“I don’t have a single friend who goes to the beach to tan. Not one,” declares Jo Horgan, the owner of Mecca Cosmetica, a string of culty beauty boutiques in Australia and New Zealand. Horgan has a zero-tolerance sunburn policy for her employees. If you’re pink and peeling, don’t even bother showing up—it sends the wrong message to her sun-smart clientele.

Horgan’s attitude embodies a seismic cultural shift in the way in which Australians think about the sun. Prompted by startling statistics (for instance: Two out of three Aussies will be diagnosed with skin cancer before age 70), the country’s government has attacked the issue of sun safety aggressively, with an approach that ranges from cutesy—the ’80s slogan “Slip! Slop! Slap!” (slip on a shirt, slop on some sunscreen, slap on a hat) was set to a catchy tune any schoolchild could trill—to the stomach-churning: In a TV spot from 2008, a pretty 26-year-old tearfully expresses her desire to live. Moments later, we learn she has already died of melanoma, and a tagline rolls: “No tan is worth dying for.” The same year, Cancer Council Australia announced that teen tanning had declined by 45 percent over three years.

Think such extreme measures are uncalled for in the United States? More than a million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed in this country every year—higher than breast, prostate, lung, and colon cancers combined. And up to 90 percent of the visible signs of aging—that’s 90 percent of all spots, wrinkles, sagging—are caused by the sun. Yet 60 percent of Americans report that they rarely or never apply sunscreen, and only 27 percent apply the one-ounce, full-body dose necessary for the level of SPF offered on the bottle.

Now comes news that the sunscreens we are using may not be doing enough. Previously, skin-care scientists focused exclusively on ultraviolet rays (UVA and UVB), devising chemical blockers such as avobenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule to absorb them and physical blockers (zinc oxide, titanium dioxide) to deflect and scatter them. (“Broad spectrum” indicates that a sunscreen contains a mixture of both.) But a German study published last year suggested that the spectrum of sun damage is wider than previously suspected: Infrared radiation may also release free radicals and accelerates aging. While UV rays account for only 6.8 percent of solar light, infrared, which we mainly experience as the heat of the sun, makes up 54.3 percent (the rest, called “visible light,” is what we see as the colors of the rainbow). How much skin damage infrared does remains to be seen—some estimates indicate that the combination of infrared and visible causes some 10 to 20 percent of sun damage—but, according to Michael Southall, PhD, a senior researcher at Johnson & Johnson, “traditional sunscreens, which only block UV, don’t protect us from the sun’s total oxidative toll.”

Our best defense may be the same family of ingredients that likely already fortify your day cream but that are relatively new to mass-market sunscreens: antioxidants. When skin absorbs solar energy (whether UV or infrared), renegade photons cause a burst of free radicals—short-lived atoms or molecules that have lost an electron, making them unstable and bound to damage any proteins or genes that get in their way. Antioxidants—including vitamins A, C, and E, green tea, and pomegranate—have the unique ability to donate an electron to a free radical, stabilizing it without destabilizing themselves.

Neutrogena recently boosted its high-octane sunscreen with the antioxidants feverfew, soy, and vitamin E; they say the new blend reduces 70 percent of oxidative damage. A study funded by Coppertone illustrates just how much such an addition could help: The brand’s basic SPF 30 sunscreen reduced free-radical formation by only 39 percent, but when an antioxidant cocktail was added, free-radical production decreased by 73 percent—almost double the protection of sunscreen alone.

For those who wish to protect from the inside out, antioxidant-packed beauty pills appear to provide some level of sunscreen backup. Perhaps the most well-studied version is Murad’s pomegranate-based Pomphenol Sunguard supplements; test subjects who popped one tablet per day for seven days and wore SPF 8 experienced 22.7 percent less burning or redness than those who only wore sunscreen.

Still, the smartest sun-safety plan is one that’s truly broad-spectrum: a multiprong defense involving certified, SPF-treated clothing (news flash: Your basic T-shirt provides the SPF equivalent of only about 6.5); UV-coated sunglasses (which can block between 95 and 99 percent of rays); and an antioxidant-rich sunscreen, applied liberally to all the vulnerable spots derms know to check for skin cancer: ears, scalp, and the backs of knees. Think of it this way: It costs $400 and up to laser off one unwelcome freckle; a $12 bottle of SPF and a $50 surfer’s rash guard—all the rage on Bondi—could save you the trouble in the first place.

View full post on ElleMakeup

Sun Protection News: Traditional Sunscreens May Not Be Enough is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

View full post on ElleMakeup

Beauty News: Hermès Launches New Perfume is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

View full post on ElleMakeup

Beauty News: Elizabeth Arden Limited Edition Red Lipstick is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

View full post on ElleMakeup

Beauty News: New Nail Polish That Doubles As Art is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

Read more on The Toledo Blade

News in a nutshell
Animal rights and wrongs; biological ID cards; NIH seeks diversity; more FDA/NIH collaboration

Read more on The Scientist

News in a nutshell is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

View full post on ElleMakeup

Beauty News: New Makeup by L’Oréal Paris and Nars is a post from: Fytuba Makeup

You’ve worked with top designers and photographers. What inspired you to become a makeup artist?
Initially I wanted to become a photographer, so I did a course at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. One theme of the assignments was “narcissism” so I did a huge project where I used myself as a model and wore different makeup in every picture. I fell in love with the flexibility of makeup and enrolled in a school for makeup artistry. I haven’t stopped since.

What made you want to create your own line of cosmetics?
It was quite an egotistical reason, to be honest! What I missed as a woman who uses makeup in daily life (as opposed to me as a makeup artist) was a practical way to carry it around. My handbag was always one big mess, with tons of products in various shapes and sizes. So I came up with a solution that provided me with what I wanted: a canister (the Ellis Holder) that holds up to eight of our formulas, which are each encapsulated in a slim, bullet-like pen. So I just made what I wanted, but I believe that I’m not the only one who can benefit, because I once read a survey that women usually spend more time looking for a certain product in their purse than it takes to apply it!

What differentiates your brand from other brands?
Every product is liquid (except for the powder, because I haven’t found a liquid solution for that yet). I really like liquid products because they become one with the face much easier than non-liquid products. For example, unlike powder eye shadows that can fall on your cheeks during the day, liquid shadow stays longer. It may take awhile for people to get used to the liquid texture, but I think they will with time. In the 1950s, mascara used to come in a little block that you had to spit on in order to make it liquid. And before automatic eyeliner, you always had to use a sharpener. I think that the same sort of development will happen for liquid eye shadow.

Ellis Faas’ liquid-to-powder eyeliner is featured in the February 2010 issue of ELLE magazine. Click here to purchase your copy!

View full post on ElleMakeup

Beauty News: Ellis Faas’ Makeup Line Lands Stateside is a post from: Fytuba Makeup