Welcome to a new episode of Truth or Scare.

歡迎收看新一期《真相或驚嚇》。

The claim on this episode is that sunscreen is harmful because it contains chemicals absorbed into your bloodstream that are linked to cancer and other health problems.

這一集的說法是，防晒霜有害，因為它含有的化學物質會被吸收到血液中，而這些化學物質與癌症和其他健康問題有關。

Some even go further, arguing that sunscreen is more dangerous than actual sun exposure.

有些人甚至更進一步，認為防晒霜比實際暴露在陽光下更危險。

Do these claims hold any water?

這些說法站得住腳嗎？

Let's get into it.

讓我們開始吧。

Skepticism of sunscreen isn't new, but it's really taken off in the last few years.

對防晒霜持懷疑態度並不是什麼新鮮事，但在過去幾年中，這種懷疑態度確實有所抬頭。

Some wellness influencers and celebrities have gone as far as saying that there's no proof that excess sun exposure is even harmful, or have argued that it's actually good for you and that covering up in any way prevents us from reaping its health benefits.

一些健康影響者和名人甚至說，沒有證據表明過多的陽光照射會對人體有害，或者認為陽光照射實際上對人體有益，任何遮蓋都會妨礙我們獲得健康益處。

Now, there's a lot to say about that, but I'd like to focus on the more pervasive argument first, that sunscreen is inherently unhealthy for us.

關於這一點，我們有很多話要說，但我想先重點談談更普遍的說法，即防晒霜本質上對我們是不健康的。

When people say this, they're primarily talking about chemical sunscreen because there's actually two types.

當人們這麼說時，他們主要是在說化學防晒霜，因為實際上有兩種類型。

One, chemical sunscreens, which work by absorbing cancer-causing UV rays from the sun and making them harmless.

其一，化學防晒霜，它的作用是吸收陽光中致癌的紫外線，使其無害。

These sunscreens are easy to rub in and dry invisibly.

這些防晒霜很容易塗抹，幹了也看不出來。

Then there's mineral sunscreens, which create a physical barrier in your skin to deflect those UV rays.

礦物防晒霜能在皮膚中形成物理屏障，抵禦紫外線。

These lotions are typically thicker and tend to leave behind white residue.

這些乳液通常較濃稠，容易留下白色殘留物。

Naysayers single out, very specifically, chemical sunscreens because they're more likely to be absorbed through the skin.

反對者特別指出化學防晒霜，因為它們更容易被皮膚吸收。

And it is true that the active ingredients in chemical sunscreen, called filters, can be absorbed into the blood.

的確，化學防晒霜中的活性成分（稱為過濾劑）可以被血液吸收。

There's strong evidence of this from two FDA studies, which found that six chemical UV filters entered the blood and stayed there for days.

美國食品和藥物管理局的兩項研究有力地證明了這一點，研究發現，六種化學紫外線過濾劑會進入血液，並在血液中停留數天。

Some of these filters, including oxybenzone, have been linked to hormone disruption and altered kidney function.

其中一些過濾器（包括氧苯酮）與荷爾蒙紊亂和腎功能改變有關。

Thus far, those effects have been found in animal research and in the most commonly cited of those research articles.

迄今為止，這些影響都是在動物研究和最常被引用的研究文章中發現的。

Rats consumed large quantities of oxybenzone in food.

大鼠從食物中攝入了大量羥苯甲酯。

And to reach that same level through sunscreen exposure, you'd need to apply it all over your body every day for 30 years.

而要想通過防晒霜達到同樣的水準，你需要每天在全身塗抹防晒霜，持續 30 年。

But let's look at another filter, octocrylene.

但讓我們來看看另一種過濾器--辛烯。

When used in sunscreen, it naturally degrades into benzophenone, a chemical suspected to be carcinogenic.

當用於防晒霜時，它會自然降解為二苯甲酮，這是一種疑似致癌的化學物質。

In one study, researchers tested 16 different octocrylene based sunscreens and found benzophenone in all of them.

在一項研究中，研究人員測試了 16 種不同的辛烯基防晒霜，結果發現所有防晒霜中都含有二苯甲酮。

While some medical folks argue that it's only a small amount of chemicals and it's not clear what the risk actually is posed by the ingredient,

雖然一些醫學界人士認為，這只是少量的化學物質，並不清楚這種成分到底會帶來什麼風險、

Yale dermatologist, Dr. Bunik says, we have a tendency in our society to say that it's such a small amount and therefore it's not harmful.

耶魯大學皮膚病學家布尼克博士說，我們的社會有一種傾向，認為它的用量很小，是以對人體無害。

But the chronic buildup of these chemicals could have a cumulative effect.

但這些化學物質的長期積累會產生累積效應。

Octocrylene has also caught the attention of environmental groups, linking it to coral bleaching damage.

辛烯也引起了環保組織的注意，因為它與珊瑚漂白損害有關。

The Hawaii State Senate has even gone as far as banning the ingredient, as well as petitioning the FDA for a complete national ban.

夏威夷州參議院甚至禁止使用這種成分，並向食品及藥物管理局請願，要求在全國範圍內全面禁止使用。

This is a big step forward for the protection of our coral reefs, marine life and human health.

這是保護珊瑚礁、海洋生物和人類健康的一大進步。

It will be the first law passed, not only in the country, but in the entire world.

這將是不僅在國內，而且在全世界通過的第一部法律。

Look, before I give this claim a rating, let's lead with some basic facts.

聽著，在我給這個說法打分之前，讓我們先了解一些基本事實。

Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer in the US.

皮膚癌是美國最常見的癌症類型。

It's also one of the most preventable.

這也是最容易預防的疾病之一。

The worst type is melanoma and most cases are caused by exposure to UV radiation.

最嚴重的類型是黑色素瘤，大多數病例都是由紫外線輻射引起的。

No surprise here that the sun is the most common source of UV radiation.

太陽是最常見的紫外線輻射源，這一點不足為奇。

Having five or more blistering sunburns between ages 15 and 20, increases your risk of melanoma by 80%.

在 15 至 20 歲期間，如果晒傷五次或五次以上，患黑色素瘤的風險就會增加 80%。

This year alone, invasive melanoma is projected to be the fifth most commonly diagnosed cancer for both men and women.

僅在今年，浸潤性黑色素瘤預計將成為男性和女性最常診斷出的第五大癌症。

Even putting the cancer risk aside, think about your appearance.

即使拋開癌症風險不談，也要考慮一下自己的外表。

Just getting burned or being tan often causes visible sun damage.

被晒傷或晒黑往往會造成明顯的晒傷。

See, there are two types of UV rays, A and B.

瞧，紫外線分為 A 和 B 兩種。

UVA are considered aging rays.

UVA 被認為是老化射線。

While they don't necessarily cause burns, they break through the clouds and are responsible for things like wrinkles, leathery texture, and dark skin patches.

雖然它們不一定會造成灼傷，但它們會穿透雲層，造成皺紋、皮革質地和皮膚黑斑等問題。

They're associated with an increased cancer risk, but not as much as UVB rays, which cause sunburns.

它們與癌症風險的增加有關，但不如紫外線 B 的風險大，因為紫外線 B 會導致晒傷。

Some sunblocks don't even do a good job at protecting from UVA rays, so it's smart to take other precautions like going to the shade or covering up.

有些防晒霜甚至不能很好地抵禦 UVA 射線，所以最好還是採取其他預防措施，比如去陰涼處或遮蓋一下。

Pretty cool because there's actually clothing made specifically for sun protection, like swim shirts with UPF.

這很酷，因為實際上有專門用於防晒的衣服，比如帶 UPF 值的泳衣。

And UPF is a little different from the SPF you commonly see written on sunblocks.

而 UPF 與防晒霜上常見的 SPF 值略有不同。

In theory, SPF from sunblock measures how much longer you can be in the sun before your skin starts to turn red with sunscreen versus without.

從理論上講，防晒霜的 SPF 值衡量的是塗抹防晒霜和不塗抹防晒霜時，皮膚在陽光下晒多久才會開始變紅。

But probably it's more accurate to say that it's a measurement of solar energy protection, mostly for the purposes of just comparing two different bottles.

但也許更準確的說法是，它是對太陽能保護的測量，主要是為了比較兩個不同的瓶子。

So like an SPF 15 protects against 93% of UVB rays, and SPF 50 protects against 98%.

是以，SPF 15 能抵禦 93% 的紫外線，而 SPF 50 能抵禦 98% 的紫外線。

Now on the other hand, UPF measures how much UV radiation can get through a fabric to reach your skin.

另一方面，UPF 衡量的是紫外線能穿過織物到達皮膚的程度。

A basic cotton t-shirt naturally has a UPF of five, blocking 80% of rays.

一件基本的純棉 T 恤的 UPF 值自然是 5，可以阻擋 80% 的光線。

A specially designed UPF 50 sun shirt blocks 98% of UV rays.

專門設計的 UPF 50 防晒衫可阻擋 98% 的紫外線。

That's pretty solid sun protection.

防晒效果相當不錯。

But is there such thing as too much sun protection?

但是，有沒有防晒過度的說法呢？

There have been theories that lathering up and staying out of the sun can be harmful for our health, including hurting our vitamin levels.

有理論認為，晒太陽會損害我們的健康，包括傷害我們的維生素水準。

While it's true that sunlight is a major source of vitamin D, a vital nutrient responsible for healthy living, you can actually get most of what you need from just 15-ish minutes of midday sun several times a week.

雖然陽光確實是維生素 D 的主要來源，而維生素 D 是維持健康生活的重要營養素，但實際上，只需每週數次在正午晒上 15 分鐘左右的太陽，就能獲得所需的大部分維生素 D。

In fact, we don't even have evidence that wearing sunscreen impacts your vitamin D levels.

事實上，我們甚至沒有證據表明塗抹防晒霜會影響人體的維生素 D 水準。

There's probably a few reasons for this.

這可能有幾個原因。

One, people can get vitamin D from dietary sources like salmon and eggs.

首先，人們可以從三文魚和雞蛋等食物中獲取維生素 D。

Two, most people don't use enough sunscreen to fully prevent the absorption of UV rays.

第二，大多數人使用的防晒霜不足以完全防止紫外線的吸收。

So while the concern might sound logical and legit, it's just not backed by research.

是以，雖然這種擔憂聽起來合情合理，但卻沒有研究支持。

We know that chemicals can be absorbed into the body and we know certain ones are linked to health issues.

我們知道化學物質會被人體吸收，也知道某些化學物質與健康問題有關。

But in reality, we're exposed to small amounts of chemicals all the time, so just saying chemicals are bad isn't really helpful.

但實際上，我們無時無刻不在接觸著少量的化學物質，所以光說化學物質不好並沒有什麼用。

It requires research to find the dose that makes the poison, and not just after one use, but cumulatively as well.

這就需要進行研究，找出使人中毒的劑量，而且不只是在使用一次之後，還需要累積使用。

And that research is absolutely ongoing.

而且，這項研究還在繼續。

After releasing that 2020 study, the FDA called for more research on the effects of longer-term exposure to the chemicals and asked the sunscreen industry to provide more safety information on 12 of them.

在發佈了 2020 年的研究報告後，美國食品和藥物管理局呼籲對長期接觸這些化學物質的影響進行更多研究，並要求防晒霜行業就其中 12 種化學物質提供更多安全資訊。

It makes sense to push our government to create better regulations that reduce our overall exposure to chemicals that are potentially bad for us.

推動政府制定更好的法規，減少我們與可能對我們有害的化學品的總體接觸，是非常有意義的。

But at the end of the day, remember, you don't need to use chemical sunscreen at all.

但最後，請記住，你根本不需要使用化學防晒霜。

There's the second type, mineral sunscreen, which is commonly recommended for young children and pregnant women.

第二種是礦物防晒霜，通常建議幼兒和孕婦使用。

The main ingredients in those are zinc and titanium oxide, and the FDA has reconfirmed that they are safe for general use and are free from the chemical controversy we just discussed.

這些產品的主要成分是鋅和氧化鈦，美國食品及藥物管理局已再次確認它們可安全用於一般用途，不存在我們剛剛討論過的化學爭議。

Understandably, some don't like mineral sunscreens because they might leave some residue, and this is where I have some really harsh criticism for the US.

可以理解的是，有些人不喜歡礦物防晒霜，因為它們可能會留下一些殘留物。

Many of the sunscreens sold here are just outdated.

這裡出售的許多防晒霜都已經過時了。

In many other countries, including France and Japan, you can buy sunscreen with newer ingredients that seem to be safer and more protective against even UVA rays.

在許多其他國家，包括法國和日本，你可以買到含有更新成分的防晒霜，這些成分似乎更安全，對 UVA 射線的防護能力也更強。

They aren't available here because of an old FDA rule that classifies sunscreen as a drug, which means it needs to be tested on animals before being approved for sale.

美國食品和藥物管理局（FDA）的一項舊規定將防晒霜歸類為藥物，這意味著防晒霜在獲准銷售前需要進行動物實驗，是以美國國內還沒有這種防晒霜。

Thankfully, there's a new bill being passed in hopes of changing the animal testing requirement and speeding up approval.

值得慶幸的是，有一項新法案正在通過，希望能改變動物試驗要求，加快審批速度。

Look, at the end of the day,

聽著，說到底

I wouldn't blame you if you wanna use sunscreen without certain chemical filters like octocrylene or oxybenzone.

如果你想使用不含辛丙烯或羥苯甲酯等化學過濾劑的防晒霜，我不會責怪你。

There are still many options for quality sun protection, but to say that all sunblock is poison or that sun exposure is completely safe, that's a full-on lie.

優質的防晒產品仍然有很多選擇，但要說所有防晒霜都是毒藥，或者說陽光暴晒是完全安全的，那就是徹頭徹尾的謊言了。

The most important fact here is that while all these potential flags have been raised, we still do not have causal proof that chemical sunscreen causes cancer or any other health issues in humans.

這裡最重要的事實是，雖然所有這些潛在的危險都已出現，但我們仍然沒有因果關係的證據證明化學防晒霜會導致癌症或人類的任何其他健康問題。

But what we do know is that it prevents cancer.

但我們知道的是，它能預防癌症。

That's why you won't find any credible expert who tells you to skip sunscreen entirely.

這就是為什麼你找不到任何可信的專家告訴你完全不用防晒霜。

The standard recommendation endorsed by every legit organization is to wear water-resistant, broad-spectrum sunscreen that's 30 SPF or higher on a daily basis, even when it's cloudy.

每個合法組織都認可的標準建議是，每天塗抹 SPF 值為 30 或更高的防水廣譜防晒霜，即使是在陰天。

On my one to 10 truth or scare scale, this claim gets a four.

在我的 1 到 10 分 "真相 "或 "恐慌 "評分表中，這一說法得了 4 分。

Now, click here to check out a video of amazing lifeguard rescues.

現在，點擊這裡查看救生員的精彩營救影片。

And as always, stay happy and healthy.

一如既往，保持健康快樂。

♪♪

♪♪