Maya, thanks! To be honest, it’s difficult to tell. Consumer Report is not a scientific organisation and, while I was doing some research on this, I came across a press release by Elta MD complaining that CR hadn’t tested the sunscreens using the FDA protocols.

Also, CR places a big emphasis on texture. Physical sunscreens tend to be thicker and greasier, which may cause people to apply less. If that happens, they’re right that you won’t get the SPF stated on the label. But that’s not because the sunscreen doesn’t work. It’s because you’re not using it right.

That sentence above may very well refer to this and in this case, you could say they’re right. But that doesn’t make physical sunscreens themselves less effective.

Sure!

Link:
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/sunscreens/buying-guide.htm

Here’s the quote:
“In our tests over the years, so-called “natural” or mineral sunscreens—those that contain only titanium dioxide, zinc oxide or both as active ingredients—have tended to perform less well than those that have chemical active ingredients, such as avobenzone. None of the mineral sunscreens in our tests this year did well enough to make our list of recommendations.”

Maya, I didn’t see this report. Can you please send me the link so I can check it out and give you my opinion? Thanks!