Why dermatologists are excited about bemotrizinol, the newest sunscreen ingredient to enter the US 18%

By Madison Czopek15%

6/25/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Halo Effect, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 21.1% saturation with 141 hits. Analysis detected 442 faulty-reasoning hits from 668 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 33% and a BS Rank of 18% (18,083 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 82.60% of the article peer group.

The U.S. is one step closer to selling sunscreen products similar to those you might find in cosmetics stores across Europe, Australia and parts of Asia. 
More than 20 years after chemical manufacturer DSM Nutritional Products first applied for approval, the U.S. 
Food and Drug Administration gave the go-ahead to an active sunscreen ingredient bemotrizinol (beh-moe-TRI-zinol), sometimes called BEMT, which protects people against harmful ultraviolet radiation. 
Dermatologists are enthusiastic about the ingredient’s upcoming introduction to U.S. products. 
"It expands the available options for UV protection in the U.S.," said Dr. 
Marisa Garshick, a clinical dermatology professor at New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medicine. 
"Having access to newer UV filters can help improve sunscreen formulations and hopefully encourage more consistent sunscreen use." 
What makes bemotrizinol different? 
Like other active sunscreen ingredients, bemotrizinol is a UV filter that protects against both ultraviolet A and B rays. 
UVB is the type of radiation most responsible for causing sunburns, but UVA radiation is also harmful and linked to sunburns, wrinkles and some skin cancers. 
Dermatologists recommend people use sunscreen with a "broad spectrum" label that means it protects against both UVA and UVB rays. 
But there’s more that excites dermatologists and skin care product consumers: Bemotrizinol is a very photostable chemical, meaning it remains more effective in sunlight than other filters. 
It doesn’t break down quickly in the sun and it can help improve the performance of other sunscreen ingredients, said Dr. 
Mona A. 
Gohara, a Yale School of Medicine dermatology professor. 
"It also blends well into formulas, making sunscreens more cosmetically elegant and less likely to leave a noticeable white cast," she said. 
And its longtime use elsewhere in the world has shown it has a strong safety record and low skin absorption, Gohara said. 
Some sunscreen critics on social media have worried that other chemical sunscreen filters such as oxybenzone absorb into the bloodstream and interfere with hormones, but that concern hasn’t been proven in humans. 
Sunscreen ingredients, including oxybenzone, are shown Wednesday, May 2, 2018, in San Jose, Calif. 
(AP) 
What else should you know about this new ingredient? 
The FDA says bemotrizinol is safe for adults and children as young as 6 months old. 
Similar to other skincare products, some people might experience skin irritation or sensitivity from bemotrizinol, but serious reactions are uncommon, dermatologists said. 
"People with sensitive skin should still patch test new products if they have a history of reactions," Garshick said. 
This new ingredient isn’t a silver-bullet, either, experts said. 
"Bemotrizinol is an exciting addition, but no sunscreen ingredient is magic," Gohara said. 
"Consistent sunscreen use matters far more than chasing the newest ingredient." 
Dermatologists recommend choosing a broad-spectrum sunscreen that’s SPF 30 or higher, applying enough and reapplying regularly  at least every two hours. 
Why did U.S. approval take longer than other countries? 
The U.S. regulates sunscreen as an over-the-counter drug, which means new ingredients face an intense and often slow-moving FDA review and approval process. 
Europe, by contrast, regulates sunscreen as a cosmetic. 
Although DSM Nutritional Products, now DSM-Firmenich, originally applied for bemotrizinol’s approval in 2005, the application didn’t progress for many years. 
In September 2024, DSM-Firmenich applied again using a faster administrative pathway created by the 2020 CARES Act. 
The FDA issued its final order June 10, approving bemotrizinol. 
It goes into effect Aug. 
9, 2026. 
Where can I buy sunscreen with this new ingredient? 
Unless you’ve got an international trip planned, you can’t get your hands on it just yet. 
In December 2025, DSM-Firmenich said its product would be available soon after the FDA’s final order went into effect. 
It’ll be sold under the brand name Parsol Shield. 
DSM-Firmenich has exclusive rights to market bemotrizinol in the U.S. for 18 months, and NPR reported that the company said the first sunscreens with this filter will be on shelves starting in September. 
RELATED: Do you need SPF 30, 50 or 100? 
We answer your burning sunscreen questions 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.1%@politifact: 2.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Madison Czopek: 0.9%@politifact: 0.6%Anchoring Bias5.4%This article: 3.3%Madison Czopek: 2.5%@politifact: 2.5%Availability Heuristic3.3%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.9%@politifact: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.0%@politifact: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 21.1%Madison Czopek: 2.7%@politifact: 3.5%Framing Effect21.1%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.3%@politifact: 0.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.7%Madison Czopek: 1.4%@politifact: 0.8%Optimism Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.9%@politifact: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 6.4%@politifact: 5.1%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.3%@politifact: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.2%@politifact: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 10.9%Madison Czopek: 1.0%@politifact: 0.8%Halo Effect10.9%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 2.4%@politifact: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.4%@politifact: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 4.8%Madison Czopek: 0.2%@politifact: 0.2%Straw Man4.8%This article: 11.7%Madison Czopek: 7.0%@politifact: 4.7%Appeal to Authority11.7%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.0%@politifact: 0.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.3%@politifact: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 3.3%@politifact: 3.0%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.4%@politifact: 2.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.4%@politifact: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.5%@politifact: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.8%@politifact: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.3%@politifact: 1.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 3.1%@politifact: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.0%@politifact: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.2%@politifact: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.5%@politifact: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.3%@politifact: 1.6%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 1.0%@politifact: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.2%@politifact: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Czopek: 0.1%@politifact: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Madison Czopek: 0.4%@politifact: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.3%

668 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers21%attributed speech529writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMarisa Garshick • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageMarisa Garshick • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageMona A. Gohara • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMona A. Gohara • 22 words • 0.0% coverageMona A. Gohara • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageMarisa Garshick • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMona A. Gohara • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMona A. Gohara • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Mona A. Gohara

64%flagged-word coverage
89 attributed words64% of attributed speech63% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -7.9 ptsWriter: 7.9%Mona A. Gohara: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.