MY name is Clare and I’ve never worn sun cream.
There, I’ve said it. While it might not sound like a huge confession, as a 46-year-old woman who loathes her lines and wrinkles, I now wonder how many of them are down to my lack of SPF.
Clare O’Reilly, aged 46, has never worn sun cream
Clare went to dermatologist Dr Toby Nelson to get her face scanned and determine the skin damage she has from not wearing SPF
She was shocked to find out her skin age is SEVEN years older than her biological ageFrom frying myself as a teen in , to sizzling in Scarborough in the early Nineties, I admired my half-Portuguese skin as it turned a deep shade of olive, and maybe a little red, all without a scrap of UV protection.
But now, finding out my skin age is SEVEN years older than my biological age is pretty devastating.
Dermatologist Dr Toby Nelson, who scanned my face to determine the damage, breaks the news gently.
“The Visia skin scanner uses hi-tech cameras and UV light to take a deep look at the surface of your face, revealing hidden sun damage, wrinkles, inflammation and more,” he says.
“It gives you a ‘skin age’. If your ’s in great shape, your age could come back younger than your actual age.
“But if you’ve not taken care of your skin, it might say you’re older. In your case, Clare, it’s seven years older.”
The UK sun protection market generated more than £300million last year, but I’ve never bought a sunscreen or lotion for myself.
Growing up in the Eighties, my parents never put any on me either. Now well into my forties, my are becoming more obvious.
The creases around my eyes feel more noticeable than those of friends the same age and I have dark spots on my cheeks.
While the scanner can’t determine any risk, I’m all too aware that statistics for , the type of skin common in those who’ve experienced sun exposure, are on the rise.
More than 17,500 people are diagnosed with it every year. That’s 48 people a day.
Dr Nelson is part of the team at Wood MediSpa in leafy Okehampton, , and while the scan of my skin, which costs £250, takes just seconds, the results will stay with me a lifetime.
I look at Dr Nelson for reassurance and am greeted with a shrug. He says it is utterly unsurprising that my skin age is 53.
“Your skin analysis is consistent with someone who likely didn’t use sunscreen regularly throughout childhood and early adulthood,” he explains.
Still reeling
“As you’re now in your forties, we’re seeing signs of sun damage, specifically sun spots, called solar lentigines, fine lines and some texture changes.
“People who haven’t consistently used SPF tend to show signs of sun damage much earlier.”
I smile meekly, wondering just how young my skin would look had I slapped on a bit of SPF over the years, and neglect to mention my occasional use of tanning beds.
Given the fact I already feel like an idiot for not using sunscreen, I fear I may be laughed out of the clinic if I admit to grilling myself unsafely under lamps as a teen.
While I’m still reeling from the results, Dr Nelson says it is not too late to reverse at least some of the damage.
“You can definitely stop things getting worse and, to some extent, improve the state of your skin right now,” he says hopefully.
“The most important step is starting sunscreen use, as it allows the skin to repair some existing damage.
“Other products offer marginal improvements. Antioxidants like vitamin C, niacinamide, vitamin B3, and other serums can help, but they don’t compare to sunscreen in terms of effectiveness.
“You can also monitor the UV index, which is available on most .
“People often overlook it in favour of the temperature or sunshine forecast. But if the UV index is three or above, you should wear sunscreen.”
My 14-year-old daughter Annie is a UV-checking addict, so I leave Dr Nelson’s clinic â feeling chastened and foolish â with some leaflets about laser treatment, which he says could help smooth my leathery skin.
And yes, I stop and buy a bottle of SPF 50 on the way home.
Clare tested the Visia skin scanner which uses hi-tech cameras and UV light to take a deep look at the surface of the faceWHAT CLARE’S TEST RESULTS SHOW
DR NELSON says: “Clare’s skin age is seven years older than her biological age, which is expected, given the fact she has never worn sunscreen.
“Scores below 50 per cent suggest Clare’s skin condition is a lot worse than average for her age. Her scan suggests areas for improvement, especially in texture, pores and redness, while UV damage is less concerning.
“That said, it has placed her skin age above her biological age primarily due to the increased brown pigmentation manifesting as solar lentigines [liver spots] and melasma [darkened skin].”
He explains the results, below. . .
SPOTS: 41.53%
Clare has darker brown or red spots, including freckles and acne scars“CLARE has darker brown or red spots, including freckles, acne scars and hyperpigmentation.
“The score reflects how your skin compares to others of the same age and gender. Higher is better.”
WRINKLES: 27.12%
She has more visible wrinkles compared to her peers“I CAN see both fine lines and deeper wrinkles. Her lower percentage indicates that she has more visible wrinkles compared to her peers.”
TEXTURE: 12.47%
Clare has irregularities in her skin texture due to sun damage“YELLOW highlights show uneven texture. Clare’s skin isn’t particularly smooth and even. Her lower score may indicate more irregularities due to sun damage.”
UV SPOTS: 75.93%
Clare has damage under the skin caused by sun exposure“Thedamage under the skin caused by sunexposureis not as much as I might expect given Clare’s never worn sunscreen.A higher score indicates less UV damage.”
BROWN SPOTS: 24.84 %
Clare’s pigmentation might be due to aging, sun damage or hormone“THE pigmentation might be due to aging, sun damage or hormones.
“The yellow dots indicate melanin concentration and her lower score indicates more brown spots.”
RED AREAS: 18.97%
Clare has redness, a sign of skin damage“RED areas show inflammation, sensitivity or acne.
“Clare’s lower score means more redness is present, which is a sign of skin damage.”
