On nano and “non-nano” sunscreens
1. Your skin circadian driven organ
Barrier function (stratum corneum tightness, lipid organization, permeability) varies by time of day, usually strongest at night and weakest during the day
Sunscreens are mostly applied in the morning/daytime, precisely when skin is naturally more permeable and meant to interact with full spectrum sunlight
Nanoparticles slipping in during this window is problematic
2. Metal ions in the blood act as circadian clock disruptors
Zn²⁺ is not neutral. It’s a powerful cofactor in transcription factors, enzymes, and synaptic signaling
Sudden spikes from non-dietary routes (skin → blood → CSF) could scramble local zinc homeostasis that’s usually tuned to food intake timing and gut absorption
Titanium (TiO₂ NPs) is even trickier because bulk TiO₂ is inert, but nanosized TiO₂ generates EXCESS reactive oxygen species under UV, throwing off the intricate balance involved with ROS and RNS within the system
3. Consider the circadian consequences
🌞 Melatonin suppression at the wrong place/time
Zinc and titanium nanoparticles can accumulate in mitochondria, altering ROS signaling
Melatonin is not just made in the pineal gland. It’s also made locally in mitochondria via the sub-cellular form
if nanoparticles hijack redox homeostasis, melatonin’s nighttime signal weakens
🌞 Central vs peripheral clock confusion
The skin clock reads the light in your environment, while the liver clock reads the food environment. Introducing artificial nanoparticle stressors through the skin is like giving the skin clock false input, which then feeds back to the SCN
🌞 Neurotoxicity risk
If Zn²⁺ ions cross into cerebral spinal fluid, they can modulate NMDA receptors, excitability, and even contribute to neurodegeneration
This is especially concerning when exposure happens daily in sync with sunlight, the very zeitgeber meant to entrain brain clocks
•••
Normally, sunlight enters through your skin and sends clean signals to your cells and brain about what time of day it is
When you cover your skin with nanoparticles, you’re letting tiny foreign particles slip inside
Instead of sunlight guiding your body’s clocks, these particles interfere with the signal, creating confusion in how your cells and brain read light
This blunts the natural circadian benefits of sunlight (progressive UV tolerance, melanin signaling, nitric oxide release) while layering in an unnatural, time dependent toxic load
From a circadian standpoint, ZnO and TiO₂ nanoparticles in sunscreens aren’t just a toxicology problem
They’re an information problem
They introduce chaos into a system that relies on precise temporal signaling from light, food, and redox balance
Put simply, they trick your body into thinking they’re part of sunlight’s signal, but instead they scramble your internal clocks
•••
Both nano and so called “non-nano” sunscreen options have issues, just different flavors of them
Nano (ZnO, TiO₂)
Nanoparticles can slip through the skin into blood and even CSF, disrupting metal balance, oxidative stress, and circadian signaling
Nano TiO₂ also acts like a photocatalyst, generating excess free radicals under UV light that damage cells
When washed off, these particles pollute rivers and oceans, harming plankton, corals, and fish
Yet companies still label them “safe mineral sunscreens,” where “safe” often only means not immediately irritating, not truly circadian or mitochondrial safe
Non-Nano (larger ZnO, TiO₂ particles)
“Non-nano” particles are often just slightly bigger than the nano cutoff, but can still fragment into smaller pieces on the skin
They block UV-B, the very wavelength range needed for Vitamin D3 production, while leaving a white cast that companies often “fix” by secretly blending in smaller particles
Even larger ZnO can still leach zinc ions into sweat and the bloodstream, just at lower levels than true nanoparticles
Nano = higher penetration risk + excess ROS stress
Non-nano = less penetration, but still blocks critical light wavelengths and often hides nano fragments anyway
Both confuse the circadian system by replacing evolutionary light signaling with an artificial barrier or intrusion
This is why I’m so strict on my recommendation of no sunscreen use, in any form
What I just laid out here is informed consent in practice, not the typical nonsense of “use this XYZ sunscreen to avoid burns”
I choose no sunscreen because the body only adapts in the way it should by respecting circadian principles and implementing progressive overload for melanin development
Sunlight exposure when UV-A and UV-B are out isn’t to be abused
It must be approached with gradual, mindful exposure rather than reckless overexposure
And if you choose to be in scenarios that increase the risk of overexposure, while using any sunscreen option, that’s your choice
Again, informed consent