Our sunscreen into Our reefs

[Elan L.]

I was talking with a friend about all the issues effecting our oceans and reefs and he brought up something i had never thought of. He said that the sunscreen we put on ourselves at the beach can effect our reefs when rubbed off into the ocean. How much of the sunscreen that rubs off into the ocean damage our reefs / can it? If it is a problem, are there any brands that are more enviromentally friendly?

Thanks, Elan

 

[seattleguy]

I thought that you were going to talk about getting sunscreen in your reef tank and I was simply going to suggest washing your hands/arms. One decent sized oil or desell spill is probably more of a problem than all of the sunscreen on all of the humans all across the world put together. Silt run off from construction projects might even be a larger problem.

Let's just all quit working and go to the beach without sunscreen and fry. Your friend needs to get real and worry about the more serious environmental issues that we face.

Just my opinion.

 

[ackee]

I'm told current research indicates that the supposed harmful effects of sunscreen to corals and other reef animals are based on fake science. No truth to the whole silly myth.

 

[Elan L.]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15385447#post15385447 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by seattleguy
I thought that you were going to talk about getting sunscreen in your reef tank and I was simply going to suggest washing your hands/arms. One decent sized oil or desell spill is probably more of a problem than all of the sunscreen on all of the humans all across the world put together. Silt run off from construction projects might even be a larger problem.

Let's just all quit working and go to the beach without sunscreen and fry. Your friend needs to get real and worry about the more serious environmental issues that we face.

Just my opinion.

I completely agree. Just needed a person on the same side. I dont want to get political, but this friend is the person that will take in a bunch of mumbo jumbo to cover up the real problems. I'll just leave it at that

 

[shamwow]

i highly doubt that our sunscreens affect ours reefs. you'll need a hell of a lot of sunscreen to even affect the reefs a tiny bit.

 

[ctenophors rule]

i am researching now, but from what i have heard, sun screan is damging to reefs because, it stays on us, then we rub up against the corals, or it is washed off of us near the reef, or over the reef, etc, etc. it has more to deal with being is close contact with the reefs, oil spills normaly occur in the middle of the ocean, not within a few inches of a reef.

 

[ctenophors rule]

here u go my homies...

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2291018

 

[jdhuyvetter]

Interesting read. I think they need to do a little more research. I would definitely say they jumped to their conclusion too soon. I'm not saying it is wrong, but has anyone repeated their research to verify the conclusion.

My single biggest issue is their numbers. 4,000 to 6000 tons of sunscreen on 10% of the world's reefs and sunscreen dipped hands for 20 minutes in 2 L of water.

For the sake of this debate, let's assume that the 4000 to 6000 tons of sunscreen is accurate. Further, let's assume that 10% of the world's reefs is also accurate. 20 minutes in 2 L is a very high concentration by volume. 10% of the worlds reefs is how much by volume. Plus, there are currents which "wash" the reef. I can't see how they can possibly correlate a 2L confined space to an open ocean (even if the concentration is correct, but I doubt it).

Therefore, conclusion that sunscreen has been shown to cause coral bleaching under experimental conditions......ok, I'll bite. Causing coral bleaching of the world's reef........nope, not buying it.

 

[ScooterTDI]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15482688#post15482688 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jdhuyvetter
Interesting read. I think they need to do a little more research. I would definitely say they jumped to their conclusion too soon. I'm not saying it is wrong, but has anyone repeated their research to verify the conclusion.

My single biggest issue is their numbers. 4,000 to 6000 tons of sunscreen on 10% of the world's reefs and sunscreen dipped hands for 20 minutes in 2 L of water.

For the sake of this debate, let's assume that the 4000 to 6000 tons of sunscreen is accurate. Further, let's assume that 10% of the world's reefs is also accurate. 20 minutes in 2 L is a very high concentration by volume. 10% of the worlds reefs is how much by volume. Plus, there are currents which "wash" the reef. I can't see how they can possibly correlate a 2L confined space to an open ocean (even if the concentration is correct, but I doubt it).

Therefore, conclusion that sunscreen has been shown to cause coral bleaching under experimental conditions......ok, I'll bite. Causing coral bleaching of the world's reef........nope, not buying it.

Agreed. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I don't really think that paper makes a strong case. I didn't see it in the paper, but did they actually make any attempt to measure the ambient concentration of these chemicals on a reef frequented by tourists? It seems like that would be necessary to make any meaningful laboratory experiment.

Scott

 

[ScooterTDI]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15482844#post15482844 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ScooterTDI
Agreed. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I don't really think that paper makes a strong case. I didn't see it in the paper, but did they actually make any attempt to measure the ambient concentration of these chemicals on a reef frequented by tourists? It seems like that would be necessary to make any meaningful laboratory experiment.

Scott

I just looked up a reference that the paper cites. 2-35 ng/L of UV filters were found in Swiss lakes that had untreated wastewater inputs and recreational visitors (ewwww!). Thats way lower than they used in this study and it was a "closed" system with a relatively small water volume by comparison.

Scott

 

[greenbean36191]

Agreed. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I don't really think that paper makes a strong case. I didn't see it in the paper, but did they actually make any attempt to measure the ambient concentration of these chemicals on a reef frequented by tourists? It seems like that would be necessary to make any meaningful laboratory experiment.

You're in total agreement with virtually every marine biologist out there except the authors.

The authors did not measure levels of these chemicals on reefs. They did not correlate bleaching events to proximity to bathing beaches. They did not show that levels of these chemicals found in nature negatively affect corals (because we don't know what level these chemicals are found in nature). They did not show that the presence of VLPs was the cause of coral decline rather than a result.

Like you pointed out, in their experiment they used doses of chemicals much higher than those recorded anywhere in nature without justification for doing so. The fact that high levels of chemical kill corals is not surprising at all- high levels of sugar do the same.

The authors' conclusions are not borne out by their experiments and as such, this paper has gotten very little attention outside of the popular media.

 

[ctenophors rule]

well, until we know for certain, i will continue wearing a light, dark shrit to protect me from u/v radiation while i snorkel.

 

[ackee]

Perhaps I am mistaken, but it seems to me that "a light, dark shirt" is sort of a contradiction, what used to be called an 'oxymoron', like 'airline food' or 'military intelligence'.
I think I know what you mean: a lightweight shirt that can block the more harmful UV rays, though a dark color is not needed for this function, only the right fabric. Some dark colored shirts can get you burned as badly as an auto da fe.
A nice lightweight shirt with sunblock properties is what you really want. May I suggest one of the dive skin rash guard shirts that can also protect your neck?
Another thing: sometimes it is prudent to avoid doing a thing that some claim to be harmful, until the facts are more clear. On the other hand, lots of people come up with harebrained theories either because they are dimwitted, or because they are researchers seeking publicity, or very commonly both. Be selective. The fact that the sunblock research paper referred to is not taken seriously by the scientific establishment, and is something mostly written about in supermarket newspapers, dive magazines and internet blogs may make you reconsider.

 

[jdhuyvetter]

I just use a Hanes T-shirt

 

[ctenophors rule]

lol, thank you ackee for that wonderful reply...

yes i did mean a lightweight shirt that would be dark in color to reflect uv radiation..i just use my dare shirt. its nice and light weight, not super dark, so it helps me camouflauge (not that the fish still can't see me. lol).

i see people in those shirts, and they look a hell of a lot more streem line, but i don't realy like them...their tooo expensive for a shirt with some elastic. (yes....i am a stinge...makes u wonder y i am in this hobby..lol)

also, i will be getting a carribean tongue coral soon, so maybe i will just use the slime from that as sunscreen???

 

[Elan L.]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15516495#post15516495 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ackee
Perhaps I am mistaken, but it seems to me that "a light, dark shirt" is sort of a contradiction, what used to be called an 'oxymoron', like 'airline food' or 'military intelligence'.

lol

 

[Michael_84]

I can do my own experiment...Does anyone use a non-oil based sunscreen, if so then it is water based, Right. Water based would wash of immediately upon entering the water. So we must assume the conscious sunscreen wearer would wear "Water Proof to the beach. Thus making it oil based. Now for the experiment. Get an empty ten gallon fish tank fill it with salt water. Then proceed to find any oily solution and poor it in. If my memory serves me right, The oil would sit on the surface, not fall and blanket the bottom. So being that any chemical bound to the oil would stay bound to the oil upon immersion. I think the submerged reefs are safe. In extremely heavy concentrations I can see tidal pools suffering, But I think all of Ireland would need to go the the great barrier reef slathered in bullfrog before we saw damage...LOL Not Likely

 

[jenglish]

It seems unlikely it would have a large effect to me but I could not wear susnscreen to snorkel a reef in a national park last week in Mexico. Of course they they hand you that as you are getting there when you have already put on your sunscreen :rolleye1:

 

[Michael_84]

I forgot! Sunscreen speeds the melting of the polar ice-caps. See when we wear sunscreen the suns ultra-violet light is both reflected and intensified and beams towards the earth's poles. thus creating an intense heat and melting the ice caps.

With that in mind I am buying tons of land near the appalachian Mt's. so when the poles melt an flood the U.S.'s eastern sea-board I will own all the new coastline, and get rich....Go Global Warming!!!.......LOL

 

[Rossini]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15542580#post15542580 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Michael_84
I forgot! Sunscreen speeds the melting of the polar ice-caps. See when we wear sunscreen the suns ultra-violet light is both reflected and intensified and beams towards the earth's poles. thus creating an intense heat and melting the ice caps.

With that in mind I am buying tons of land near the appalachian Mt's. so when the poles melt an flood the U.S.'s eastern sea-board I will own all the new coastline, and get rich....Go Global Warming!!!.......LOL

idiot :bum: