Light Daily Sunscreen (for use over an aftershave balm)?

[aphextwin07]

unless your going to be out in the sun for multiple hours at a time, i don't understand the point of buying a standalone sunscreen as opposed to just getting a facial moisturizer with added SPF.

 

[SField]

Originally Posted by aphextwin07

unless your going to be out in the sun for multiple hours at a time, i don't understand the point of buying a standalone sunscreen as opposed to just getting a facial moisturizer with added SPF.

Sorry to bring back an old thread, but is there's a huge benefit of using an aftershave balm AND a good moisturizer? Can't you just use the moisturizer after the aftershave? I'd imagine it does nearly the same thing.

 

[aphextwin07]

in most cases after shave balm simply is a moisturizer, and vice versa. you can use a moisturizer in lieu of an after shave and receive the same benefit for the most part. some after shaves will have an extra ingredient or two to further soothe the burn but the benefit on your face is essentially the same. you'll also see a number of after shaves labeled as being an after shave AND moisturizer for this reason. there's no need to use both unless the after shave you're using doesn't provide adequate hydration. if you're looking for something that can function as both give this a try, I just bought this recently and like it so far- completely organic and paraben/vitamin A free. It does have a slight medicinal scent to it but it's derived from natural ingredients (non-toxic) and seems to fade after maybe an hour or so. If you can't stand any fragrance this one also works really well but it has vitamin A (retinyl acetate) like most aftershaves so you won't want to use it if you're going to be exposed to the sun.

 

[Reggs]

I use this:

It's very light weight and protects against UVAs too. I would not call it a moisturizer though, which is a good thing since combo products like that tend to be very heavy.

 

[rabidawg]

I use Shiseido's Extra Smooth Sun Protection Lotion SPF 38 PA++. My face is extremely sensitive to the "heaviness" of most sunscreens (I can feel myself sweating through them, etc.), and I don't even notice that I'm wearing this one. The smell is OK, but it fades very quickly. I've also used the same product in 60 PA+++, and it is not noticeably different on the face.

Note that Shiseido also sells Extra Smooth Sun Protection Cream SPF 38 PA+++, which does give me that heavy feeling. The lotion is the one you want (or, at least, the one I want), and has a very thin, liquid consistency.

 

[rondark]

No one has mentioned the one by Billy Jealousy It's called the Combat Lines Face Moisturizer SPF 30 and works a treat! It's not greasy and is easily absorbed by the skin....I tried mine from Fresh Fragrances & Cosmetics as the dept stores didn't have this brand unless anyone knows where I can get it in store?!

 

[aphextwin07]

Originally Posted by rondark

No one has mentioned the one by Billy Jealousy It's called the Combat Lines Face Moisturizer SPF 30 and works a treat! It's not greasy and is easily absorbed by the skin....I tried mine from Fresh Fragrances & Cosmetics as the dept stores didn't have this brand unless anyone knows where I can get it in store?!
umm... the active sunscreen agent in that is oxybenzone which is extremely toxic.... as are about all of the recommendations in this thread. yikes, I guess no one has heard of EWG? pretty much any name brand including all that have been mentioned thus far should be avoided (Kiehls, Clinique, Lancome, Neutogena, Shiseido etc). Ocean Potion as well. for a budget recommendation I would suggest this, or this if you're willing to spend a bit more. the former is better and safer than anything mentioned in this thread, while the latter may be better due to the use of non-nano particles, which the verdict is still not completely out on as the research available is not exhaustive enough. for moderate/heavier sun exposure it would be best to just consult this list.

 

[rabidawg]

Originally Posted by aphextwin07

umm... the active sunscreen agent in that is oxybenzone which is extremely toxic.... as are about all of the recommendations in this thread. yikes, I guess no one has heard of EWG? pretty much any name brand including all that have been mentioned thus far should be avoided (Kiehls, Clinique, Lancome, Neutogena, Shiseido etc). Ocean Potion as well. for a budget recommendation I would suggest this, or this if you're willing to spend a bit more. the former is better and safer than anything mentioned in this thread, while the latter may be better due to the use of non-nano particles, which the verdict is still not completely out on as the research available is not exhaustive enough.

for moderate/heavier sun exposure it would be best to just consult this list.

Real doctors FTW.

"We are concerned that the criticisms will raise unnecessary fears and cause people to stop using sunscreen, doing their skin serious harm," said Dr. Warwick Morison, MD, chairman of The Skin Cancer Foundation's Photobiology Committee and Professor of Dermatology at John Hopkins University. "The EWG has their own system for evaluating things which is nothing more than junk science."

http://www.skincancer.org/sunscreen-...unfounded.html

 

[aphextwin07]

rofl!!!! all EWG findings are based on scientific studies performed by legitimate scientists, doctors, institutions etc over many decades. it's not their own research. they even cite all of their sources throughout the databases and you can see the findings and draw your own conclusions. what a baseless comment. not to mention, that article you linked misses the entire point of EWG in that it is recommending alternatives and not to rule out sunscreen altogether. thanks for the laugh and pointless link.

 

[Notcathy]

Thanks for the suggestions guys!

 

[rabidawg]

Originally Posted by aphextwin07

rofl!!!! all EWG findings are based on scientific studies performed by legitimate scientists, doctors, institutions etc over many decades. it's not their own research. they even cite all of their sources throughout the databases and you can see the findings and draw your own conclusions. what a baseless comment. not to mention, that article you linked misses the entire point of EWG in that it is recommending alternatives and not to rule out sunscreen altogether. thanks for the laugh and pointless link.


The link was for purposes of the quote, not the article. I'm just providing an alternate opinion. Folks can Google the Environmental Working Group themselves (I'd recommend appending "junk science" to the search

) and come to their own conclusions. Theirs is certainly not the final word on this topic. Sorry if you've got a vested interest in them.

 

[aphextwin07]

the quote is baseless when taken out of context from the article. only a mongoloid would take the sole word of the FDA over countless studies performed by various doctors and scientists in the industry/academic/government fields. judging by our response you fall into this category. you really think the FDA has your best interests at heart? some informed opinion that is, lol. keep drinkin' that kool-aid.

 

[rabidawg]

Originally Posted by aphextwin07

the quote is baseless when taken out of context from the article. only a mongoloid would take the sole word of the FDA over countless studies performed by various doctors and scientists in the industry/academic/government fields. judging by our response you fall into this category. you really think the FDA has your best interests at heart? some informed opinion that is, lol. keep drinkin' that kool-aid.

What? Who said anything about the FDA? Is The Skin Cancer Foundation not "in the industry"? Is John Hopkins University not a relevant academic institution? Your reading comprehension fail has me flummoxed. The guy ******** on the EWG's science is this guy. His creds are legit.

"Dr. Warwick Morison, MD, chairman of The Skin Cancer Foundation's Photobiology Committee and Professor of Dermatology at John Hopkins University."

I have no personal knowledge of whether that chemical is good, bad, or indifferent. But the EWG makes their scratch by scaring the **** out of people. That should be taken into consideration when reading their opinions. It's called taking things with a grain of salt.

 

[aphextwin07]

lol, you're the one with unparalleled reading comprehension fail. look at the section in your link on oxybenzone. apparently you didn't even read your own article, you just googled something and posted a link. i'm amazed at the idiocy i encounter on this forum sometimes. this thread has become unworthy of additional posting.

 

[rabidawg]

Originally Posted by rabidawg

The link was for purposes of the quote, not the article.

Originally Posted by aphextwin07

look at the section in your link on oxybenzone. apparently you didn't even read your own article, you just googled something and posted a link.