Hawaii Bans Sunscreens That Hurt Coral Reefs (popularmechanics.com) 65
In early May, Hawaii lawmakers passed a bill that would prohibit the sale of over-the-counter sunscreens containing chemicals that contribute to the destruction of the state's coral reefs and other ocean life. Hawaii Governor David Ige signed the bill this week, making the ban official. Popular Mechanics reports: Hawaii is the first U.S. state to pass a legislation banning the sale of sunscreen containing [oxybenzone and octinoxate]. The bill will go into effect on January 1, 2021. "We are blessed in Hawaii to be home of some of the most beautiful natural resources on the planet," Ige said at the bill signing, according to The Huffington Post. "But our natural environment is fragile and our own interaction with the Earth can have everlasting impacts, and this bill is a small first step worldwide to really caring about our corals and our reefs in a way that no one else anywhere in the world has done."
A 2015 study conducted by scientists at the University of Central Florida found that oxybenzone, a common UV-filtering compound, kills the coral, causes DNA damage in the coral's adult stage, and deforms the DNA in the larval stage, hindering its development. A separate 2015 study, published in the Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology and conducted by biologist Craig Downs, also found that the chemicals produced water pollution and had damning effects on the coral reefs. In 2012, Women's Health reported that oxybenzone and octinoxate may actually be harmful to humans as well, not just coral reefs. According to the publication, when the skin absorbs oxybenzone, it can cause an eczema-like allergic reaction and disrupt hormone levels. Octinoxate may damage skin cells and lead to premature aging.
A 2015 study conducted by scientists at the University of Central Florida found that oxybenzone, a common UV-filtering compound, kills the coral, causes DNA damage in the coral's adult stage, and deforms the DNA in the larval stage, hindering its development. A separate 2015 study, published in the Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology and conducted by biologist Craig Downs, also found that the chemicals produced water pollution and had damning effects on the coral reefs. In 2012, Women's Health reported that oxybenzone and octinoxate may actually be harmful to humans as well, not just coral reefs. According to the publication, when the skin absorbs oxybenzone, it can cause an eczema-like allergic reaction and disrupt hormone levels. Octinoxate may damage skin cells and lead to premature aging.
Good move (Score:5, Insightful)
Sunscreen is only one factor out of several, but you have to start somewhere.
Re: (Score:1)
Having your sunscreen recalled in the state of Hawaii does not constitute a birth condition.
Re: (Score:1)
won't be banned until 2021.
they didn't start anything.
Re: (Score:3)
We live in a capitalist society - have to give the capitalists time to dump their inventory without losing money. Why should they be punished when they did nothing wrong?
I mean, other than choosing to sell products known to kill coral. But nothing BAD, like depriving shareholders of profits or providing insufficient political contributions.
Re: (Score:1)
Ping hawaii.state... sometimes no response. (Score:1)
While we're talking about Hawaii, there's times that our satellite signals don't reach. Is everybody okay over there? Pop singer Hoku... we haven't heard from you recently. Can you visit Slashdot once in a while?
Re:Rediculus (Score:5, Insightful)
Hawaii has several coral-lined bays where they don't permit boats. Their exposure to oil, fuel, etc. would be quite minimal relative to other reefs. However, they do see a large number of tourists, many of whom will be wearing sunscreen.
And before someone goes off about people getting skin cancer, there are several types of sunscreen that don't use either chemical and are available in high-SPF varieties. I'm not sure how easy it will be to enforce any of this. The last time I was in Hawaii there was plenty of litter on some of their beaches. If people can't even be expected to pick up after themselves, they won't be bothered to make sure they're not using the wrong kind of sunscreen.
Excuse me, but (Score:1)
Excuse me, but the plural of reef is reeves.
Re:Excuse me, but (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Most of the people who litter are tourists, not locals, and this law doesn't apply to them I believe. Hawaii won't prevent you from bringing your sunscreen from the mainland in, it'll simply prevent you from buying that sunscreen in Hawaii.
You do know that Hawaii has special permission to search your bags in and out of the state, even on domestic flights? They have enormous issues with non-native species and searching baggage is the only way to stop it. So Yes, they can take your non-compliant sun screen from you.
Re: Rediculus (Score:1)
Probably not that hard. Given TSA restrictions on liquids and gels tourists probably mostly just buy sunscreen when they get there and locals obviously aren't exactly likely to pick any up just over the state line. So if you get the stuff off the store shelves you are probably 90% there. You're only problem then is the few who order sunscreen online and that probably isn't a huge environmental impact
Re: (Score:2)
What's killing the coral reefs is all the boat oil, fuel, etc. leakages and exhaust venting into the ocean.
I know. Guns don't kill people. Car accidents, and smoking kills people. It's absurd to think there could be anything else contributing to death.
coral safe sunscreen (Score:1)
First time I used coral safe sunscreen, I discovered the nuclear option. Titanium dioxide was the main ingredient. Put it on and spent hours in the water fishing. I was as white as ever when I washed it off. Not a bit of tanning from solar exposure. None. It's not the sexy option. You will look pasty white if you use it. Ultraviolet will not get through. You could probably survive being stuck in a microwave. Okay, maybe not but seriiusly, you won't get burned by the sun. Costs a few extra $,
Re:coral safe sunscreen (Score:5, Funny)
Just do what I do: Use titanium dioxide and paint your face like a Juggalo. You will not only be protected from the harming rays, but you'll get all the girls. Well, not "all", but the ones who have really bad self-image. Which are basically the only ones we're going to get anyway, so... But at least you won't have to worry about skin cancer!
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, brother. I thought we were just getting to be friends. You've hurt me now, and I've done nothing to you.
I think you should leave.
Re: (Score:3)
PopeRatzo = fake name
Aw shit! I thought he was a real Pope.
Ratzo mate, you're dead to me now.
Re: (Score:1)
Plus you won't be recognized by the facial recognition cameras!
Ugh (Score:2)
Checked a bunch of spray on sunscreen? Both chemicals. Been using the stuff for years... Makes me wonder what I've been doing to my body.
Re: Ugh (Score:1)
Look at any that aren't zinc based and have spf 50 or higher. Specifically, look at kids and baby products. You see them in almost all of that subset.
Re: (Score:2)
look at kids and baby products
But are those made from real babies?
Bigger fish to fry (Score:2)
How about banning fluffy-haired real estate agents pimping the property values to the level where native Hawaiians can afford to buy?
Most are forced to live inland in shantys.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The people you think of as native Hawaiians found someone else living there when they got there. They killed and maybe ate them.
The notion that someone is entitled to land because they were there "first" is as ridiculous as the notion that it's okay to treat people badly because you have more guns than they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Except in terms of colonization, Hawaii was settled for the first time at a distinct point in history.
Right, by people who preceded the people you think of as Hawaiian natives.
Property rights come from occupation of land, so they own it first.
Wrong. Rights come from power. There's no such thing as inherent human rights. That's why we have to defend each one that we care about, or lose it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bigger fish to fry
NO FFS No. You know ewhat happens when people succeed wiht the premise that we shouldn't fix X because Y is more important? You eng up with neither fixed.
How about...
Do that too, but don't not do this one.