Does the 3M Crystalline tint provide more or less UV protection than the 3M Ceramic IR tint?
I am reading conflicting information:
3M™ Crystalline Automotive Window Films:
- https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/662303O/3mtm-crystalline-automotive-window-films-brochure.pdf: "blocks 99.9% UV Rays, SPF 1000+"
- https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/all-3m-products/~/3M-Automotive-Window-Film-Crystalline-Series/?N=5002385+3290229310&rt=rud "Blocks up to 99% of ultraviolet (UV) light to provide a total Sun Protection Factor (SPF) of 1000 for you and your passengers.
- https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1161043O/3m-automotive-window-film-crystalline-series-brochure.pdf "Blocking up to 99% of ultraviolet (UV) light, the Crystalline Series provides a total Sun Protection Factor (SPF) of 1000."
3M™ Automotive Window Film Ceramic IR Series:
- https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1752329O/ceramic-ir-mini-brochure.pdf: "Blocking up to 99.9% ultraviolet (UV) light"
- https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1161043O/3m-automotive-window-film-crystall: "Up to 99% UV protection (up to SPF 1000)"
It should be easy to see the difference with a UV meter. In terms of health impact, 99.9% protects around ten times more than 99%, since UV damage is cumulative.
Since several people have questions the usefulness of blocking UV-A, here are some motivations:
In one study, almost 75% of melanomas were diagnosed on the left side.
An extreme example of unilateral dermatoheliosis for people who don't get statistics: Trucker accumulates skin damage on left side of his face after 28 years on the road
I have crossposted the question at: