It was interesting to read the article in todays Daily Mail on whether or not to trust cosmetic products, make up or fake tan to protect you from sun rays.
It’s great that the Mail is bringing attention to this topic which I wrote about recently in Velvet Magazine here.
Having analysed thousands of clients over the last 7 years using a Visia, I’m not sure their conclusions are totally accurate however, although it is great that they are highlighting the need for SPF.
Firstly, Visia machines are designed to identify UV damage, not sun protection. When an image is taken on the Visia, it emits a bright flash of UVA light not UVB.
Secondly, physical and chemical sunscreens react very differently. One will absorb the ray and one will reflect it.
As you’ll see from the article, the mineral powder shows a bright luminous reflection from the UV light because mineral sunscreens work by reflecting UV rays from the skin, not absorbing them.
In contrast, the Nivea advert below, where people apply chemical SPF under the same light looks as though they are applying a black liquid.
This is because Nivea is a chemical SPF which creates a layer on the skin to absorb UV rays, not reflect them like a physical or mineral SPF.
Although the article suggests the mineral SPF ‘proved to have the same UV score as leaving the skin bare’, you can not tell this from a Visia image or the Visia ‘score’ as the Visia scores the skin on the UV damage - not on the protection of the product applied.
For my post explaining SPF’s in more detail and my recommendations, click here.