Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've found that I react to the high factor creams - even the hypo-allergenic ones. It's almost as though they trap the sun and I get a real heat type rash. I get on better with lower factors and just covering up more & staying out the sun. Not as much fun but better in the long run.
Severe eczema runs in our family so know what its like with very sensitive skin. For years on all children the suncream to use for us has been low spf Clinique. My mum used it on all of us 20 years ago and its still a good contender on the market for sensitive skin. Maybe try getting a free sample/small size to trial online or from a department store as it is quite an expensive product to try.

I react to some sunscreens as well, low or high factor, and sensitive skin creams. I've never been able to figure out which ingredient(s) it is, but some sunscreen formulations make my skin feel like it's burning even though there's nothing to see.


For about the last 20 years, I've consistently found that Olay sunscreen is ok for my skin. It's low factor, so I have to keep re-applying.


Covering up and sticking to shade between 11am-3pm is good. Also you might try a zinc-based sunscreen on areas prone to burn, like nose/cheeks. Zinc is a physical sunblock rather than a chemical sunscreen, so it's formulated completely differently.

Ladival!


My daughter is highly allergic (really itchy rash usually) and very fair skin, so it is essential to have a high spf.

That one is the only cream she tolerates and that one is made for allergic skin. To us it is holiday saver.


It's a german brand but as far as I know you can get it on ebay.


Happy summer!

enjoy

Thanks for all the replies - very helpful suggestions. Will give these a try and see what works. I hope it isn't just low spf that's the answer though - we are pretty careful about covering up but I like the reassurance of a sunscreen for the bits you can't cover. I am a bit paranoid about the sun having grown up in the tropics and burned a lot as a child myself but also, my son had a bad burn to his chest 18mths ago and has very delicate skin there that we need to be super careful about.
My 2 year old is allergic to most creams (rash, streaming nose and eyes) and I have tried quite a few of the above without too much success (Jason organic was the best for us). Last week though i thought i'd try the new formula ambre soleil sensitive advanced 50spf for kids as saw it was new with different ingredients and so far so good. Am pleased as my bank account was taking a massive hit spending a fortune on creams that she still reacted to!
I'm also allergic to a lot of suncreams, including some of those for sensitive skin (get a bad, oozy rash) and now only use non-chemical sunblocks where the only active ingredient is titanium dioxide and/or zinc oxide. It is easy to find formulations up to SPF 20/30, although I've also been able to find ones going up to 50 and 60 with some effort. One thing I've learned is that I need to make sure everyone I'm likely to come into contact with also uses that suncream, because I've gotten a rash even after touching someone else who was wearing normal suncream, so both my husband and daughter use it as well, even though they aren't themselves allergic. Good luck!
There's a very good pharmacy in Herne Hill called the Fourways or something (next to the Half Moon pub). I get the Green People organic kids' sun cream from there, which seems to have the lowest number of weird chemicals in it (I've examined a few!) . However, I've a feeling if you ask the pharmacist for help he may well be able to advise on other products they may have in stock.

We have the same problem with suncreams and it has been suggested that the problem may be (as someone else has mentioned above) with the higher SPF creams. My toddler has inherited my fair skin so we do need a high SPF, but so long as he isn't outside all day in the hottest sun (eg on holiday) we manage fine with SPF 30. He has an SPF swimsuit and a very wide brimmed hat which goes some way to helping.


patt1980 - I bought a bottle of the Ambre Solaire cream you mention last week, on the basis that I am usually fine with their creams, but haven't tried it yet. I have high hopes! I also bought their childrens' SPF 30 to try because it's sand and water resistent - have you tried that one?

My understanding is that it's not directly the higher SPF itself, but that higher SPFs have to be formulated differently. So if you've very sensitive skin, the formulation may be a limiting factor when trying higher SPFs.


Is Ultra sun a physical sunscreen (eg titanium dioxide)? Chemical sunscreens are broken down by the UV in the process of protecting your skin. So they have to be reapplied, whereas physical sunscreens (don't be fooled by the name, some of these are clear) block UV from the skin's surface. They only need to reapplied if they're rubbed away from the skin.


I've heard that SkinCeuticals does a factor 50 SPF, with titanium dioxide. Not tried it, but it sounds good. Might be worth investigating?

Knomester - I have tried the kids 50spf one (didn't spot the 30 so went for the highest) which was fine on my LO so I'd have thought the 30 would be ok too if you find it works for you. She is at the stage of loving to spray it on so it has been well tested at our house and no reactions yet!
  • 4 weeks later...
Just boycotting a bit. Been told I should worry about the star rating for UVA not just the SPF. I've always used Green People 25 on my girl, but now noticed this has no star rating. And I don't think Ultrasun has either. That's not to say they don't protect, I was just wondering if anyone out there knows more about star ratings?

A high star rating isn't necessarily an indication of high protection. I think it's the ratio of UVA/UVB protection, so a low SPF could still have a high star rating. So what you'd want for max protection is a high SPF with a high star rating. However the star rating system is proprietary to Boots it seems, so be aware of other rating systems if you're travelling internationally.


Also, a high factor/star sunscreen still has to be reapplied if it's been rubbed off, so don't be lulled into a false sense of protection. For very young children the advice is still to keep them out of direct sunlight during the highest UV hours of the day esp'y in summer, eg 11am-3pm; and to keep them covered in the sun by using lightweight clothing or UV suits.


Broad-spectrum (UVA/B) sunscreens came into the market a while back, so most reputable sunscreens now seem to have both UVA/B protection but always best to double check the label.


http://www.bad.org.uk/site/734/default.aspx


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunscreen#Sunscreen_protection

That was an interesting link Saffron - thanks. I was under the understanding that the SPF indicates how long you can stay in the sun before you need to apply some more. So if you apply a factor 50 it will last 40 times longer than a factor 10 so you have to reapply a lower SPF more often than a higher one.
That's roughly true for SPF which refers to UVB coverage, but only so far as enough stays on the skin and doesn't get rubbed away during playtime! Yup, UVA is a whole different system and v confusing it seems. UV suits are great protection, plus you can alternate days in the sun to minimise exposure. Little Saff and I both have fair sensitive skin, so it's a struggle to get it right sometimes.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...