Health authorities, dermatologists and the cosmetics industry have been saying for decades that sunscreen protects against skin cancer. But a large British study based on the UK Biobank is now sparking debate. An analysis of more than 470,000 participants revealed a surprising correlation: people who reported using sunscreen regularly had a significantly higher risk of various forms of skin cancer – even after statistically adjusting for a number of known risk factors.
The study does not prove that sunscreen causes skin cancer. However, it does raise questions that cannot be completely ruled out given the size of the study.
There is a striking correlation between all three types of skin cancer.
The researchers analysed data from more than 470,000 participants in the UK Biobank and compared their information on sun protection with later skin cancer diagnoses.
The result was surprising:
- The risk of developing malignant melanoma was statistically about 292 percent higher among regular users.
- For basal cell carcinoma, the correlation was about 140 percent.
- For squamous cell carcinoma, the rate is about 126 percent.
The researchers adjusted their calculations to take into account factors such as age, sex, skin type, hair color, ability to tan, childhood sunburn, use of tanning beds, and time spent outdoors. However, the statistical correlation remained.
The authors do not discuss the evidence
The researchers themselves explicitly emphasize that their study cannot prove cause and effect.
It is possible that people with particularly sensitive skin or those already at increased risk of skin cancer use sunscreen more often. The data also do not reveal what type of sunscreen was used. The category “Sun/UV protection” covers a variety of protective measures and does not distinguish between mineral and chemical sunscreens or other forms of UV protection.
The question remains, however, why the correlation was still so clearly visible even after extensive statistical corrections.
A topic that has been the subject of controversial debate for years.
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher sees the study as a reason to critically review current recommendations. He points out that many conventional sunscreens contain chemical UV filters such as oxybenzone, octocrylene or homosalate. Some of these substances have been detected in blood, urine or even breast milk in other studies and have been the subject of scientific debate for years due to their potential hormonal effects.
Does sunscreen really increase the risk of skin cancer? Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher analyzes a new study of more than 470,000 people that found that sunscreen users have a dramatically higher incidence of all major types of skin cancer. Watch The Matt Gaetz Show today on YouTube TV!
Does sunscreen actually INCREASE the risk of skin cancer?
Epidemiologist @NicHulscher breaks down a new study of more than 470,000 people that found sunscreen users had dramatically higher rates of all major skin cancers.
Watch The Matt Gaetz Show on YouTube TV Today! pic.twitter.com/0PopAtz0vR
— One America News (@OANN) June 27, 2026
In addition, in recent years, some sunscreens have been found to be contaminated with benzene. Benzene is considered a carcinogen, but it is a manufacturing impurity and is not a common ingredient in sunscreens.
However, these aspects were not examined in the British study.
Is an important topic being questioned too little?
For decades, public campaigns have focused almost exclusively on the message: avoid the sun, use sunscreen, use the highest possible SPF.
Much less often is it mentioned that sunlight is also the most important natural source for the body’s own production of vitamin D, or that a healthy approach to sunbathing involves more than just applying sunscreen.
The new study does not challenge existing recommendations. However, it shows that the interplay between UV radiation, individual genetics, skin type and sun protection is clearly more complex than is often portrayed.
Time for an open scientific debate
A British study provides no evidence that sunscreen causes skin cancer. Yet it is a statistically significant finding in one of the largest data analyses on the subject.
That is precisely why it would be scientifically dishonest to ignore or prematurely dismiss the results. But it would be equally dishonest to conclude from the study that sunscreens are ineffective.
The study primarily shows something else entirely: A topic that has been considered scientifically settled for decades clearly deserves a new, open, and ideologically unfettered discussion. With more than 470,000 data sets analyzed, the scientific response should not be to reflexively dismiss inconvenient findings, but rather to examine them carefully and, if necessary, commission further independent studies.
Source: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10840669/
Image: Pexels.com
