FDA Proposes First New Sunscreen Molecule in Nearly Three Decades Amid Broader Science Policy Shifts
Americans may soon see a new type of sunscreen for the first time in nearly 30 years. On December 11, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed to recognize bemotrizinol, which has been used as a safe and effective UV filter. This is a big step towards providing Americans with more sunscreen options. In this proposal, the government agency has announced a plan to categorize bemotrizinol (BEMT) as “generally recognized as safe and effective” (GRASE), which could open a new generation of sunscreen products that may be introduced in the US.
Bemotrizinol has been used extensively in the European Union and many other nations since 2000. Since 2002, the FDA has been able to consider overseas safety data, but it has hardly ever done so. The agency would use over 20 years of foreign evidence under the current proposal. The FDA has long been encouraged by legislators, business associations, and public health activists to acknowledge this body of information in order to help broaden the limited selection of UV filters that American consumers can choose from.
Researchers claim that bemotrizinol has a number of significant advantages. Its high molecular weight reduces the possibility that it could be absorbed through the skin and enter the bloodstream, and it provides broad-spectrum protection by shielding against both major kinds of UV light. The plan is “a sure win for American public health and skin cancer prevention,” according to Carl D’Ruiz, a regulatory affairs manager at DSM-Firmenich, which has worked with the substance for more than 20 years. Bemotrizinol-containing sunscreens may be accessible to US customers as early as fall 2026 if the regulation is approved following a public comment period.
According to policy analysts, the proposal could establish an important trend that would facilitate the regulatory path for other sunscreen components that have long been used safely abroad and increase the options for sun protection in the US, where skin cancer rates are still rising.
Additionally, the FDA’s decision coincides with increased activity in Washington about science and technology policy. A reconciled version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a comprehensive law authorizing around $900 billion in defense and national security spending, was narrowly approved by the US House of Representatives on December 10. The Senate-backed Biosecure Act, which forbids federal agencies from acquiring goods or services from “biotechnology companies of concern” with connections to foreign enemies, especially China, is included in the bill.
While supporters see the act as an essential measure to safeguard national security, a number of science policy experts warn that it would impede academic cooperation and put more pressure on pharmaceutical supply chains. The more comprehensive House version of the SAFE Research Act, which would have restricted federal funding for scholars collaborating with people or organizations connected to ambiguously defined “hostile foreign entities,” was eventually excluded from the final form.
The NDAA also contains provisions affecting research funding. One measure would prevent the Department of Defense from changing indirect cost rates for research grants without consulting universities and other members of the extramural research community. This follows controversy over a proposed 15% cap on indirect costs that was struck down by a federal judge earlier this year.
Together, these developments highlight a moment of transition in US science and regulatory policy, one that balances public health innovation, national security concerns, and the future of research collaboration.
