Is sunscreen still the most powerful anti-ageing product people underuse?

The Australian trial remains the strongest direct evidence, but research involving Korean, Chinese, Japanese and Indian populations shows that photoageing varies across different skin tones; it does not appear in exactly the same way for everyone.

A Seoul National University study assessed wrinkles and pigmentary changes in 407 Koreans aged 30 to 92. It found that wrinkling was a major feature of photoageing alongside pigmentation. Sun exposure and smoking were independently associated with wrinkles—and not just as dark spots or uneven tone that most people assume of East Asian skin. 

Don’t miss: How Asia is changing the meaning of longevity

In Guangzhou, researchers examined 301 Chinese women with markedly different sun exposure and protection habits. Women who routinely limited their exposure used combinations of umbrellas, hats, masks and photoprotective cosmetics. The group with greater exposure showed more pronounced changes in wrinkles, texture, pigmentation and sagging and tended to be perceived as older. 

In New Delhi, Rashmi Sarkar and colleagues recruited 230 adults with Fitzpatrick skin types IV—skin that tans easily and rarely burns, usually medium-brown or olive skin skin—and V—skin that tans deeply and very rarely burns, usually brown or dark-brown complexions—and facial pigmentation irregularities. Participants used either an SPF 50 PA+++ or SPF 19 PA+++ sunscreen twice daily for 12 weeks. Both groups showed improvements from baseline in pigmented spots and radiance, with no significant difference between the products.

While these studies do not independently prove that sunscreen is the ultimate anti-ageing product for Asian skin, they do support the conclusion that solar exposure contributes to wrinkles, texture changes and pigmentation across Asian populations, while the most noticeable benefit of prevention may vary by skin tone and concern.

Underuse is not simply about whether one applies sunscreen or not. It’s also a question of quantity, coverage and reapplication.

Sunscreen protection is tested under standardised conditions. A 2023 by Jimmy Le Digabel and colleagues used multispectral imaging to measure how much SPF 50-plus sunscreen 26 volunteers applied to their faces. Without guidance, participants used an average of 1.04 mg/sq cm. A second application increased this to 1.23 mg/sq cm, while a visual application guide raised the average to 1.45mg/sq cm—still below the 2mg/sq cm used in standard sunscreen testing. 

Furthermore, a 2024 paper led by Singapore dermatologist Chee Leok Goh—which drew on an online survey of 3,000 adults in China, Indonesia and Japan—found that only 22 per cent of respondents in China, 13 per cent in Indonesia and three per cent in Japan said they systematically used all the protective measures examined: sunscreen, midday avoidance, shade, hats, protective clothing and sunglasses. While these describe comprehensive photoprotection instead of daily sunscreen-use rates, the findings nevertheless point to the main weakness in sunscreen’s anti-ageing reputation: the protection printed on the bottle is not necessarily the protection achieved on the skin.

There is no single product type for every face, climate and activity. Furthermore, it’s not simply about picking the one with the highest SPF—it’s important to find a sunscreen that suits the user’s specific case and concerns.

A broad-spectrum daily sunscreen

For routine use, the baseline is a product that clearly provides protection from both types of invisible ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun, UVA and UVB. The difference between the two is that UVA rays cause skin ageing, while UVB rays cause skin burning. Strictly speaking, SPF is a measure of sunburn protection rather than a complete description of the product. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says the SPF value primarily indicates protection against UVB radiation. “Broad spectrum” means the product has also passed testing for UVA protection. Under US rules, broad-spectrum sunscreens with SPF 15 or higher may state that, when used as directed with other precautions, they reduce the risk of early skin ageing caused by the sun.

Labelling differs across Asia, however. Depending on the market, UVA blocking performance may be communicated through a PA rating, a UVA symbol, a protection factor or broad-spectrum language. This makes the front of the bottle a two-part question: what is the SPF, and what does the label say about UVA?

For everyday use, SPF 30 or higher is a practical starting point. The texture—whether it comes as fluid, gel, milk, cream or moisturiser—is not a minor consideration: a formula that stings the eyes, pills under makeup or feels intolerable in humid weather is unlikely to be applied generously day after day. A light daily sunscreen may therefore be more effective in practice than a technically formidable formula that doesn’t get used.

A high-protection, water-resistant sunscreen

For prolonged outdoor activity, a high-protection, broad-spectrum product with tested water resistance is the more appropriate category. Under FDA labeling rules, water-resistant sunscreens must state whether they retain their tested protection for 40 or 80 minutes while swimming or sweating. Water resistant does not mean waterproof. The product must still be reapplied after the stated interval, immediately after towel drying and at least every two hours during continued exposure.

This is where the finish of a daily facial sunscreen becomes less important than durability, complete coverage and ease of reapplication. A formula designed to sit invisibly beneath makeup may not be the best product for a tropical beach, endurance sport or hours on a boat.

A tinted sunscreen for pigmentation

For people managing melasma or persistent hyperpigmentation, a tinted sunscreen containing iron oxides may offer a more targeted form of protection. A 2025 study evaluated two iron-oxide-containing formulations against visible-light-induced pigmentation in people with Fitzpatrick skin type IV. The tinted products reduced pigmentation more effectively than untreated skin and a non-tinted mineral SPF 50-plus comparator. Note that “tinted” is not enough information by itself—check to see whether the formulation contains pigments, such as iron oxides, in a form and concentration that meaningfully extends protection into visible wavelengths.

In short, for someone treating melasma, a tinted broad-spectrum sunscreen containing iron oxides may be more useful than an untinted product with a higher SPF, because it can also help protect against visible light that may worsen pigmentation.

Mineral, organic-filter or hybrid sunscreen

Consumers are often asked to choose between “mineral” and “chemical” sunscreen as though one category were inherently healthier or more effective.

Mineral sunscreens use zinc oxide, titanium dioxide or both. Other products use organic ultraviolet filters, while many formulas combine filter types. The categories affect texture, transparency, permitted ingredients and tolerability, but neither label alone establishes how well a finished product protects.

The more meaningful evidence is on the product: has it met the relevant SPF and UVA standards, is it appropriate for the intended exposure, and can it be applied evenly and in sufficient quantity? The FDA likewise evaluates the protection of the complete formulation rather than treating the filter category as a substitute for performance testing.

Mineral formulas may suit some people who find them more tolerable, but they can leave a visible cast, particularly on deeper skin tones. Organic-filter or hybrid formulas can offer lighter, more transparent finishes, although individual products may still irritate the eyes or skin.

So, there is no universal winner. The best choice is the product that the consumer can tolerate, afford and use properly and consistently.

Moisturiser with SPF or a dedicated sunscreen

A moisturiser can provide sunscreen protection if the finished product carries an adequate SPF and UVA claim and is applied at the required amount. Calling it a moisturiser does not automatically make its protection weaker, but it could lead to problems with usage. Consumers may find themselves applying a thin layer of moisturiser according to how much hydration they want, rather than according to the quantity needed for the labeled sunscreen protection. A separate sunscreen can make the protective step easier to recognise and measure, but it is not necessarily superior by definition.

So what’s important is not whether sunscreen and moisturisers are separate products; whatever your choice, the important thing is that the product is used adequately.

Makeup with SPF

The good news: foundation, skin tint, BB cream, powder and cushion products can add some protection.

The bad news: they are somewhat less dependable as a sole sunscreen because makeup is generally applied according to the desired coverage and finish, not the amount used in SPF testing. So while the SPF on the product is real under its test conditions; the difficulty lies in achieving those conditions on the face. A person may be willing to apply a visible layer of foundation, but probably not enough to reproduce the protection measured in the laboratory. 

Makeup with SPF is therefore better treated as an additional layer unless the product is specifically being applied in sufficient quantity as the primary sunscreen. 

Sticks, sprays, mists, powders and cushions

Portable formats can make reapplication easier, particularly over makeup or on small exposed areas. Their weakness is that coverage and dose can be difficult to judge.

A stick must be passed over every area enough times to leave an even film. A spray or mist must reach the skin uniformly rather than dispersing into the air. Powders and cushions may be convenient for topping up, but applying enough to reproduce formal SPF testing can be impractical.

This doesn’t mean that these formats are automatically ineffective—but they are less forgiving of casual application. The Le Digabel imaging study showed that even a conventional cream can be applied below the standard test amount, underlining the care needed in using formats that make the deposited quantity harder to see.

For long outdoor exposure, a lotion, milk, cream or gel that can be applied generously remains the clearest primary layer. Portable formats can then serve as useful additions rather than presumed replacements.

Sunscreen is not designed to carry the full burden of sun protection alone. The FDA advises combining broad-spectrum sunscreen with measures such as limiting intense exposure and using clothing, hats and sunglasses. This is particularly relevant during prolonged outdoor activity, when even diligent application can be disrupted by sweating, swimming, friction or missed areas.

The practical anti-ageing routine simple, boring, but proven to be effective. Choose a product with credible UVA and UVB protection. Match its durability to the day ahead. Apply it evenly to exposed skin rather than the face alone. Reapply when exposure, water, sweat or friction makes that necessary. Use shade and clothing when sunscreen would otherwise be asked to do too much.

Yes, sunscreen remains one of the most powerful anti-ageing products people underuse—but only when “anti-ageing” means preventing further photoaging.

The evidence does not show that sunscreen can stop intrinsic aging or outperform every treatment for existing wrinkles and pigmentation. It does show, through a rare long-term randomised trial, that regular use can slow measurable sun-related aging. Studies involving Asian populations add that photodamage can appear through wrinkles, texture changes and pigmentation, while the most visible concern may differ among individuals and skin tones.

The most powerful product is not automatically the one with the highest SPF, newest filter or most luxurious finish. It is a broad-spectrum sunscreen suited to the person’s exposure and skin concerns, in a format they can apply generously and consistently.

For a normal day, that may be a lightweight facial fluid. For a day outdoors, it may be a water-resistant lotion. For melasma, a tinted iron-oxide formulation may offer more relevant protection. Makeup, sticks and mists may help, but their convenience does not eliminate the problem of dose.

Sunscreen’s advantage is not that it promises to make the skin look younger overnight. It is that, over time, there may be less damage to correct—and that is already a win.

NOW READ

Inside Asia’s biohacking landscape: the science, trends and scientists to know

Retreat, resort, clinic or medical wellness programme? How to choose what you actually need

How Asia is changing the meaning of longevity