Might point out, Aussies have the highest skin cancer rates in the world
Choice report finds popular Australian sunscreens fail to meet SPF claims on label
By national health equity reporter Rachel Carbonell and the Specialist Reporting Team's Paige Cockburn
Consumer advocacy group Choice tested 20 sunscreens and found most did not meet their SPF claims. (ABC News: Billy Cooper)
In short
Consumer group Choice tested 20 sunscreens and found only four provided the SPF protection their label claimed.
The brands dispute the findings and say their own testing shows their sunscreens meet or exceed their SPF claims.
What's next?
Experts say Australians should still have confidence that sunscreens work even if some tests results show a lower SPF than what labels say.
Popular sunscreen brands have failed to meet the SPF50 protection claims on their labels, according to testing by Australia's peak consumer advocacy group.
Choice tested 20 sunscreens in an independent accredited Australian lab and found 16 did not meet their advertised SPF50 rating, including three children's sunscreens and three sold by the Cancer Council.
Choice said the results were "disappointing" given Australia's reputation for having some of the world's best sunscreen standards, but cautioned against panic.
CEO Ashley De Silva said lower SPF sunscreens still provided significant protection.
"It would be a real shame if people decided that sunscreen was not useful or that it didn't matter, or even products with lower scores are ineffective, because the science shows that's not true,"
he said.
"There's a big gap between the SPF rating but a very small gap in effectiveness."
Choice director of testing Matthew Steen said while there was "always variability in testing", the difference between what brands advertised on their products and what Choice testing found was "quite stark".
What were the best and worst performers?
The worst performer was the most expensive — Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ Mattifying Zinc Sunscreen, which costs $52 for 75 millilitres, and returned an SPF rating of four.
Mr de Silva said this result was so low the team commissioned a smaller additional test at a German lab to validate the results.
"Those tests found the product had an SPF of five … an almost identical result to our initial testing," he said.
Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Sunscreen returned an SPF rating of four, according to Choice. (ABC News: Billy Cooper)
A spokesperson for Ultra Violette said the company did an urgent SPF test of the sunscreen in April and it came back with an SPF of 61.7, confirming its original test results.
The company said it had not received a single substantiated claim of sunburn.
The company said it did not accept the Choice results as "even remotely accurate" and human error during testing was highly probable.
Most sunscreens tested by Choice returned results in the 20s, while eight different products had protection ratings in the 30s and 40s.
Sunscreens rated in the 20sCarousel
Neutrogena Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch
Neutrogena's Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch Lotion says it's SPF 50 but came in at 24.
Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen
Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen says it's SPF50 but returned a test of 24.
Aldi Ombra Everyday Sunscreen
Aldi Ombra Everyday Sunscreen Lotion has a rating of 50+ but tested as 26.
Bondi Sands Zinc Mineral
Bondi Sands Zinc Mineral Body Lotion is labelled as SPF 50+ but came out with 26.
Woolies Sunscreen
Woolworths Everyday Sunscreen came in with a rating of 27.
Cancer Council Everyday Value Sunscreen
Cancer Council Everyday Value sunscreen has a 50+ label but came out as 27.
Banana Boat Baby Zinc
Banana Boat Baby Zinc Sunscreen Lotion returned a rating of 28.
1 / of 7
Sunscreens rated in the 30sCarousel
Bondi Sands Fragrance Free Sunscreen
Bondi Sands Fragrance Free Sunscreen claims it's SPF 50+ but tested as 32.
Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc
Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc tested as 33 SPF despite claiming to be 50+.
Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen
Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen Lotion returned a test rating of 35.
Invisible Zinc Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen
Invisible Zinc Face + Body tested at 38.
1 / of 4
Sunscreens rated in the 40sCarousel
Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen
Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen Lotion came in with a total of 40.
Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock sunscreen
Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock sunscreen returned a test result of 40.
Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen
Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen Lotion returned a result of 41.
Coles 50+ Ultra Sunscreen Ultra Tube
Coles 50+ Ultra Sunscreen Ultra Tube returned a result of 43.
1 / of 4
Sunscreens rated 50+Carousel
Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body Hydrating Sunscreen
Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body Hydrating Sunscreen got a rating of 51 from CHOICE's test.
Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen
Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen returned an SPF of 52.
Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion
Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion received an SPF rating of 56 from CHOICE.
La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen
La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen returned a result of 72.
1 / of 4
Most of Choice's tests were performed on ten volunteers in line with Australian and international standards. Three tests were performed on five volunteers.
The testing process involved putting sunscreen on the skin of volunteers, exposing that skin to a solar simulator to replicate the effects of the sun, and analysing the results.
Those results were then compared to the same process on unprotected skin.
"Consumers should be able to feel confident that the protection that's promised on the bottle that they're buying is what they're using," Mr de Silva said.
"I think when you're seeing 16 instances of that not being the case from our testing, it definitely raises questions."
These seven sunscreens rated in the 20s in Choice's test, despite having SPF50+ on their labels. (ABC News: Billy Cooper)
All the brands tested rejected Choice's findings and said their own independent testing showed their products met the advertised SPF.
All brands except Aldi, Nivea, Woolworths, and Neutrogena provided Choice with evidence of those tests.
In a statement to ABC News, the Cancer Council said it had test results that showed its sunscreens met their SPF ratings, but out of an abundance of caution, it had submitted the products for further testing.
Coles, Ultra Violette, and Invisible Zinc have signalled they would pursue additional testing following the Choice results.
You can read responses brands provided to ABC News here.
Experts on the differences between a budget and expensive sunscreen
Photo shows Close-up of a young woman applying sunscreen on her tanned shoulder to protect her skin from the sun.
Experts explain what divides a budget sunscreen from a bougie one.
'Don't throw your sunscreen out'
Despite the Choice results, the Melanoma Institute's head of dermatology Linda Martin has urged Australians to maintain confidence in sunscreens.
"Don't go and throw your sunscreen out, if anything, use more — that's the most important take-home message," Dr Martin said.
She said while testing needed to improve to make sure labelling was accurate, adequate application of sunscreen was just as important.
Research has long shown many Australians do not apply enough sunscreen and that two in three will be diagnosed with skin cancer in their lifetime.
"Skin cancer is the most common, most expensive and most preventable cancer in Australia. It costs our government billions of dollars so every step counts," Dr Martin said.
Linda Martin says sunscreen use is still crucial. (ABC News: Chris Taylor)
Dr Martin said many people overestimated the difference in protection between an SPF30 and 50, and thought sunscreen was a "coat of armour" when really it was a "colander" that still let sunrays in.
If applied properly, SPF50 products block 98 per cent of UV rays whereas SPF30 items block 96.7 per cent, according to the Melanoma Institute.
Applying a broad-spectrum sunscreen of at least 50+ is only one of five sun-safety steps the institute recommends.
All sun safe rules recommended by the Melanoma Institute:
Slip on sun-protective clothing which covers your back, shoulders, arms and legs
Slop on sunscreen with a rating of above SPF50
Slap on a broad-brimmed hat
Seek shade, especially in the hottest part of the day
Slide on some wrap-around sunglasses that meet Australian standards
TGA urged to do more
All sunscreens in Australia are regulated by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and must adhere to testing requirements.
Choice sent the TGA its findings and urged it to order its own testing of the 16 products that it found did not meet their SPF label claim.
John Staton, one of Australia's top sunscreen-testing experts, said any sunscreen with test results below its label claim should be addressed by the sunscreen company and regulator.
"It's certainly not a panic situation. I think it's just a matter of making sure corrective action is taken,"
he said.
The TGA told ABC News it did not conduct its own testing because that required humans to be exposed to controlled doses of UV radiation and the regulator did not conduct any human or animal testing.
"Where necessary, the TGA has previously outsourced SPF testing to accredited laboratories," it said in a statement.
The TGA said it could check that companies were complying with safety regulations and direct them to investigate and re-test if there were any potential issues with a product.
John Staton says the TGA should be commissioning its own SPF spot testing. (ABC News: Billy Cooper)
The regulator said it was investigating the Choice findings and would take action as required.
The TGA said there was variability in SPF testing results across laboratories, which it said was largely due to the reliance on human subject testing.
Mr Staton said that while variability between labs and test subjects was a genuine issue, there should not be large variations.
Choice said its results had also been submitted to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) so the watchdog could determine whether any of the brands made misleading claims about the products.
