Are 16 Million Americans Ditching Sunscreen? What an Instagram Post Gets Right

An Instagram post from @boxlifemagazine says millions of Americans are ditching sunscreen after viral posts claimed it causes cancer. It says scientists find the evidence "overwhelmingly" supports sun protection. It says the #antisunscreen trend has led 16 million Americans to cut back on or stop using SPF. It also says some worries about chemical UV filters are legitimate, and that newer formulas are coming.

View the original post

What's real

The 16 million number traces to the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD). Its 2026 Practice Safe Sun Survey, released May 1, 2026, said more than 16 million adults reported reducing or stopping sunscreen use because of online claims. The survey was run by Versta Research. It asked 1,132 U.S. adults between January 19 and February 2, 2026. The results were weighted to match U.S. Census figures. The AAD lists a margin of error of up to 3 percentage points.

The post is also right that sun protection is well supported. The CDC says most skin cancers are caused by too much exposure to ultraviolet (UV) rays from the sun and tanning beds. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) says UV exposure causes early skin aging and damage that can lead to skin cancer.

What's missing or wrong

• It is an estimate, not a head count. About 1,100 people answered a survey. The AAD scaled their answers up to all U.S. adults. People also said what they did, and nobody checked it. The real number could be higher or lower.
• "Because of online claims" is what people reported. The survey does not prove that one hashtag caused anyone to quit. The post says #antisunscreen "influenced" people. We could not confirm that the AAD survey measured that hashtag, so we treat it as the post's framing.
• "Reduced or stopped" lumps two groups together. Someone who now uses a little less is counted with someone who quit.
• The post gives no detail on the "legitimate concerns." The two it names are real, but they are narrower than the viral claims. See below.

What the evidence says

UV is the proven risk. The CDC says a tan or a burn is a sign of skin injury, not health. NCI says UV risk applies to all skin tones, though skin cancer is more common in people with lighter skin.

Chemical filter absorption is real. Harm has not been shown. The FDA says at least some sunscreen active ingredients are absorbed through the skin and enter the body. It has asked makers for data to confirm their safety. The FDA study behind this was published in JAMA. It enrolled 48 healthy adults, and 44 finished. They used four sunscreen types, applied heavily and often, as a test of the maximum. All six filters tested reached blood levels above 0.5 ng/mL, the FDA's threshold for further safety testing. That threshold is a trigger for more testing. It is not a harm level. The authors wrote that the findings "do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen." They called for more studies to learn what the results mean for health. The trial measured blood levels in the short term. It did not measure cancer.

The benzene recalls were a contamination problem. Benzene is not a sunscreen ingredient. The FDA says it can get in through other ingredients, such as thickeners or a spray propellant. Some spray sunscreens were recalled. The FDA tells people to avoid recalled products and to keep using sun protection. Its page on benzene in drugs says that, for benzoyl peroxide acne products, the cancer risk from benzene found in them is very low even with daily use for decades. We did not find an FDA estimate of risk for the recalled sunscreens specifically, so we are not offering one.

New formulas. The FDA recently added a new filter, bemotrizinol, to the list of permitted sunscreen ingredients (see our earlier article). Trade and law-firm reports we found describe a June 2026 order. We did not open the FDA order itself for this article.

What to do with this

• Use sun protection. The CDC advises shade, long sleeves and pants, a wide-brimmed hat, sunglasses that block UVA and UVB, and broad-spectrum sunscreen with SPF 15 or higher. NCI says SPF 30 is preferred.
• If you want to avoid chemical filters, ask a pharmacist or dermatologist about mineral sunscreens. Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are on the FDA's approved list. Clothing and shade also protect without any product on the skin.
• Check the FDA recall database for any spray sunscreen you own. Stop using a recalled product.
• Skip tanning beds. The CDC calls them a known source of intense UV.
• Be careful with social posts that say sunscreen "causes cancer." Our guide on spotting cancer misinformation can help.

When to talk to a doctor

See a clinician about a mole or spot that is new, changing, bleeding, or a sore that does not heal. If you take medicines that make skin more sensitive to sun, or have had skin cancer, ask your care team what sun protection is right for you. For a medical emergency, call 911.

Sources

• Instagram post by @boxlifemagazine: instagram.com
• American Academy of Dermatology, "Misinformation increases skin cancer risk for 16 million Americans" (May 2026): aad.org
• JAMA, sunscreen active ingredient absorption under maximal use (randomized clinical trial): jamanetwork.com
• FDA, "Sunscreen: How to Help Protect Your Skin from the Sun": fda.gov
• FDA, "Frequently Asked Questions on Benzene Contamination in Drugs": fda.gov
• National Cancer Institute, "Sunlight": cancer.gov
• CDC, "Reducing Risk for Skin Cancer": cdc.gov

Two pages did not open for us: the PubMed record for the JAMA trial (only a cookie notice loaded, so we used the JAMA page) and an FDA article on sunscreen absorption (404 error).

How this article was prepared

An AI-assisted editorial system helped prepare this page. It used the AAD release, the JAMA trial page, and FDA, NCI and CDC pages. No named medical reviewer has reviewed it unless one is listed.

Cancer Explained is published by the National Cancer Information Foundation. It is not medical advice and does not suggest a test or treatment.

See an error, old source, or unclear wording? Tell us.