All the solar products brought to the laboratory pass the tests, except one that protects much less than the factor 30 that it should guarantee: not to buy, as evidenced by the Altroconsumo investigation. They are not all the same for the environment, there are still too many unwanted substances including the dreaded microplastics. Sprays allow you to waste less product than the cream formulation. It is important to take the right precautions when you are exposed to sunlight, so do not overdo the tan, but it is also essential to use good quality protection. And, as emerges from the test, sunscreens are not all the same: they range from high efficacy to intermediate levels and in one case even not recommended because it is much lower than the declared degree of protection. , with one exception, an ultra-hydrating sun milk. The test showed that the sun protection factor (SPF) guaranteed by this cream is well below that declared (30 SPF). For this reason, the judgment with an insufficient overall evaluation was penalized. On the contrary, the protection from UVA rays is good, but this is not enough to protect the skin exposed to the sun.With the sun, in any case, we must not overdo it, even with adequate protection, such as that guaranteed by the sunscreen promoted in the test. The sun’s rays, even if filtered, in excessive doses can damage the skin, causing erythema and increasing the risk of skin cancers, such as melanoma.The revealing evidence of the test is the verification that the protective efficacy of the sun corresponds to the protection factor declared. This is the most important parameter: if a sunscreen does not comply with the indicated protection level (30 in the case of the test) it is penalized in the overall quality judgment and therefore not recommended, just as happened to Angstrom cream. Another fundamental aspect is the presence of ingredients that can be harmful to our health. Cosmetics uses substances, such as fragrances or allergens, from which it is good to stay away especially if you are allergic and if it is products to be used widely on the skin, such as sunscreen. Five creams are penalized in the safety test of the ingredients: they contain substances capable of disturbing our hormonal system, the so-called endocrine disruptors (such as propylparaben or butylparaben). An advantage of solar sprays is that, since they are vacuum-packed products, not in direct contact with the air, they require fewer preservatives.Then there is the emerging problem of microplastics, tiny particles of plastic used by the cosmetic industry, often as exfoliants or emulsifiers. These fragments, released by cosmetics and toothpastes, are not captured by purification plants and are accidentally ingested by marine fauna, thus returning to the food chain to our dishes. In the test sunscreens we found around 40 ingredients that release microplastics. It is not just the most well-known microplastics, such as polyethylene, polypropylene or nylon, there are many other ingredients that release millimeter traces of plastic whose nature and effects are still debated. Sunscreens are essential for the effectiveness of the product, but some are better than others for the environment. In addition to the planet-friendly filters, we also penalized products with unnecessary ingredients (such as preservatives, antioxidants, allergenic fragrances), which would be replaceable with alternative, more sustainable substances. As for the material of which the packaging is made, in many creams it is not stated what type of plastic is used. On the other hand, the content / container ratio is judged to be sufficient: in practice the packaging is not excessive compared to the content, with few exceptions. However, there is an unnecessary waste of product at the end of use: in some packages there is more.