Sunscreen killing coral?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I think to be safe we need to not apply sunscreen directly to corals as the amount the researcher used was rather large.

This is where research is published in a peer-review article.

http://www.ehponline.org/members/2008/10966/10966.pdf

The following is taken from the third reference in post #6:

Robert van Woesik, a coral expert at the Florida Institute of Technology, was not involved in the research.

He questions whether conditions in the study accurately reflect those found in nature.

For example, the coral samples were exposed to sunscreen while in plastic bags to avoid contaminating the reefs. But van Woesik worries this prevented dilution of the chemicals through natural water circulation.

"Under normal situations on a coral reef, corals would not be subjected to these high concentrations because of rapid dilution," van Woesik said.
If you're going to quote from the article, then include the rest of the passage:


"But according to study author Danovaro, the effect is not dose dependent—so coral's exposure to a very small dose of sunscreen is just as dangerous as a high exposure. "It is more like on-off," he said. "Once the viral epidemic is started, it is not a problem of toxicity."
 
Well, I suspect that many people will either tend to believe this or not to based on their own leanings towards environmental issues. Either way, how much trouble is it to use greaseless and biodegradable sunscreen? It's a rule in some marine parks anyways.
Thanks for the note of sobriety.

I'm rather passionate about the destruction of the reef systems globally. I watch incredible stupidity such as a photog kicking a reef, and when asked "why," his reply to me was "I wanted to preserve a great shot of that beautiful staghorn." My only reaction was thoughts of a strobe enema...

Point is, if there's just a chance of it being contraindicated for the health of the reef, why not take such a simple, benign precaution...

Apathy is the principle cause of the reefs' slide to begin with...
 
"Under normal situations on a coral reef, corals would not be subjected to these high concentrations because of rapid dilution," van Woesik said.


If you're going to quote from the article, then include the rest of the passage:


"But according to study author Danovaro, the effect is not dose dependent—so coral's exposure to a very small dose of sunscreen is just as dangerous as a high exposure. "It is more like on-off," he said. "Once the viral epidemic is started, it is not a problem of toxicity."

He can not state that based on his published paper as he DID NOT use small doses.

By the way, did you consider where he got the coral for his research?????

I try to minimize the introduction of ANY chemicals into the environment be they biodegradable or not.

I think there are larger issues to be debating, or spending research funding for, than sunscreen affect on coral. Someday I hope that is all we have to worry about.
 
Either way, how much trouble is it to use greaseless and biodegradable sunscreen?


that's a good point

still, i am not sure that putting a plastic bag around corals and dosing them with sunscreen is a good way to measure the effect of sunscreen in a real coral reef, since the dilution of the chemicals is going to play a huge part in the ultimate effect
 
"Under normal situations on a coral reef, corals would not be subjected to these high concentrations because of rapid dilution," van Woesik said.

He can not state that based on his published paper as he DID NOT use small doses.
Since neither you nor I read his paper, neither of us know WHAT size dose he used.

I think there are larger issues to be debating, or spending research funding for, than sunscreen affect on coral. Someday I hope that is all we have to worry about.
This didn't begin as a debate. You made it so.

The original point was simple. If there's room for doubt... if there's a wisp of a glimmer of a hint that you can do something positive for the environment you assert you protect... then leave the sunscreen at home when you dive.
 
On a related note, it was next to impossible to find biodegradable sunblock stateside. My wife went to every drugstore around, and I hit the web. Ended up finding only a few brands, and ordered one. When it arrived, to my dismay, it did not say "biodegradable" on the side, and the captain of the dive boat we took near Cancun didn't want to let us use it. :/
 
Might want to consider Cactus Juice which is supposed to be very effective and all natural.
 
These extremist attitudes towards the environment (considering activities like lumbering the forests, building nuclear generators, building roads and bridges in the wilderness, expansion of living areas, third and forth world countries dumping millions of gallons of pollutants into the seas every day and the dumbest: the miniscule amount of divers using sunscreen on the few square inches of exposed anatomy while diving in an ocean which must surely involve 'billions and billions' (C. Sagan) of gallons of salt water) just shows how gullible the average environmental wacko tends to be. Get a life.
 
These extremist attitudes towards the environment (considering activities like lumbering the forests, building nuclear generators, building roads and bridges in the wilderness, expansion of living areas, third and forth world countries dumping millions of gallons of pollutants into the seas every day and the dumbest: the miniscule amount of divers using sunscreen on the few square inches of exposed anatomy while diving in an ocean which must surely involve 'billions and billions' (C. Sagan) of gallons of salt water) just shows how gullible the average environmental wacko tends to be. Get a life.
Whatever... fiddle on, Nero...
 
BKP, When you say "This didn't begin as a debate. You made it so". Please understand that this whole board is about discussion and debate of ideas and principles. You can't just come on here and make a statement and be shocked when people disagree with you. You obviously feel very passionate about the issue and the environment in general. That's great, I think we all do. However, just because poeple might not agree with you or the study doesn't mean they are being smug if they make a joke about peeing in the water. Most of your posts on this issue all have a hint of confrontation so if it turns into a debate it can't be too surprising. The bottom line is the first thing we should do before we just soak in any of these reports is to find out where the scientist's funding is coming from. If it's federal grant dollars then take it with a grain of salt until you research it further. I'm not saying it isn't true but just like hurricanes and global warming, if these guys come out and say the danger is gone or improving their funding goes away. Once again, I'm not saying it is all bunk but I think we have seen enough of this stuff get proven wrong in the past to make us question their motives. Personally I don't see how putting sunscreen into a ziploc full of water and coral could prove any real scietific results when you consider the amount of dillution in the ocean but like you, I haven't read the report so I will keep an open mind.
 

Back
Top Bottom