Skin Functional Sun Functional Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50

Here's a myth worth busting: mineral filters are usually described as working by "reflecting" or "bouncing" UV off your skin.

That's mostly not true: when researchers actually measured it, ZO and Titanium Dioxide reflect only about 4-5% of UV (less than SPF 2 worth of protection).

The vast majority of the work (~95%) is done by absorption, similar to chemical UV filters. ZO is a semiconductor that absorbs UV photos through its energy band gap.

So the old "physical blocker vs. chemical absorber" framing is really an oversimplification.

Zinc Oxide is one of the most effective broad-spectrum UV filters out there. It protects across UVB, UVA2, and UVA1 with a flat, even absorption curve across the whole UVA-UVB range.

That uniform UVA coverage is its standout feature; titanium dioxide skews more toward UVB as its particle size drops so ZO gives more consistent and extended UVA protection.

It's also very photostable. As an inorganic oxide, ZO doesn't break down in sunlight the way some organic filters can, so it holds up over a day of wear.

This ingredient is gentle and soothing, making it go-to for sunscreens aimed at sensitive skin, rosacea, or ecezma-prone skin, babies, and children.

It's also unlikely to cause the "eye sting" that some sunscreen ingredients are known for, and regulatory agencies broadly consider it non-toxic and safe for topical use.

Beyond sun protection, ZO is also a recognized OTC skin protectant. It forms a breathable barrier that shields skin from moisture and irritation while supporting healing. This is why you'll see it as a classic active in diaper rash creams.

The only downside to ZO is that it can leave a visible white cast, especially on deeper skin tones. This is the main reason mineral sunscreens have historically felt less cosmetically elegant than chemical or hybrid formulas.

Zinc Oxide comes in both non-nano and nano forms. The dividing line is 100nm and anything under is classified as a nanomaterial by the EU.

The nano version scatters less visible light which cuts down white case and gives a lighter, more wearable texture.

Another thing worth understanding about formulation:

Uncoated ZO has some inherent photocatalytic activity. This just means it can generate reactive oxygen species under UV. It's exactly why cosmetic-grade ZO is almost always surface-coated; this coating suppresses that reactivity and improves how the powder disperses and feels.

A well-formulated coated ZO largely sidesteps this issue.

Zinc Oxide is commonly used anywhere from 10% up to the regulatory maximum in sunscreens (25%).

Mineral-only broad-spectrum products often land in the 15-25% range to hit higher SPF and UVA values. Keep in mind SPF performance depends heavily on particle size, dispersion, and the rest of the formula, and not just the percentage.

As an OTC skin protectant like diaper creams, ZO typically runs higher at roughly 10-40%.

This ingredient is generally easy to work with and doesn't photodegrade.

The only thing to know is that uncoated ZO can be a bit reactive in a formula.

Under UV, it can break down sensitive ingredients like other actives or UV filters. This is another reason coated versions are standard. ZO can also react with very acidic ingredients or throw off stability of some creams. A good formula will get around this with the right coatings and dispersion.

The EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has concluded that ZO nanoparticles "can be considered to not pose any risk of adverse effects in humans after application on healthy, intact or sunburnt skin".

You might hear that ZO is "toxic"; this is because an in-vitro (test tube) study suggested micronized ZO had potential phototoxicity. In vivo (human) investigations have disputed this and the results have come back reassuring.

So does ZO penetrate skin? The short answer is no, not in any way that matters.

The most relevant evidence comes from real-world human studies: in one, volunteers applied ZO nanoparticle sunscreen hourly for six hours and daily for five days. The advanced imaging showed the particles stayed on the surface and never reached the living epidermis, and no cellular toxicity was found.

Other in-vivo and ex-vivo work agree; ZO nanoparticles don't cross the stratum corneum, even on flexed, massaged, or barrier-impaired skin.

A small amount of solubilized zinc ions can dissolve off the particles and enter the upper skin. But the quantities are tiny compared to the zinc already naturally present in your body, and studies haven't found this to cause local toxicity.

The sunscreen bans you've heard of (like Hawaii's) are aimed at two chemical filters, Oxybenzone and Octinoxate. ZO itself it not banned and is often recommended instead.

So far, there's no solid evidence that any form of ZO harms reefs. It is an ongoing and active area of study, and worth keeping an eye on.

If you're traveling somewhere with these rules, a non-nano mineral sunscreen is the safe bet.

In practice, that translates to a long shelf life and a consistently elegant skin feel.

While there is an assumption Caprylic Triglyceride can clog pores due to it being derived from coconut oil, there is no research supporting this. Just patch test if you have concerns.

Fractionated coconut oil and MCT Oil are both listed as Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride according to INCI. This is because INCI names are based on the ingredient’s final chemical composition and not its marketing name or source.

This ingredient is treated as the gold standard fungal acne safe oil. Even though it is coconut derived, the problematic lauric acid is stripped out.

This leaves just caprylic (C8) and capric (C10) acid. These chain lengths actually trend antifungal; a 2020 study found caprylic acid was enough to disrupt Malassezia furfur cell membrane, with a caprylic acid derivative damaging membrane structures at concentrations as low as 0.2%.

On the safety side, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel has concluded this ingredient to be safe as used in current cosmetic practices + concentrations.

Typical use levels in a formula run about 1-5%.

A really common myth is that mineral filters work by reflecting UV light off your skin like tiny mirrors.

They don't only do that; modern research shows TD protects mostly by absorbing UV radiation, the same way chemical filters do.

When researchers measured this, reflection accounted for only about 4-5% of the protection (and less than SPF 2 on its own). The other ~95% comes from absorption: the UV photons hit the particle and their energy gets soaked up by its semiconductor band gap rather than bouncing off.

So "reflects vs. absorbs" was never really the right way to split mineral from chemical filters.

TD gives broad-spectrum protection that's strongest in the UVB and UVA-2 range and weaker in the UVA-1 range. Its UVA protection isn't quite as strong as Zinc Oxide's which is why you'll often see the two paired together.

Together, they make a solid broad-spectrum system.

TD is a great pick for sensitive, acne-prone, or redness-prone skin because it's non-irritating and chemically inert. Regulatory reviews classify it as a non-sensitizer and mild-to-non-irritant.

It's also unlikely to cause the "eye sting" some chemical filters are known for.

The main trade-off is cosmetic; TD can leave a white cast and has a thicker texture. This is why mineral sunscreens are often less cosmetically elegant than chemical or hybrid formulas (and harder to shade-match on deeper skin tones).

Formulators often use micronized or nano-sized TD to cut down on white case and improve spreadability. Smaller particles scatter less visible light so the formula looks less chalky while still filtering UV.

TD is almost always bundled with coatings like Alumina, Silica, Stearic Acid, or Dimethicone. These coatings do two important jobs:

TD can be used at up to 25% in a finished sunscreen; this is the regulatory ceiling in both the US and the EU.

In practice, the amount in any given product varies a lot depending on the target SPF and whether it's paired with other UV filters.

TD is one of the most heavily vetted sunscreen ingredients out there. It is approved as a UV filter in all major markets worldwide, including the US, EU, UK, Japan, Korea, China, Australia, and Canada.

The safety evidence is solid. There was an old worry that nano particles might absorb through skin into the body but multiple studies (including on damaged, sunburned, and UV-irradiated skin) have shown that TD stays on the surface and the layer of dead skin cells on top of everything else.

There's also no evidence of carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or reproductive toxicity from dermal exposure of this ingredient.

For those who have seen the headline about a 2022 EU ban on TD, that was on TD as a food additive (a complete separate use from topical sunscreen).

There are ongoing questions about how nano-TD might affect marine ecosystems. As of now, there has been no conclusive evidence that any form of TD (or any other sunscreen filter) harms coral reefs or marine life.

The science is still developing and it's a space worth watching rather than packing over.

However, several destinations have reef-safety sunscreen rules that restrict certain chemical filters and steer visitors toward mineral, non-nano options. If you're traveling somewhere with these rules, a non-nano mineral sunscreen is the safe bet.

The common safety discussion around this ingredient involves a manufacturing byproduct called 1,4-dioxane.

Trace amounts can form during production but the EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has concluded that levels at/below 10 ppm in finished products are safe (commercial products consistently fall within acceptable margins).

True allergic reactions are uncommon and the CIR Expert Panel has confirmed this ingredient to be safe as used in cosmetics.

Because it is derived from lauric acid, it may not be fungal acne safe.

Although “aluminum” in an ingredient name can raise red flags for some consumers, the form and usage context matter significantly.

For typical topical applications, there is no substantial evidence of health risks - such as cancer, neurotoxicity, or systemic “aluminum overload.”

Depending on the concentration, it can drastically change the texture of a product from pasty solid (like lipstick) to sprayable liquid.

The CIR Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety has concluded this ingredient to be safe in cosmetics. The highest reported use concentration is 14.2% in lipsticks.

Concentrations up to 100% in guinea pig tests found it to be non-sensitizing and completely safe for use in cosmetics.

D-panthenol is also known as dexpanthenol. Most cosmetics use dexpanthenol or a mixture of D and L-panthenol.

Panthenol is famous due to its ability to go deeper into the skin's layers. Using this ingredient has numerous pros (and no cons):

Like hyaluronic acid, panthenol is a humectant. Humectants are able to bind and hold large amounts of water to keep skin hydrated.

This ingredient works well for wound healing. It works by increasing tissue in the wound and helps close open wounds.

Once oxidized, panthenol converts to pantothenic acid. Panthothenic acid is found in all living cells.

This ingredient is also referred to as pro-vitamin B5.

By the way, the FDA allows products to be labeled "alcohol-free" even when they contain fatty alcohols like this one.

In a formula, it prevents the water and oil phases from separating over time while also contributing to a pleasant, non-greasy slip.

Interestingly, this ingredient can organize into the structures that mimic the skin's own lipid architecture to help support barrier function and reduce transepidermal water loss (TEWL).

The CIR Expert Panel has thoroughly assess the individual fatty alcohols that make up this blend and found no significant toxicity or dermal irritation.

It plays several roles in a formula:

Typical use levels for this ingredient sit around 1-10% and the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel has affirmed safety at concentrations up to 25% in leave-on products.

Multiple assessments have found it to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing to most people.

However, there have been some cases of allergic contact dermatitis in patients with chronically compromised skin barriers.

Cetearyl alcohol has a comedogenic rating of 2 and irritancy rating of 1. Both of these numbers come from the 1989 study that used rabbit ears; a "2" means mildly comedogenic and a "1" means low irritancy.

Here's the catch: rabbit skin is more sensitive than human skin and throws a lot of false positives. A 1996 reappraisal found that ingredients rated 1-2 in the rabbit ear tests are generally safe for humans.

Remember comedogenic ratings are unable to assess the entire formula of a product or how it will react on your skin. Just be sure to patch test if you are unsure about certain ingredients.

This ingredient is not fungal acne safe. Cetearyl alcohol is a fatty alcohol with chain lengths that fall within the range that Malassezia can metabolize.

A 2019 study has also observed Malassezia growth in the presence of this ingredient, confirming it to be not-fungal acne safe.

This ingredient is good for soothing sensitive skin.

Many different types of algae have different benefits.

One of its most common jobs is acting as a pigment carrier and dispersant.

Alumina platelets are often blended with inorganic sunscreens like Titanium Dioxide (or with colorants) and then coated with a silicone such as Triethoxycaprylylsilane so the pigment spreads evenly and smoothly.

In makeup, it can also double as a light-diffusing powder or oil absorber to keep formulas from looking greasy.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel has concluded alumina to be safe in present practices of use and concentration.

They note it's a stable, oxidized compound and scientific research has failed to establish links to health issues.

Concentrations vary depending on the product:

Glyceryl Isostearate may not be fungal acne safe.

Like other plant oils, Orbignya Oleifera Seed Oil is hydrating and can help soften skin.

It is also an antioxidant. Antioxidants help fight off damage from free-radical molecules.

One study found this oil might contain anti-inflammatory properties, but more research is needed.

This is due to how structurally similar it is to what your skin already produces.

Though it is mostly an emollient that helps soften and hydrate skin, it also has some humectant and occlusive action. Humectants help the skin retain moisture while occlusives seal it in, making squalane a triple-threat moisturizer.

Research shows it has antioxidant capabilities that help protect against stressors like UV exposure, specifically UVA induced oxidative stress. This study also found that it supports collagen biosynthesis in human dermal fibroblasts.

No clinical study has reported significant adverse effects and irritation reactions are very rare from this ingredient (even at 100% concentration).

Overall, it's a fantastic ingredient for hydration and is suitable for all skin types.

This depends on the source. Squalane can be derived from both plants and animals. Most squalane used in skincare comes from plants.

Please note: the source of squalane is only known if disclosed by the brand. We recommend reaching out to the brand if you have any questions about their squalane.

Read more about squalene with an "e".

Though squalane is often called an oil, it’s technically not one. It is a hydrocarbon, meaning it is only made of carbon and hydrogen. True oils are triglycerides and made of fatty acids and glycerol.

The term “oil-free” isn’t regulated so companies can define it however they want. Some exclude all oils, while others just avoid mineral oil or comedogenic oils.

Squalane has a comedogenic rating of 1 from the original 1972 study that tested raw ingredients under occlusion on rabbit ears. This system is not standardized or peer-reviewed, and using the raw ingredients is very different from how diluted cosmetic formulations are used on human skin.

A comedogenic rating of 1 means it is "unlikely to clog pores" according to the original rating system.

The overall formula of a product matters more than the individual ingredients on whether or not it will cause clogged pores.

On a cellular level, it disrupts the cell membranes of microbes by poking holes that make the cell leak. This shuts down the chemical reactions the microbe needs to make energy so it can no longer survive.

Another perk of this ingredient is that it stays functional across a wide pH range (3-10).

You'll often see it paired with boosters like Ethylhexylglycerin; one study showed that a 1:9 ratio of Ethylhexylglycerin to Phenoxyethanol damages bacterial membranes as effectively as doubling the Phenoxyethanol concentration on its own.

Typical use concentrations range from 0.3-1% depending on the formula, and this ingredient is capped at 1% int the EU.

Safety-wise, the fear mongering does not hold up to the evidence. The EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety and FDA consider it safe as a preservative at up to 1%, including for children of all ages.

Adverse systemic effects only showed up in animal studies at exposures roughly 200x higher than what people get from cosmetics. And despite its very widespread use, this ingredient is a rare sensitizer and allergic reactions are uncommon.

Synthetically created CI 77492 is considered safer than those naturally found. This is because the synthetically created version may contain less impurities. Iron oxides are generally non-toxic and non-allergenic.

It's actually inactive on its own and works like a slow-release "storage" form; the enzymes in your skin called esterases gradually convert it into active vitamin E over time.

One in vivo study showed 5% of the acetate in the living layer of the epidermis converted to vitamin E after 5 days of application. This study also found the skin gained protection against UV damage even though the conversion was slow and small.

Once converted, vitamin E acts as a skin's main fat-soluble antioxidant that fights free radicals to protect skin from damage.

Topical vitamin E generally boosts the skin's photoprotection, and it reduced UV-damage in animal models.

This ingredient has some brightening potential but it's more of a prevention ingredient than spot-fader. Cell studies show it can slow down melanin production but it's worth noting that it's not the most powerful brightener out there.

Overall, it has a pretty solid safety profile and has been found to be non-irritating and non-comedogenic. Allergic reactions may happen but stay rare due to how widely the ingredient gets used.

The concentration will vary depending on the formula; industry data shows 0.1% in baby lotions, 3% in lipsticks, and 5% in foot powders. You can also find this ingredient at 100% in a pure vitamin E oil.

Most leave-on skincare keeps it at the lower end, often between 0.5-1%.

Research shows it can encourage your skin cells to turn over and renew by stimulating keratinocyte and fibroblast proliferation.

It also has mild keratolytic properties to help loosen and shed dead skin cells without being harsh.

Studies also suggest allantoin can help calm inflammation by dialing down some of the chemical signals your skin sends out when it is irritated.

This ingredient is typically used in the 0.1-0.5% range, and the FDA recognizes it as a skin protectant in OTC products up to 2%.

Overall, allantoin is a wonderful addition to most routines; it is stable across a wide pH range (~4-8), works well with other ingredients, and is considered non-sensitizing/non-irritating.

Fun fact: Allantoin is naturally occurring in comfrey root, beets, chamomile, and wheat sprouts. Our bodies even produce it as a byproduct of uric acid metabolism.

The CIR Expert Panel has confirmed this ingredient to be nontoxic and clinical studies show no sensitization at cosmetic use concentrations.

True allergic reactions are quite rare: a 15-year retrospective study of 6,751 patients found only 0.31% had a positive reaction (and less than half were considered clinically relevant).

It seemed that when sensitization does occur, it's most commonly linked to topical medication (like corticosteroids) and not cosmetics. Allergic contact dermatitis also appears largely limited to individuals with underlying skin conditions.

Overall, propylene glycol is a well-studied ingredient that most people can tolerate without issue.

Your skin makes glycerin on its own (mostly from sebaceous oil breakdown) and shuttles it to your outermost layer of skin, or your epidermis, via aquaporin-3.

Aquaporin-3 is a transporter that is essential for normal skin hydration, elasticity, and repair. Interestingly, mice lacking in AQP3 have dry and less elastic skin that can be fully corrected with glycerin.

This ingredient is non-irritating, plays well with almost every ingredient, and works across all skin types. Typical use is anywhere between 3-10% but can go up to 79% in some leave-on products.

Just know very high concentrations (>40%) can feel tacky in low humidity.

Glycerin is the name for this ingredient in American English. British English uses Glycerol/Glycerine.

As a preservative, it is used to stabilize products and prevent them from degrading. Specifically, BHT prevents degradation from oxidation.

The concerns related to BHT come from oral studies; this ingredient is currently allowed for use by both the FDA and EU.

However, it was recently restricted for use in the UK as of April 2024.

Due to its large molecule size, it doesn't penetrate beyond the skin's surface.

This ingredient has a solid regulatory track record; the CIR Expert Panel first concluded it was safe for use in cosmetics at concentrations up to 100% in 1997. A 2012 reassessment reaffirmed that finding. Safety studies have also found no irritation or evidence of toxicity.

A 2019 study did find this ingredient to grow Malassezia, so this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe.

The CIR Expert Panel has evaluated the scientific data and found this ingredient to be safe, non-irritating, and non-sensitizing at concentrations up to 5% (it's even approved by the FDA as an OTC eye drop ingredient).

Wolf's Bane has been said to have anti-inflammatory properties. However, studies are conflicting about whether this is true.

According to the Final report on the safety assessment of Arnica montana, this plant has not been found to cause dermal irritation.

This flower contains numerous fatty acids such as palmitic, linoleic, myristic, and linolenic acids. The presence and amount of fatty acids depends on where the flower is harvested.

Like other flowers, this ingredient has a natural fragrance. It can also be used to mask, or cover, the unpleasant scents from other ingredients.

Industry-reported use ranges from 8% in rinse-off products and 2% in leave-on formulations.

Synthetically created Ci 77491 is considered safer than those naturally found. This is because the synthetically created version may contain less impurities. Iron oxides are generally non-toxic and non-allergenic.

As a cosmetic ingredient, it grabs water and holds it in the upper layers of skin to smooth roughness and ease dehydration.

There's some clinical support for the NMF approach with a study showing that a cream built to mimic the skin's NMF significantly boosted hydration.

Safety-wise, this ingredient non-irritating, non-comedogenic, and non-phototoxic in testing, with minimal skin absorption.

It also works really well with other hydrators like glycerin or hyaluronic acid, and typical usage is somewhere between 0.2-4%.

First, Retinyl Palmitate is created from Palmitic Acid and Retinol. It is a Retinol ester and considered one of the weaker forms of retinoid.

This is because all retinoids have to be converted to Tretinoin, AKA Retinoic Acid.

Retinyl Palmitate is pretty far down the line and has to go through multiple conversions before its effects are seen. Once it's on your skin, enzymes called esterases convert it into Retinol, then into Retinal, and finally into Retinoic Acid; that's three steps with a little lost at each one.

The benefits of Retinyl Palmitate are debated due to this long and ineffective conversion line.

So why use it at all?

The answer is stability. Retinol and Retinoic Acid break down fast when they hit light, heat, and air, and Retinoic Acid can be pretty irritating on top of that.

Retinyl Palmitate is much more stable and gentler, making it easier to formulate with and easier on sensitive skin (even if it's weaker gram for gram).

Studies show Retinyl Palmitate to help:

Newer research from 2023-2025 also found that Retinyl Palmitate works especially well when paired with Retinol. The two seem to cover each other's weak spots; retinol brings the potency while Retinyl Palmitate brings the stability and gentleness. Together, they repair UV damage better than either one does alone.

This ingredient used to be found in sunscreens to boost the efficacy of sunscreen filters.

The downfall of Retinyl Palmitate was due to released reports about the ingredient being correlated to sun damage and skin tumors.

Most of this traces back to a 2012 US National Toxicology Program (NTP) study where hairless mice coated in Retinyl Palmitate cream and exposed to UV light developed skin tumors faster.

Here's the nuance, though.

When the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel went back through that study, they found methodological flaws and decided the results couldn't be interpreted as proof of extra risk.

The EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) said the mouse findings might point to a concern but they're hard to apply to humans since hairless mouse skin and human skin behave differently.

While there is a study showing this ingredient to cause DNA damage when exposed to UVA, there is no concrete proof of it being linked to skin cancer. It is completely safe to use when used correctly.

Both the CIR and the SCCS consider it safe at the concentrations used in cosmetics; the SCCS specifically cleared retinoids up to 0.05% in body lotions and 0.3% in face creams, hand creams, and rinse-off products.

As of 2025, the EU has written those limits into law, plus a label warning about your total Vitamin A intake from all sources.

All retinoids increase your skin's sensitivity to the sun in the first few months of usage. Be especially careful with reapplying sunscreen when using any form of retinoid.

One more note: if you're pregnant, high doses of Vitamin A can be a concern, so a lot of people skip topical retinoids (including Retinyl Palmitate) during pregnancy just to be safe. Check with your doctor if you're unsure.

Fun fact: This ingredient is often added to low-fat milk to increase the levels of Vitamin A.

Xanthan gum is a pretty common and great ingredient. It is a natural, non-toxic, non-irritating ingredient that is also commonly used in food products.

As you may know, regular vitamin C is notorious for breaking down when exposed to sunlight and air. Ascorbyl Palmitate is more stable and degrades at a slower rate.

Research on whether it converts efficiently into active vitamin C once it's applied on your skin is still limited.

Some in-vitro studies suggest it may support collagen production, but it is not considered one of the stronger vitamin C derivatives, like:

Due to the palmitic acid base, this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe. Comedogenic studies have also shown this ingredient to have a rating of 2.

It's also worth keeping in mind that comedogenic and irritancy ratings are tested on individual ingredients, not finished formulas. The final product's formulation, concentration, and other ingredients all play a role in how something actually behaves on your skin.

Foods containing high amounts of bioflavonoids include celery, peppers, berries, grapes, citrus fruits, cocoa, and more.

This is why Europe's medicines regulator has approved calendula extracts as a traditional remedy for minor skin inflammation and healing small wounds.

The stronger human evidence is around would/ulcer care rather than everyday cosmetic claims; a review that pulled together 14 studies found that calendula helped calm the early, inflamed stage of a wound and helped new skin tissue form faster.

Two studies also showed it shrank leg ulcers (the kind caused by poor circulation). Results were mixed for burns and for the skin irritation people get from radiation treatment, so it's not a sure thing there.

In cosmetics, it's mostly a skin conditioning and soothing agent.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel concluded that calendula-derived ingredients are safe as used and that the ingredients are not irritating, sensitizing, or photosensitizing in clinical tests (though they may be mild eye irritants).

Typical use levels are quite low; industry data reported it used at under 0.5% (one supplier noted a 10-25% extract blend used at 1-10% in the finished product). Historical use goes up to 10%.

The only thing to keep in mind is if you have daisy/ragweed allergies. Calendula is in the same family and one patch-test study found 2% of dermatitis patients reacted to marigold. Be sure to patch test if you have sensitive or allergy-prone skin.