Therapeutic Goods Administration investigates sunscreen non-compliance claims in Choice consumer report

A sunscreen stoush is unfolding after a consumer report testing sunscreens found 80 per cent of those marked SPF 50 were under the rating’s threshold. Several manufacturers have disputed the claims, with one labelling the report “misleading” as others initiate their own investigations. Consumer group Choice tested 20 popular sunscreens and found 16 of them did not meet claims of SPF 50 or more. Shockingly, one sunscreen recorded an SPF of just four, while three from Australia’s leading cancer charity recorded results under 30. Sun protection factor (SPF) is a measure of how well sunscreen protects the skin from harmful UV rays. SPF 50 and SPF 30 protects against 98 per cent and 97 per cent of UV rays, respectively. Two in three Aussies will be diagnosed with some form of skin cancer in their lifetime. It means sunscreen is highly regulated in Australia, with the Therapeutic Goods Administration responsible for their safety, quality and efficacy. But the TGA relies on compliance reports supplied by manufacturers, which it licenses to produce sunscreens. It’s why Choice has reported its findings to the TGA and Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, urging the regulators undertake their own investigations. While just four sunscreens met their SPF claims, another eight sunscreens ranged between SPF 30 and 50, which still offers a high degree of protection, and another seven ranged between SPF 20 and 30. Ultra Violette’s Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen scored the lowest in Choice’s testing, returning an SPF of just four. “We were really shocked to see the results for Ultra Violette . . . so much so that we actually decided to test a different batch at a completely different lab in Germany to confirm the results,” Choice chief executive Ashley de Silva said. “Those tests found the product had an SPF of five — an almost identical result to our initial testing.” Ultra Violette hit back at the claim with scathing criticism, refusing to accept Choice’s results “as even remotely accurate”, before saying it had “proactively initiated an urgent SPF test of the batch in question” in the interest of transparency. “It is disappointing that Choice has chosen to release what we view as misleading information,” it said. Three sunscreens from the Cancer Council, Australia’s leading cancer non-profit, failed to meet its SPF 50 threshold in Choice’s testing — including one branded for children. A Cancer Council spokeswoman said the charity “takes SPF testing standards extremely seriously”, adding its own testing confirmed its compliance. “Out of an abundance of caution, we have submitted the four referenced products for further testing by an independent international laboratory,” she said. Ultra Violette and Cancer Council are among several manufacturers standing by their compliance testing, leaving them at odds with Choice, which also backs its testing. “There is, of course, some variability when it comes to sunscreen testing, but when you have 16 of 20 sunscreens not meeting their SPF claims, there is clearly a widespread issue that needs to be investigated,” Ms de Silva said. A TGA spokesman said the regulator was investigating the report findings and “will take regulatory action as required”. Choice SPF testing results: