The American Academy of Pediatrics new policy statement on UV exposure — which has received media attention for suggesting that those under age 18 should not be permitted to use commercial sunbeds — also includes language suggesting that most chemical sunscreens on the market today may be dangerous.

“People may wish to avoid using sunscreens that contain oxybenzone, which may have weak estrogenic effects when absorbed through the skin,” AAP states in its policy statement first published early this month. The statement – titled “Ultraviolet Radiation: A Hazard to Children” — openly contradicts AAP’s other statements about sunlight. AAP also believes that the main reason 70 percent of children are vitamin D deficient today is that kids do not get as much sun exposure today as children did in generations past.

“In one breath they are saying that children don’t get enough sun exposure, in another breath they are making a policy recommendation made based on incomplete data provided to them by lobbying groups for the cosmetic dermatology industry and groups who have not identified that chemical sunscreen and cosmetic dermatology have affected their policy decisions,” Smart Tan Vice President Joseph Levy said. “Their policy recommendations are inconsistent and are in need of correction.”

To say that UV exposure from any source is harmful, and therefore should be avoided, is akin to saying that water causes drowning, and therefore humans should avoid water.

AAP’s position on oxybenzone in sunscreen has received almost no attention despite the fact that it is telling people to avoid most every chemical sunscreen product on the market. Oxybenzone is present in almost every brand of commercially available sunscreen today and is under fire from many sources as being a toxin that may have negative health effects. United States Centers for Disease Control & Prevention research shows that 97 percent of Americans have oxybenzone in their urine now.

Smart Tan recommends chemical sunscreens be used only when sunburn is a possibility — which is the product’s only legal claim. But sunscreen manufacturers and dermatology groups have promoted daily-use of the product.