If “all-mineral” sunscreen were a dinner guest, Butyloctyl Salicylate would be the plus-one they insist belongs. It doesn’t.
I don’t claim to know everything. Far from it. That’s why I like to write. Writing is thinking and thinking is how I learn. One thing I have learned, and remain steadfast about, is my distaste for a very specific ingredient: Butyloctyl Salicylate. Not the ingredient itself, but how it’s used in sunscreens.
Not because my skin can’t tolerate it (it can) or because I think chemical filters are bad (I actually prefer them to most all-mineral formulas), but because of how it’s used to market sunscreens in the U.S.
If you’re unfamiliar, Butyloctyl Salicylate is what’s known as an SPF booster.
In certain formulas, it allows a product to hit a high SPF number without relying solely on mineral UV filters.
This is not inherently bad. What’s bad is when brands lean into “all-mineral” or “reef-safe” claims while slipping this ingredient into the mix, knowing full well it’s technically a chemical filter.
If you’re a founder, transparency should be your default setting.
Tell consumers what makes your sunscreen good. Don’t hide behind hazy “clean” language or vague reef-safe claims. Otherwise, you’re not educating. You’re marketing around the truth.
WARE’s SONNY Face Serum SPF 40: My First Eyebrow Raise
I first ran into this ingredient with a launch from a brand called Ware a few years ago.
Their SONNY Face Serum SPF 40 listed 2% Titanium Dioxide and 1% Zinc Oxide as actives, yet somehow claimed SPF 40 and “all-mineral.”
I couldn’t make the math work.
Curious, I sent the full ingredient list to a cosmetic chemist without mentioning the brand. The answer came back fast: the second ingredient after water was Butyloctyl Salicylate. That explained everything.
While the product felt luxurious on the skin, its physical filter presence was minimal.
And Then I Tried Good Weather Skin’s The One Daily Sun Cream SPF 30
Many months later, I spotted an Instagram ad with an everyday sunscreen user calling The One by G.W.S. the only thing that rivals EltaMD.
With EltaMD’s reformulation already disappointing me, I was intrigued — basically the perfect audience. Before I could even place an order, the founder generously offered to send me a bottle.
I tried it, liked it a lot… and then read the box. Butyloctyl Salicylate again, fifth on the INCI list. Still sold and marketed as mineral.
The frustrating part? The One contains 15% zinc oxide and a number of peptides. It’s genuinely good. Now the brand calls it “zinc-based,” which — okay. The ultimate trigger? Marie Claire named it Best Mineral Sunscreen in their 2025 Skin Awards. Personally, WTF SPF LOL feels more accurate.
Connecting the dots
That’s when I went down the rabbit hole and found an excellent breakdown from Dr. Michelle Wong of Lab Muffin.
She explains that Butyloctyl Salicylate is so structurally similar to Octisalate, she compares it to identical twins with different haircuts.
Technically, it works in the same way as a known chemical UV filter.
The key difference? It’s not FDA-approved as a sunscreen filter, which means it can slide into formulas as a “cosmetic ingredient,” boosting SPF without technically counting as a filter on the label. Click here to read the full article.
This trick isn’t unique to sunscreen
It’s the same marketing sleight of hand you see outside of beauty.
Think “no sugar added” yogurt that tastes syrupy sweet because it’s loaded with stevia.
Or “100%” orange juice that casually includes high-fructose corn syrup. Why? Why does orange juice need to be sweeter?
The front of the label tells you what you want to hear.
The ingredient list tells you what you’re actually getting.
A quick detour to the comments section
Last summer, I was quoted in the Financial Times about one of my favorite daily sunscreens, Le Prunier Plumscreen SPF 31. In the same piece, dermatologist Sharon Belmo recommended Colorescience Sunforgettable Total Protection Face Shield SPF 50 in Bronze, highlighting its benefits as a mineral sunscreen.
In the comments, someone suggested only dermatologists’ advice was worth listening to and dismissed “beauty blogger” perspectives. That part didn’t bother me — what did was the misinformation.
Colorescience consistently markets their formulas as mineral, but most contain Butyloctyl Salicylate. While some brands call it an “SPF booster,” it’s technically a chemical UV filter that isn’t FDA-approved as a sunscreen active.
The Sunforgettable product in question is labeled “all-mineral actives”. Butyloctyl Salicylate is its THIRD ingredient. This is exactly the kind of ingredient that turns a so-called “all-mineral” formula into something else entirely.
If you’re choosing mineral sunscreen for specific reasons — whether that’s skin sensitivity, allergies, or environmental concerns — here’s the part nobody talks about.
Brands with big advertising budgets (Colorescience is owned by SkinMedica, btw) will keep inviting editors on press trips, and you’re not likely to see this discussed in the beauty pages of any magazine. So the next time you come across a “Best Mineral Sunscreen” roundup, take the extra step and check the ingredient deck yourself.
Why it matters
If you have a salicylate allergy, you could react even to a sunscreen labeled “all-mineral.”
And if you choose mineral-only SPF for sensitive skin or environmental reasons, you’re not getting exactly what you think you are.
When a brand demonizes chemical filters yet slips this one in under the radar, it’s not transparency.
It’s omission. And omission is dishonesty.
As long as FDA does not recognize Butyloctyl Salicylate for what it is, brands that rely on anti-chemical sunscreen marketing will profit using semi-false claims. It’s that simple.
The real question is: if beauty industry publications/insiders/professionals refuse to acknowledge this, how are we supposed to learn?
The takeaway
If you choose mineral sunscreen for valid reasons, check the INCI list.
Look for Butyloctyl Salicylate and decide if that changes the equation for you.
I’m not saying these are bad products. I’m saying the labeling is selective to the point of being misleading.
What do you think? Would love to hear your take on this.
Have a good day now. And wear the sunscreen that works for you.
This is a repost from my Substack. I'd love for you to join me there.
Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links. If you purchase through them, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you.
