You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 141 No. 8, August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (7)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Occupational and Environmental Medicine
 •Dermatology
 •Dermatologic Disorders
 •Neoplasms
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Sunscreen, Sun Protection, and Our Many Failures

Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:1025-1027.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In this month’s ARCHIVES, we have 2 excellent prospective studies of sun-exposure behavior and sunscreen use. The study by Dupuy et al1 examines the effect of sunscreen labeling in the real-world setting of French vacation sites. These investigators studied vacationers who volunteered to be randomly assigned to 3 different sunscreen groups for a week during their holiday. Participants were given sun protection factor (SPF) 40 sunscreen labeled either basic protection or high protection, but were blinded as to the actual SPF. A third group got SPF 12 labeled "basic protection." The end result of this study was that there was no difference in sunscreen use in the SPF 40 group, suggesting that the high protection label did not lead to more intentional UV exposure or less sunscreen use than the same SPF 40 sunscreen labeled basic protection. These authors ultimately concluded that, while sunscreens are not . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION
Mark Naylor, MD; June K. Robinson, MD



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Skin Cancer Risk Behaviors: A Conceptual Framework for Complex Behavioral Change
Joel Hillhouse and Rob Turrisi
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141(8):1028-1031.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Randomized Controlled Trial Testing the Impact of High-Protection Sunscreens on Sun-Exposure Behavior
Alain Dupuy, Ariane Dunant, Jean-Jacques Grob, and for Réseau d’Epidémiologie en Dermatologie
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141(8):950-956.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Sunscreen Use Related to UV Exposure, Age, Sex, and Occupation Based on Personal Dosimeter Readings and Sun-Exposure Behavior Diaries
Elisabeth Thieden, Peter A. Philipsen, Jane Sandby-Møller, and Hans Christian Wulf
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141(8):967-973.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Enhancing Patient Motivation to Reduce UV Risk Behaviors: Assessing the Interest and Willingness of Dermatologists to Try a Different Approach
Mallett et al.
Arch Dermatol 2008;144:265-266.
FULL TEXT  

Skin Cancer Risk Behaviors: A Conceptual Framework for Complex Behavioral Change
Hillhouse and Turrisi
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:1028-1031.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2005 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.