Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen only has SPF of 4, according to Choice
Winter has come and chilly conditions have set in, but those looking forward to summer are being warned that not all sunscreens are equal when they slip, slop, slap.
Consumer advocacy group Choice tested 20 sunscreens with SPF 50 or 50+ labels and found only four met the criteria.
'Consumers expect sunscreen to protect them in line with the SPF rating on the product, but as our testing has shown, the SPF label doesn't always match what's in the bottle,' the group's CEO Ashley de Silva said.
Some of the Cancer Council's own sunscreen products egregiously missed the mark.
The Kids Clear Zinc 50+ tested at 33, the Everyday Value Sunscreen 50 scored just a touch above the halfway mark at 27 and the Ultra Sunscreen 50+ came at a shockingly low 24.
Only one product from the council matched the label — the Kid Sunscreen 50+, which scored a strong 52.
Three other products from well-known brands — La Roche-Posay, Neutrogena and Mecca Cosmetica — delivered on their dermatological declarations.
La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen SPF 50+ tested at 72, Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion SPF 50 came in at 56 and Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body SPF 50+ Hydrating Sunscreen scraped through at 51.
The sunscreen which scored the lowest was Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen, which returned an SPF of 4, the consumer group said.
Ultra Violette disputed CHOICE's testing methodology and results, saying it did not arbitrarily slap on an SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines.
'We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate,' the company said.
'Lean Screen contains 22.75 per cent zinc oxide, a level at which, when applied sufficiently, would render a testing result of SPF 4 scientifically impossible.'
'We are deeply committed to the health and safety of our customers, rigorously retesting our entire SPF range every two years.
'Lean Screen has been on the market for five years in 29 countries and we have not received a single substantiated claim of sunburn during use – reinforcing our confidence in the testing we have. If the CHOICE results were at all feasible, we would have had hundreds of cases of reported sunburn and skin damage while using this product in real life situations.'
Ultra Violette's Lean Screen was tested by the company in 2021 and 2024, and returned a result of 64.32 to allow for an SPF 50+ rating.
'To ensure complete transparency and peace of mind for our customers, we have proactively initiated an urgent SPF test of the batch in question,' Ultra Violette said.
'Should there be any chance our product is not delivering on the claims we have made around SPF protection, we would address this as a matter of urgency.'
Ultra Violette labelled Choice's study 'misleading' and 'not at all in the best interest of consumers'.
Following pushback from the company, Choice sent a new sample of Ultra Violette Lean Screen to a different lab for retesting, which returned an SPF of 5.
Other brands also pushed back against the results.
Bondi Sands said its SPF 50+ Fragrance Free Sunscreen Lotion and SPF 50+ Zinc Mineral Body Lotion came in at SPF 72.8 and SPF 73.6 respectively in its testing.
Invisible Zinc last tested its Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen SPF50 in 2017, and returned a result of 63.1.
'The formulation has not changed in the intervening period,' the brand said.
'It is also worth noting that the SPF test results were achieved after two hours of water resistance testing.'
Woolworths also said its Everyday Sunscreen SPF 50+ 100ML last tested at SPF 68.
'Water resistance testing showed an SPF of 60,' the company said.
'Any sunscreen is better than none at all'
Industry body Consumer Healthcare Products Australia assured people they can step out into the sun 'with full confidence in the quality, safety and effectiveness of Australian sunscreens'.
The body said in a statement that it worked closely with the TGA and Standards Australia to ensure consumers were protected by some of 'the most stringent requirements in the world'.
Choice said it had informed the TGA, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission as well as the brands concerned of the results.
It has requested the authority conduct its own compliance testing.
de Silva tempered any concerns for people heading to beaches or enjoying scorching sunny days, noting that 'any sunscreen is better than none at all'.
'Please continue to wear sunscreen,' she said.
'Sunscreen saves lives. A sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or even 20 still offers a significant amount of sun protection.
'Australians should make a daily habit of wearing sunscreen and reapplying regularly, particularly if you're swimming.'
Choice recommends wearing a hat, staying in the share and wearing sunglasses in combination with sunscreen use.
Sunscreens that passed the SPF test
Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen SPF 50+ passed with a reported SPF of 52
La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen 50+ passed with a reported SPF of 72
Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body SPF 50+ Hydrating Sunscreen passed with a reported SPF of 51
Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion SPF 50 passed with a reported SPF of 56
SPF results in the 20s
Aldi Ombra 50+ – tested at 26
Banana Boat Baby Zinc Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ — tested at 28
Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Zinc Mineral Body Lotion — tested at 26
Cancer Council Everyday Value Sunscreen 50 — tested at 27
Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen 50+ — tested at 24
Neutrogena Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch Lotion SPF 50 — tested at 24
Woolworths Sunscreen Everyday Tube SPF 50+ — tested at 27
SPF results in the 30s
Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ — tested at 35
Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Fragrance Free Sunscreen — tested at 32
Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc 50+ — tested at 33
Invisible Zinc Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50 — tested at 38
SPF results in the 40s
Coles SPF 50+ Sunscreen Ultra Tube — tested at 43
Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ — tested at 41
Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock SPF 50+ Sunscreen — tested at 40
Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen Lotion 50+ — tested at 40
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
3 days ago
- SBS Australia
New study reveals some popular Australian sunscreens are not meeting their sun protection claims
New study reveals some popular Australian sunscreens are not meeting their sun protection claims Published 12 June 2025, 9:45 am A new study has found some of Australia's most popular sunscreens are failing to meet their sun protection claims. Independent testing by consumer group Choice has revealed a large proportion of sunscreens they tested did not have the advertised protection level. Several sunscreen manufacturers have disputed the findings.
Sky News AU
3 days ago
- Sky News AU
More than a dozen Aussie sunscreens fail to meet SPF claims on their labels, consumer group Choice finds in shock new report
More than a dozen favourite Australian sunscreens have failed to meet their SPF claims, according to a shock report by consumer group Choice. Twenty SPF 50 or 50+ products from different brands and retailers were subject to the test, which Choice said was conducted by experts in an accredited sunscreen lab. Sixteen of the 20 sunscreens under the microscope did not meet the SPF ratings stated on their labels, with only four living up to their claims, the analysis found. The worst performer, according to the report, was Ultra Violette's Lean Screen Mineral Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen which returned an SPF rating of four despite being labelled as 50+. Some Cancer Council products, including its SPF 50+ Ultra Sunscreen and Everyday Value Sunscreen SPF 50, tested at almost half their advertised ratings at 24 and 27, respectively. Woolworths' Sunscreen Everyday Tube SPF 50+ returned a rating of 27. Choice CEO Ashley de Silva said a follow up analysis was conducted for Ultra Violette's Lean Screen given the astonishing test result. "We were really shocked to see the results for Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ product, so much so that we actually decided to test a different batch at a completely different lab in Germany to confirm the results," he said in a statement. "Those tests found the product had an SPF of five - an almost identical result to our initial testing." A spokesperson for Ultra Violette said the company does not accept the results "as even remotely accurate". "Lean Screen contains 22.75 per cent zinc oxide, a level at which, when applied sufficiently, would render a testing result of SPF 4 scientifically impossible," a spokesperson said. Among the top performers included La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen SPF 50+ which tested as providing a higher protection rating of 72. Neutrogena's Ultra Sheer Body Lotion returned a slightly higher SPF of 56, over its printed label of 50, while the Cancer Council's Kid Sunscreen SPF 50+ tested at 52. Popular makeup brand Mecca Cosmetica's To Save Body Hydrating Sunscreen had an SPF of 51, according to the report. Choice has called on the Therapeutic Goods Administration to conduct its own compliance testing in the wake of the analysis, as it urges the ACCC to investigate any misleading SPF claims. "Currently, the TGA relies on reports provided by manufacturers to ensure the safety, quality and efficacy of sunscreen products," Mr de Silva said. "Unfortunately, these reports may not be providing the accurate information consumers need when choosing sunscreens for themselves and their families." However, Mr de Silva noted the consumer group's testing does not mean sunscreen is not effective. "While some specific sunscreens did not meet their claimed SPF, a sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or even 20 still offers a significant amount of sunscreen protection, and any sunscreen is better than none at all," he said. A TGA spokesperson confirmed to it is investigating the findings and will "take regularly action as required". The authority said it cannot comment on whether individual products may be subject to investigation, or compliance and enforcement activity due to privacy and legal restrictions. "The TGA acknowledges that there is variability in SPF testing results across laboratories, which is largely due to current reliance on human subject testing," a spokesperson said. "Limited inter-laboratory calibration may also lead to inconsistencies in methodologies and results. "While encouraging progress is being made internationally toward in-vitro sunscreen testing which would improve consistency of results, this will not eliminate the need for human subject testing, particularly for verifying water resistance claims." The TGA reiterated the importance of using sunscreen in addition to other sun safety measures such as wearing a wide-brimmed hat, protective clothing and sunglasses. "We note that a number of the products Choice tested provided results in the range of SPF 30," the regulator said. "It is important to note that SPFs in the range of 30 to 59 provide 'High protection', while a SPF of 60 or higher (SPF 50+) provides 'Very high' protection. "Therefore, products with an SPF of 30 are effective to use. "Consumers are also advised that, irrespective of the SPF rating, sunscreens should be applied liberally and reapplied frequently." A spokesperson for the ACCC said it is considering the issues raised in Choice's report in accordance with its Compliance and Enforcement Policy. "The ACCC will engage closely with the Therapeutic Goods Administration in considering the allegations," a spokesperson said in a statement to "In addition to obligations under therapeutic goods legislation, businesses also have obligations under the Australian Consumer Law, including an obligation not to make false or misleading representations." has contacted the Cancer Council and Ultra Violette for further comment.
Sky News AU
3 days ago
- Sky News AU
Choice sunscreen test finds most brands do not meet SPF 50 claims
Major sunscreen brands are not living up to their SPF claims, according to a new test from consumer group Choice. Choice tested 20 popular SPF50 and SPF50+ sunscreens and found that only four lived up to the standard they claimed, with 16 falling short. SPF stands for 'sun protection factor' and is the measure of how well the sunscreen protects from the sun's UV rays. An SPF 50 sunscreen is meant to block about 98 per cent of the rays, meaning it will take 50 times longer to get burnt than with unprotected skin. The consumer group tested the products with experts in an accredited sunscreen lab, with four products returning SPF results in the 40s, four in the 30s, and seven in the 20s. Choice chief executive Ashley de Silva said the tests showed that products were not meeting consumer expectations. 'Consumers expect sunscreen to protect them in line with the SPF rating on the product, but as our testing has shown, the SPF label doesn't always match what's in the bottle,' he said. One sunscreen, Ultra Violette's lean screen SPF 50+ mattifying zinc skinscreen, astoundingly returned a result of just SPF4. 'We were really shocked to see the results for Ultra Violette's lean screen SPF 50+ product, so much so that we actually decided to test a different batch at a completely different lab in Germany to confirm the results,' Mr de Silva said. 'Those tests found the product had an SPF of 5 – an almost identical result to our initial testing.' The consumer group was, however, quick to remind people that while a sunscreen may have ranked lower than claimed in its tests, that does not mean that products do not work. A sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or 20 can still give significant sun protection and is much better than using no sunscreen at all. Choice have told the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) about the results of the tests and asked the TGA to conduct their own tests. 'Risk of death': Grim call on Temu itemsAussies warned over new pay trend 'Choice is calling on the TGA to urgently carry out its own sunscreen compliance testing and on the ACCC to investigate if any SPF claims are misleading,' Mr de Silva said. 'Currently, the TGA relies on reports provided by manufacturers to ensure the safety, quality and efficacy of sunscreen products. 'Unfortunately, these reports may not be providing the accurate information consumers need when choosing sunscreens for themselves and their families.' Originally published as Consumer group finds most sunscreens do not meet SPF claims
