met at Trunk Bay in the Caribbean, and a local merchant told them that tourists left behind "a long oil slick."

And the beach is not the only way that sunscreen gets into the oceans. "The most direct evidence we have is from beaches with a large amount of people in the water," John Fauth, an associate professor of biology at the University of Central Florida in Orlando and member of the international team, told the Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/10/20/after-sunscreen-protects-humans-it-massacres-coral-reefs/]. "But another way is through the wastewater streams. People come inside and step into the shower. People forget it goes somewhere."

Most popular brands of sunscreen include oxybenzone, but there are several products that work just as well without the damaging ingredient. The non-profit organization Environmental Working Group provides a list [http://www.ewg.org/2015sunscreen/best-sunscreens/best-beach-sport-sunscreens/] of non-offending products.

"This study raises our awareness of a seldom-realized threat to the health of our reef life ... chemicals in the sunscreen products visitors and residents wear are toxic to young corals," said Pat Lindquist, executive director of the Napili Bay and Beach Foundation in Maui. "This knowledge is critical to us as we consider actions to mitigate threats or improve on current practices."

Source: University of Central Florida [http://www.researchgate.net/publication/283077578_Toxicopathological_Effects_of_the_Sunscreen_UV_Filter_Oxybenzone_%28Benzophenone-3%29_on_Coral_Planulae_and_Cultured_Primary_Cells_and_Its_Environmental_Contamination_in_Hawaii_and_the_U.S._Virgin_Islands]









Permalink
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
albino boo said:
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
That's what I was going to mention...entering the water without sunscreen is a pretty bad idea. Hopefully that list of sunscreen that's safe for the coral has some waterproof brands in it.
 

John Keefer

Devilish Rogue
Aug 12, 2013
630
0
0
albino boo said:
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
Fair enough. Modified the lead paragraph.
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
albino boo said:
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
Luckily exposure to uv radiation doesn't cause skin cancer. Over exposure to it does. Walking around in the sun without sunscreen is perfectly safe as long as you consider how long you are exposed and how strong the sun is while you're at it. You are more likely to get the bad kind of uv during mornings or evenings and less during noon. Keep things like this in mind and we can preserve aquatic life and remove sunscreen and still avoid cancer.

John Keefer said:
Apparently, the oxybenzone not only kills coral, but can deform the DNA of the creature so that it cannot form properly.
OK, can you explain this? Does the DNA deformation prevent the DNA from reaching a stable orientation? Does it disrupt developement of the coral? Does it affect DNA replication and thus reproduction? Does it intercalate with DNA? Does it form nicks? Does it form clumps? Does it straighten? This sentence says nothing, it would be better if you just said it causes DNA damage rather than saying some vague effect of it. (I checked it up though, it does affect replication.)

I checked the source article and it did not mention DNA once so I am also curious why you wouldn't list the source you actually used.

If you're going to write science news, do it right.
 

chadachada123

New member
Jan 17, 2011
2,310
0
0
I always thought it was the norm to not wear sunscreen if you planned on swimming in a natural body of water, honestly. The minimal increase in cancer risk doesn't mean much to me if the alternative is polluting the water.
 

chadachada123

New member
Jan 17, 2011
2,310
0
0
Yopaz said:
John Keefer said:
Apparently, the oxybenzone not only kills coral, but can deform the DNA of the creature so that it cannot form properly.
OK, can you explain this? Does the DNA deformation prevent the DNA from reaching a stable orientation? Does it disrupt developement of the coral? Does it affect DNA replication and thus reproduction? Does it intercalate with DNA? Does it form nicks? Does it form clumps? Does it straighten? This sentence says nothing, it would be better if you just said it causes DNA damage rather than saying some vague effect of it. (I checked it up though, it does affect replication.)

I checked the source article and it did not mention DNA once so I am also curious why you wouldn't list the source you actually used.

If you're going to write science news, do it right.
I'm no biologist (yet), but I'm pretty sure the answer you want is definitely in the OP, under the link that says "new study." Below is the main part about DNA, but this chemical, according to the published study, does other stuff to it too.

Oxybenzone is a genotoxicant to corals, exhibiting a positive relationship between DNA-AP lesions and increasing oxybenzone concentrations.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Fortunately, I do not engage in battle with this creature called "sun," so I do not need protection. I am very reef-friendly.

TheRundownRabbit said:
We can use this to create the lamest Captain Planet villain ever.
Even worse than the guy whose master plan was to sneak into houses and leave the lights on?
 

John Keefer

Devilish Rogue
Aug 12, 2013
630
0
0
Yopaz said:
John Keefer said:
Apparently, the oxybenzone not only kills coral, but can deform the DNA of the creature so that it cannot form properly.
OK, can you explain this? Does the DNA deformation prevent the DNA from reaching a stable orientation? Does it disrupt developement of the coral? Does it affect DNA replication and thus reproduction? Does it intercalate with DNA? Does it form nicks? Does it form clumps? Does it straighten? This sentence says nothing, it would be better if you just said it causes DNA damage rather than saying some vague effect of it. (I checked it up though, it does affect replication.)

I checked the source article and it did not mention DNA once so I am also curious why you wouldn't list the source you actually used.

If you're going to write science news, do it right.
Apologies, it was in a UCF article. There was a bad link in the story making it not show properly. I fixed it and also added it to the source. The appropriate paragraph from the UCF piece for my comment was #3: The chemical not only kills the coral, it causes DNA damage in adults and deforms the DNA in coral in the larval stage, making it unlikely they can develop properly. The highest concentrations of oxybenzone were found in reefs most popular with tourists.
 

Fdzzaigl

New member
Mar 31, 2010
822
0
0
albino boo said:
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
A good alternative is to use a UV-protective rash guard when going out swimming. They offer better protection than sunscreen, don't cost much and surfers use them too, so not too dorky either.

It's unsettling how many things we've changed in nature without really even realising. For example: a few years back there was a study that showed how female contraceptives were causing tons of mutations in fish because of the hormones in human urines which were flowing to the ocean.
Sadly I don't think we can actually stop changing shit.

Still, as I diver I'll definitely think about finding some of the sunscreen without that component.
 

TigerLlilly

New member
Oct 25, 2015
1
0
0
albino boo said:
I don't think it's great idea for the Escapist to suggest that wiping sunscreen off before going into the water is a good idea. UV radiation can penetrate water to the depth of 200m. Removing sunscreen before entering the water will increase your chance of getting skin cancer. Furthermore any exposed flesh above the water will also get UV reflected from the surface increasing your exposure to UV by about 30% than just sitting on the beach.
Despite sunscreen you could very easily just wear a T-Shirt or Shirts created especially to wear in water. In Australia where UV is very high many people are using shirts even in swimming pools. For diving and swimming for a long time wearing a shirt keeps you even warmer. As well, shirts are even better in protecting you from the sun than any sun screen.
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
chadachada123 said:
I'm no biologist (yet), but I'm pretty sure the answer you want is definitely in the OP, under the link that says "new study." Below is the main part about DNA, but this chemical, according to the published study, does other stuff to it too.

Oxybenzone is a genotoxicant to corals, exhibiting a positive relationship between DNA-AP lesions and increasing oxybenzone concentrations.
That was not listed among the sources when I posted (still isn't), but thanks for directing me to it. If you're planning to be a biologist (guessing based on your (yet)) I welcome you to the field.

John Keefer said:
Apologies, it was in a UCF article. There was a bad link in the story making it not show properly. I fixed it and also added it to the source. The appropriate paragraph from the UCF piece for my comment was #3: The chemical not only kills the coral, it causes DNA damage in adults and deforms the DNA in coral in the larval stage, making it unlikely they can develop properly. The highest concentrations of oxybenzone were found in reefs most popular with tourists.
Cool, thanks. Sorry if I come across as rude. The developmental issues is not strictly due to DNA damage (although sufficient DNA damage would indeed be lethal), but rather because it function as an endocrine disruptor, making the corals unable to form the skeletal structures. As I said, it's better to keep it simple and understand everything rather than to misunderstand something and say something incorrect.
I come across too much bad reporting in science. You should also post the peer-reviewed article in the list of sources as secondary sources generally focus on different aspects of a study than what people educated in the field might.
 

John Keefer

Devilish Rogue
Aug 12, 2013
630
0
0
Yopaz said:
John Keefer said:
Apologies, it was in a UCF article. There was a bad link in the story making it not show properly. I fixed it and also added it to the source. The appropriate paragraph from the UCF piece for my comment was #3: The chemical not only kills the coral, it causes DNA damage in adults and deforms the DNA in coral in the larval stage, making it unlikely they can develop properly. The highest concentrations of oxybenzone were found in reefs most popular with tourists.
I come across too much bad reporting in science. You should also post the peer-reviewed article in the list of sources as secondary sources generally focus on different aspects of a study than what people educated in the field might.
Added and fixed. I love reporting science, but am no expert in the field. I covered NASA for 5 years for the newspaper, and was in newspapers for 14 years before joining the games industry. I try hard not to be a bad reporter ;)
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
John Keefer said:
Yopaz said:
John Keefer said:
Apologies, it was in a UCF article. There was a bad link in the story making it not show properly. I fixed it and also added it to the source. The appropriate paragraph from the UCF piece for my comment was #3: The chemical not only kills the coral, it causes DNA damage in adults and deforms the DNA in coral in the larval stage, making it unlikely they can develop properly. The highest concentrations of oxybenzone were found in reefs most popular with tourists.
I come across too much bad reporting in science. You should also post the peer-reviewed article in the list of sources as secondary sources generally focus on different aspects of a study than what people educated in the field might.
Added and fixed. I love reporting science, but am no expert in the field. I covered NASA for 5 years for the newspaper, and was in newspapers for 14 years before joining the games industry. I try hard not to be a bad reporter ;)
You make a solid effort unlike many. Most reporters do a poor job of it, you did include sources for your main article, few news sites outside specialized ones (which often are quite bad at reporting the actual facts) do that. I'm just being picky as I like to know the mechanisms. Thanks for your efforts :)
 

Lightspeaker

New member
Dec 31, 2011
934
0
0
Yopaz said:
Luckily exposure to uv radiation doesn't cause skin cancer. Over exposure to it does.
Strictly speaking any amount of radiation exposure could cause cancer, albeit its very, very unlikely with low doses. Its down to random chance, with increasing amounts of radiation increasing the likelihood.


On topic: A lot of our coral reefs are very, very badly screwed up. I had the privilege to do conservation research on what are probably the best preserved reefs in the world in Indonesia and even then there were dead areas and huge holes in the coral where locals had been fishing with explosives. Other parts of the world are much worse, a big part of that being because of over-tourism and how careless people can be. One of the things banned during our work was diving gloves. Simply because wearing gloves makes people more likely to poke and touch things.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
I think there are better ways to preserve coral reefs, like not swimming near them at all, because they can lead to human injury in the first place. Plus, there's the fishmen and the deep ones...
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
Lightspeaker said:
Yopaz said:
Luckily exposure to uv radiation doesn't cause skin cancer. Over exposure to it does.
Strictly speaking any amount of radiation exposure could cause cancer, albeit its very, very unlikely with low doses. Its down to random chance, with increasing amounts of radiation increasing the likelihood.
Fair point I guess, but the same could be said for cell division, breathing air, oxidative metabolism, aging and DNA damage from background radiation. My point is that simply getting some uv radiation isn't dangerous and the whole "Wear sunscreen or get cancer" schtick seems more like spreading fear amongst those who don't know better.


On topic: A lot of our coral reefs are very, very badly screwed up. I had the privilege to do conservation research on what are probably the best preserved reefs in the world in Indonesia and even then there were dead areas and huge holes in the coral where locals had been fishing with explosives. Other parts of the world are much worse, a big part of that being because of over-tourism and how careless people can be. One of the things banned during our work was diving gloves. Simply because wearing gloves makes people more likely to poke and touch things.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, interesting to hear from someone with more intimate knowledge.