Latest news with #ABC News
ABC News
17 hours ago
- Business
- ABC News
Why we're using more electricity than ever before
Our hunger for electricity has never been so great. That's hardly surprising given the growing desire to electrify our homes and transport. But it's the massive computer data centres that could become a big problem. There are questions about whether the official forecasts underestimate how much power they'll need over the next ten years. Today, ABC energy reporter Dan Mercer on whether we have enough electricity to keep up with the huge demand. Featured: Dan Mercer, ABC energy reporter Subscribe to ABC News Daily on the ABC listen app.
ABC News
5 days ago
- General
- ABC News
Going beneath the surface to protect dolphins
Australia is home to the world's only city-based dolphin sanctuary, established in 2005 to protect a pod, considered rare for living in an Adelaide estuary. Since becoming protected, they have battled pollution, speeding boats and fishing lines. Their population has halved. And experts fear some of their biggest challenges are still ahead. Port River is a mix of power plants, residential development and industrial business. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) It can be a place of breathtaking beauty. A place where dense 10,000-year-old mangroves line the rivers, inlets and narrowing creeks that make-up this Adelaide estuary. An abandoned ship among mangroves in the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) A place where abandoned ships dating back to 1909 are both seen and partially hidden by silt and mangroves in the backwaters of this ecosystem. The Port River mangroves are home to waterbirds. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) A place to spot birds from as far abroad as Siberia and Alaska. The Port River Expressway at Port Adelaide. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) But it is also a place where pockets of natural beauty meet industry. A scrap metal business in Port Adelaide. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Lining the Port River, in metropolitan Adelaide, are power plants with high-voltage transmission towers, submarine construction, residential development, scrap-metal recycling and industrial businesses. Port Adelaide was South Australia's first port. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) In 1837, the river became South Australia's first port and remains the state's largest with 2,000 container ships coming in and out each year. There are about 20 dolphins in the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Protected marine life and mangroves must coexist with some of the very things that may threaten their survival. Marine scientist Mike Bossley spent years documenting Port River dolphins. Researcher Mike Bossley has spent decades trying to protect a unique dolphin pod that lives in the Port River and its adjoining inlets. His love of the ocean inspiring more than 50 years of marine conservation. Mike Bossley has dedicated his life to protecting Port River dolphins. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) "I grew up more or less in the ocean and I've loved the ocean ever since, all my life really," Dr Bossley said. "If there was an epiphany for me it was when I was studying in Canberra and went down to the South Coast [of New South Wales] and was walking along the beach with my wife. "I was watching some guys surfing and suddenly a group of dolphins came and started surfing the same waves as the guys were." Horse trainer Sandy befriends a dolphin named Billy in the Port River. ( The Advertiser/State Library of South Australia/ABC News: Stephan Hammat ) Later, he received a letter from a friend about a dolphin that was swimming with racehorses, who were training in the Port River. "It was early 1988, and I started watching this dolphin — whose name was Billy — swimming beside the racehorses," he said. Mike Bossley bought a boat to continue his research into the Port River dolphins. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) "I got so interested, the next year I bought a boat and started following them around to get to know them." Mike Bossley does weekly surveys of the Port River dolphins. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) His weekly surveys of the resident Port River dolphins started in 1988. They continue to this day, making his research one of the longest-running dolphin data sets in the world. He knows every dolphin by name ... ... every injury, every mark on their bodies. "We know their life history, who their mother was, who their grandmother was, who they hang out with," Dr Bossley said. Dolphins under attack But in the late 1990s and early 2000s, dolphins were being shot and stabbed. Warning: This section of the story contains some images that may cause distress to readers. Dr Bossley started campaigning, trying to convince the state government to declare the estuary a marine protection zone. He lobbied for a decade, and in mid-2005, the Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary was established — the first of its kind in the world. It became a criminal offence to harm the mammals, park rangers were employed to monitor the pod, and a plan was made to improve their habitat and the water quality of the Port River. Back then, the pod comprised of about 40 resident bottlenose dolphins. Dolphins were entangled in fishing lines or injured by speeding boats. Then-SA premier Mike Rann offered $10,000 for information on who was shooting dolphins. ( The Advertiser/Marianna Boorman/Whale and Dolphin Conservation ) Dolphin researcher Marianna Boorman spent decades recording Port River dolphin movements. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) "We've certainly had some ups and downs — we used to see a lot more dolphins when the sanctuary was started," dolphin researcher Marianna Boorman said. Ms Boorman met Dr Bossley when she was 13 years old and started volunteering by helping with mailouts. Marianna Boorman (left) met Mike Bossley during her year 11 work experience in 1998. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) In 1998, she did her year 11 work experience with the veteran conservationist. "Sadly, it was also when I saw my first deceased dolphin," she said. "This was a mother dolphin that had a young calf. It was one of two adult dolphins that had been deliberately shot. "It was very upsetting and made me realise how callous people could be and how important it was that more measures were taken to help protect these dolphins. "I've loved dolphins for as long as I can remember." Ms Boorman started taking her camera on surveys to capture "some of these special moments between the dolphins". "I probably have about 20 hard drives [of images]," she said. Her extensive catalogue provides an insight into their fascinating history ... ... but also a stark reminder of how many dolphins have been lost. Dolphin numbers fluctuate as calves are born, but the pod has suffered significant losses over the past 20 years. "It is heartbreaking, especially when you know [the death] has been caused by human activity," Ms Boorman said. "They do face many threats from humans including fishing line entanglements, boat strikes, pollution, being fed and harassment." In 2021 six dolphins — Doc, Twinkle, Tallula, Hunter, Squeak and another in nearby Semaphore — became abnormally thin and died within a few months. Doc and Twinkle went missing and presumed dead in June 2021. ( Supplied: Marianna Boorman ) Sparkle with her calf Tinsel died in March 2019. ( Supplied: Marianna Boorman ) The late Talulla learnt the act of tail walking from his mother, Wave. ( Suppied: Marianna Boorman ) Post-mortem examinations found heavy metals and other toxicants were present but not the cause. Most had compromised immune systems, leaving them vulnerable to infection. It is unclear what exactly impacted their immune systems. A further three dolphins — Hope, Ripple and Namor — died or disappeared in 2022 and 2023, but there have been no further adult deaths in the past two years. Many calves have died, which is common given their vulnerability. A one-week-old calf died from blunt force trauma in March this year. Two of five calves have survived the last breeding season. There are now 20 dolphins left in the Port pod. River a historic dumping ground The decline in health of the Port River dolphins prompted a parliamentary inquiry last year, which found that toxicants likely contributed to the deaths. "Not enough is understood about the legacy toxicants lying in the sediment in the ADS, particularly PFAS and microplastics, and the potential to impact the health of the dolphins," the committee report stated. The estuary has a history of poor water quality, and has been a dumping ground for industrial pollutants, with raw sewage discharged into the river until 2004. The former Penrice soda ash production plant at Osborne. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Transmission towers lined the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Five gas power plants sit on the shoreline of the sanctuary. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Swimmers are asked to avoid Angus Inlet in the sanctuary. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Penrice Soda pumped the byproducts of its soda ash and sodium bicarbonate into the Port River for decades. Until 1999, it had a licence to pour 75 megalitres of processed water containing calcium chloride and ammonia into the river each day. Along with 100,000 tonnes of insoluble residue, called "calsilt", and 540 tonnes of nitrogen per year into the waterway. Every two-to-three years, Penrice would have to dredge the contaminated silt, and that spoil would be dumped in deeper waters off Outer Harbor. The company was liquidated and stopped operating in 2014. Five natural gas power plants — Torrens Island, Dry Creek, Pelican Point, Osborne and Quarantine — sit on the shoreline of the sanctuary. The state's largest, Torrens Island, discharges thermal effluent into the Port River, increasing temperatures in Angus Inlet to over 30 degrees Celsius in summer. According to a 2022 South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) report, the increased water temperature lowers oxygen levels, driving away fish and killing seagrass. Lynette Crocker is worried about the industrial impact on the Port River dolphins. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Senior Kaurna woman Lynette Crocker believes historic pollution and the destruction of seagrass and mangroves has damaged the ecosystem in the Port River. She is terrified of plans to build nuclear submarines at Osborne, which sits within the sanctuary. Australian submarine company ASC's headquarters at Osborne. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) A November 2024 environment impact report by Australian Naval Infrastructure found habitat will be lost, and up to 891,000 cubic metres of river floor will need to be dredged. "I'm fearful of what is going to happen with AUKUS, what is going to happen with the nuclear subs — not only for the dolphins, but for the rest of us," Ms Crocker said. Lynette Crocker says once upon a time there were up to 80 dolphins in the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) The former Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary board member remembers a time when there were 80 dolphins — or yambo in Kaurna language — living in the Port River. She is saddened by their demise. "When is it going to stop? When is enough, enough for making things worse rather than making things better?" she said. "There are several agencies that have a responsibility and they're failing miserably." Osborne is the site where the proposed nuclear submarines will be built. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Ms Crocker said businesses "profiteering off the Port River" also have a responsibility to ensure the ecosystem survives for future generations. "We're not leaving a legacy for anybody else — it's just more damage for young people to deal with," she said. "It's not a sanctuary; but it could have been." Mike Bossley spends most of his life in marine conservation. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Dr Bossley is less concerned about the nuclear ship build but believes the Port River dolphins face three major challenges in the future. Future algal blooms disrupting the wider ecosystem ... ... the H5N1 bird flu, which has spread to mammals in Antarctica and will, he said, make its way to Australia eventually ... Port River is where nature meets industry. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) ... and development along the Port River. "For somebody who spent their life trying to protect these dolphins and their habitat, it can keep me awake at night," Dr Bossley said. The algal bloom can be seen above the water. The SA government earlier this month confirmed traces of a toxic algal bloom impacting South Australian waters has now been detected in the Port River. The National Parks and Wildlife Service has confirmed the deaths of 10 dolphins along the metropolitan coast since March 1, but authorities believe the bloom does not directly affect mammals — a view shared by Dr Bossley. "Hopefully it won't have any direct impact on the Port dolphins because it hasn't had an impact [on mammals] in any other areas where the bloom has been much worse," Dr Bossley said. Dolphins swimming in the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) But he said the bloom could kill off food for the Port River dolphins, which are "extremely site-attached". "Most of them have grown up there, their mother grew up there, their grandmother grew up there, so I suspect that they would stay, even without any food." Jon Emmett works for the National Parks and Wildlife Service. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Jon Emmett oversees both the protection of the dolphins within the sanctuary, and their habitat. "A big part of that is making sure users of the sanctuary — boaters, fishers and others — abide by the regulations, especially with respect to feeding the dolphins and keeping a distance," he said. St Kilda mangroves are an important habitat for shorebirds. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) He said progress had been made over the past 20 years to improve the dolphins' wellbeing. "Since it was established, we've managed to stop that practice of dolphins being deliberately harmed," he said. "We haven't seen that happen in a long time." Housing development along the Port River. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) He said water quality has improved, and community and industry were a lot more aware of the need to look after the river. But Mr Emmett agreed development in the Port could threaten the dolphins. "There are challenges coming their way. We have a lot of development going on in the Port — it is going to get busier," he said. "There's a lot of residential development; there's a lot of industrial development and I think that's a good thing. I'm optimistic about that. "[But] we need to make sure the things the dolphins need for their survival are taken care of. We must be mindful of the quality of the habitats in this area. "If we look after the habitats, the dolphins will look after themselves." Lewis Pullman says the dolphins need to be protected. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) Local tour guide Lewis Pullman has spent years paddling around the sanctuary on dolphin sight-seeing trips. "These are completely wild animals — we don't tame them, influence them in any way. Our goal is to not have an impact on them at all," he said. "Sometimes we see them jumping out of the water and that invokes a bit of a roar with the crowd." Adelaide Dolphin Sanctuary tour guide Lewis Pullman. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) He said the dolphins were important for the business, but the "environment itself is incredible". "The dolphins are the face that we all know and love, but there's a lot beyond the surface that needs to be protected as well," he said. The St Kilda mangroves are of national significance. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) "Mangroves are the best vegetation species for storing carbon — four times better, per square kilometre, than the Amazon rainforest. "For its carbon storage properties alone, that's massive. But all the life that happens under the water as well, that's critical. "This area has suffered in the past but now, things are looking pretty good." While the Port River has been a source of heartbreak for the dolphins and the people who monitor and care for them, it is also a place of miracles. A dolphin named Rocket was orphaned at seven months old after her mother Ripple appeared unwell and disappeared in September 2022. "Rocket has managed to survive, she's catching fish and seems to be doing well," Ms Boorman said. Rocket is part of the Port River pod. ( Supplied: Marianna Boorman ) Playful Rocket leaps out of the water. ( Supplied: Marianna Boorman ) Now three years old, Rocket is spending more time with mother and calf Mouse and Piki, as well as another mother and calf Summer and Comet. "We hope she continues to socialise with them, and she'll start behaving a bit more normally," Ms Boorman said. Two of five calves survived the last breeding season. ( ABC News: Che Chorley ) "We're very lucky, there's not many places in the world where you have a pod of dolphins living so close to a city. "It's a very special place." Credits: Reporting: Meagan Dillon Photography and videography: Che Chorley Digital production: Josephine Lim Editing: Sara Garcia Additional photos: Marianna Boorman
Daily Mail
6 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Terry Moran doubles down on Trump comments
Former ABC News star Terry Moran meant what he said about Donald Trump and Homeland Security aide Stephen Miller last month - even if it got him fired. While Moran quickly deleted the original post slamming the president and his top adviser as 'hate mongers', and subsequently tip-toed around the late-night diatribe, the axed anchor double-downed on the criticism for the first time. 'I wrote it because it's true,' Moran, 65, wrote on X Thursday, referring to the post slamming Trump as a 'world class hater' and Miller as full of 'bile.' He made the proclamation in reply to a Wednesday post from podcaster and former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau, who had called Miller 'a sociopath.' 'Wild that ABC fired @TerryMoran for simply stating that this person is a world-class hater,' the Pod Saves America host added, sharing a clip of a teenage Miller discussing the hypothetical torture of Iraqi soldiers in 2003. In the clip, Miller - then 17 and seen sitting on a school bus - is seen ranting on the subject as his classmates laugh in response. 'The goal of war is to kill as few people as possible,' Miller says at one point. 'But as for Saddam Hussein and his henchmen, I think the ideal solution would be to cut off their fingers. 'I don't think it's necessary to kill them entirely - we're not a barbaric people. We respect life,' he continues with a smile. 'Therefore, torture is the way to go. Because tortured people can live. Torture is a celebration of human life and dignity.' The remarks were enough for Moran to finally weigh in on what got him fired, with the veteran correspondent standing by his comments. 'Miller is a man who is richly endowed with the capacity for hatred. He's a world class hater,' Moran wrote just after midnight on June 8. 'You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment. He eats his hate,' the anchor continued. 'Trump is a world-class hater. But his hatred only a means to an end, and that end his own glorification.' The next day, ABC issued a statement saying Moran had been suspended 'pending further evaluation.' Two days later, a spokesperson for the network confirmed Moran's firing, specifically citing his late night post as being a 'clear violation' of ABC's policy. 'We are at the end of our agreement with Terry Moran and based on his recent post – which was a clear violation of ABC News policies – we have made the decision to not renew,' the statement sent to Daily Mail at the time read. 'At ABC News, we hold all of our reporters to the highest standards of objectivity, fairness and professionalism, and we remain committed to delivering straightforward, trusted journalism.' The rep reiterated how the post did not reflect the views of ABC News, months after it was forced to fork over a $15 million libel settlement to Trump over erroneous on-air comments from Moran's longtime colleague George Stephanopoulos last year. 'We [expletive] took it seriously and dealt with it pretty [expletive] quickly,' a source at ABC News further told Fox News. Miller - one of the men behind Trump's mass deportation agenda - responded to the comments directly. 'The most important fact about Terry's full public meltdown is what it shows about the corporate press in America,' Miller wrote. 'For decades, the privileged anchors and reporters narrating and gatekeeping our society have been radicals adopting a journalist's pose. Terry pulled off his mask.' Vice President JD Vance, meanwhile, called Moran's comments a 'vile smear.' 'ABC should apologize to Stephen,' Vance wrote. 'What Terry posted is disgraceful.' The attention came with sizable social media scrutiny and seemingly forced ABC's hand. Moran, at 65, was the network's senior national correspondent for several years and previously as its Chief Foreign Correspondent - holding the position from 2013 to 2018. Before that, he had co-anchored the network's newsmagazine Nightline for nearly a decade. He was also ABC News' Chief White Correspondent from 1999 to 2005. He notably sat down with the president in April, for an exclusive interview in the Oval Office a few weeks before the tweet that upended his nearly 28-year ABC career.
ABC News
10-07-2025
- Health
- ABC News
New questions in the sunscreen SPF saga
Sydney Pead: Sun safety is drilled into Australians from a young age, but the protection offered by some of the most popular sunscreen brands is in question, after consumer group Choice released test results showing many are not meeting their SPF claims. Today, the ABC's Rachel Carbonell on the industry backlash, her investigation into an overseas testing lab, and whether we can trust the SPF on the bottle. I'm Sydney Pead. On Gadigal Land in Sydney, this is ABC News Daily. Sydney Pead: Rachel, in this country, we are basically raised being told to put on sunscreen any time you leave the house, protect yourself from the you've been following this story that's cast doubt on how accurate the SPF labels on some of Australia's most popular sunscreen brands. It's just been this massive controversy, hasn't it? Rachel Carbonell: It has. It's been huge. I knew people would have strong reactions when the sunscreen SPF testing came out, but I was still surprised by just how passionate people are about their sunscreens in Australia, which is just as well, considering how high our skin cancer rates are, I guess. Sydney Pead: Mm, absolutely. And now, your investigations have raised even more questions, this time about one of the labs used by sunscreen brands for SPF certification. So we'll come to that in a moment. But first, just take me back. This whole saga really kicked off last month, didn't it? With a report from CHOICE, the consumer advocacy group. So what exactly did it find? Rachel Carbonell: So last month, consumer group CHOICE released the SPF test results for 20 popular sunscreens. It went to an independent Australian lab and had all 20 of them tested for their SPF and found that 16 of them failed to meet the SPF claim on the label. Now, those results varied quite a lot. Some got an SPF result in the 40s and 30s, but a bunch of them, seven, I think, had SPFs in the 20s, including a couple of Cancer Council products. And the one that really took everyone by surprise was the Ultra Violette product, which tested at four. And that's a product called Lean Screen SPF 50 Plus Mineral Mattifying Skin Screen. Now, this was also the most expensive product that CHOICE tested, and it retails for about $52 for 75 mils from the brand's online store. So look, all of those brands did come back saying that they'd followed all of the regulations, which meant that they had done their own independent testing for the SPF, showing that their sunscreens were compliant, which is something that all sunscreens have to do before they're allowed to sell their sunscreens in Australia. And I guess that's where the controversy really kicked off, because people are legitimately wondering how there can be such huge differences in SPF results between different labs. So after the results came out, CHOICE did ask the Therapeutic Goods Administration or the TGA, which regulates sunscreens in Australia, to go and test these products themselves. Sydney Pead: Right, and CHOICE actually said that because the results of Ultra Violette's product were so low, they needed to send it to get another test at a German lab to validate those results. Is that right? Rachel Carbonell: That's correct. So they sent it off for a smaller validation test at a well-known German lab, and that sample received an SPF of 5. So that's one more than the testing in Australia. So pretty much in line with the original testing. Sydney Pead: That's shockingly low for a sunscreen that's claiming to have an SPF rating of 50 plus. The company, Ultra Violette, was not happy about that finding. Rachel Carbonell: Ultra Violette hit back pretty hard at the CHOICE testing. Ava Chandler-Matthews, Ultra Violette co-founder: Obviously, I've seen all of the press about the CHOICE testing, and I guess I just wanted to give you a bit of an understanding of why we're disputing these claims. Rachel Carbonell: One of their founders, Ava Chandler-Matthews, went direct to the customers on social media saying that the results were not accurate and emphasising that the brand had done its own SPF testing at an independent overseas lab and received a result of more than 60. Ultra Violette then went and tested that sunscreen again. So that original result would have been the result they got before they put that sunscreen on sale in Australia. So they went and tested it again, and it got a result of over 60 again. Ava Chandler-Matthews, Ultra Violette co-founder: So we now have three SPF tests done on 30 people that show where we've got a consistent result within one point of each other, one or two points of each other, at an over 60. Rachel Carbonell: It's worth noting that they went back to the same lab that they'd previously used, not a different lab. Now, that's not breaking any rules. They're just trying to show the public that they've done their testing and it's coming back at what they say it is. She also made the point that, you know, CHOICE is not the TGA or the consumer watch dog. Ava Chandler-Matthews, Ultra Violette co-founder: What we do know about CHOICE is they're not a regulator. They are not the ACCC. They are not the TGA. They are not the ones who approve sunscreens. Rachel Carbonell: And she said that, you know, for what it's worth, you know, she still has faith in that product and she still uses it herself. Sydney Pead: And so Ultra Violette's objection to CHOICE's testing was that their product was decanted before testing, and that process might tamper with the efficacy of the product. Is that right? Rachel Carbonell: Yeah, look, for everyone who was following along on the socials, this whole issue got quite heated and quite detailed. And there was a whole debate about decanting sunscreens out of their original packaging and into something else, whether that be for testing or if you're travelling and you're doing that with your sunscreens and raising questions about whether or not this might, you know, mess with test results. CHOICE hasn't said a lot publicly since it released the SPF results, but it did come back and provide some clarity on what it did in relation to the testing when it sent it off. Very keen for people to know that it followed some pretty strict protocols set by the lab. So they said it was decanted and sealed and labelled and transported, according to the lab instructions, in amber glass jars to limit any degradation of the ingredients. And that for the Sydney tests that were done, that was all done inside of an hour. Sydney Pead: OK, Rachel, can you walk me through what actually makes a sunscreen 50 plus and what testing a brand has to do to be allowed to print that on the bottle? Rachel Carbonell: SPF stands for sun protection factor, and it's a measure of how long it takes for skin to burn under the sun's rays or an imitation of the sun's rays with sunscreen on compared to that same exposure on bare skin. Working this out is actually done with human test subjects, which surprises a lot of people. To be allowed to sell sunscreen in Australia, sunscreen makers have to have done what's called a 10 person in vivo test, which is just a panel of 10 human volunteers. So in the test, the volunteers have a patch of unprotected skin exposed to UV radiation using a solar simulator and a patch of protected skin exposed to those rays. And then the readings from that go into a set of calculations which give an individual SPF value for each of the 10 test volunteers. And then the mean of all of those values is the final SPF for the product. The Therapeutic Goods Administration is the body that regulates sunscreen in Australia, and they don't do their own SPF testing. They can't do it in-house. And the TGA also has no oversight of the third party testing labs that sunscreen makers go to to certify the SPF in their products before they go to market. It is known in the industry that there will be differences between test results between labs. But I suppose the big question is how much variability is acceptable between these labs. I mean, the difference between Ultra Violette's own testing and Choice's testing is more than a whole SPF 50. Sydney Pead: OK, and you've been investigating this even further, and you found that at least half the sunscreens that failed to meet their SPF claims, according to Choice, had their original certification conducted at the same overseas lab. Rachel Carbonell: That's right. So we found at least eight of the 16 sunscreens that Choice found didn't meet their label claim used a lab called Princeton Consumer Research. So they include products from, well, three Cancer Council products and of course, the Ultra Violette sunscreen that we've been talking about. There was also two sunscreens that met their label claim in Choice's testing that used Princeton Consumer Research. But again, the PCR or the Princeton Consumer Research test results for those products were much higher than Choice's testing, which was done here in Australia. Sydney Pead: And Rachel, Ultra Violette published their SPF results from the PCR lab, both the original ones they submitted to the TGA and the second round conducted after Choice's report. You've shown these results to some experts. What did they have to say? Rachel Carbonell: Yeah, we showed the Ultra Violette results and four sets of results for Cancer Council to some experts here in Australia and overseas. And all of those experts said that the results were unusual and that they had concerns about them. To explain this, you need to understand a little bit more detail about the testing again. Sorry to get technical on you. But with each of those 10 volunteers that all receive their own SPF value, you would expect there to be a bit of variability across the 10 subjects, according to those experts. But many of the test reports that we saw, they showed very little variation. And to explain that, for example, in one test report, nine of the 10 test volunteers got exactly the same SPF result down to the decimal point. In another few of them, we saw eight volunteers got exactly the same SPF result down to the decimal point. In the case of Ultra Violette's, it was two different sets of SPF numbers across 10 participants. So one of the experts that we spoke to from the Germany-based Normec Schrader Institute, Dr. Mathias Rohr, he said that the results were unlike anything that he'd seen in his whole career, testing more than 1,000 products a year. Now, it's worth noting at this point that this is the institute that CHOICE went to to do the validation test of Ultra Violette's products. So technically, you know, you could say, is there a conflict of interest there? There's no suggestion that there is. But we went to a bunch of other experts for that reason, just to make sure we were getting a spread of people and making sure we were talking to people who weren't in any way connected to CHOICE's testing. And they all held the same concerns about that lack of variability. They were all very careful to point out that it isn't impossible for these results to line up like that, just that it's unlikely and that they didn't really have an explanation for how that was happening. Sydney Pead: And you did go to the lab, you went to PCR and asked them. So what did they say? Rachel Carbonell: They did acknowledge that this kind of uniformity of SPF results for the test volunteers is uncommon, but did say that it can happen, especially with high performing products in a controlled test environment and that their testing processes meet the standard, the regulation, their testing processes are robust and they're verifiable. We spoke to a couple of the technical directors there, and, you know, both of them were saying, look, it is less common for that kind of lack of variability to happen. But, you know, it does happen. And it just so happens that that's what the test results look like in the test reports that the ABC was looking at. Sydney Pead: It seems a little unusual. How have the TGA and the brands that used this lab responded to your investigation? Rachel Carbonell: Look, a few of the sunscreen brands have told us that they are now going to another independent lab. So somebody that is not who they originally tested with and basically not Princeton Consumer Research. And so that suggests to me that those sunscreen brands that are doing that, which includes Cancer Council and Ultra Violette, are taking it seriously enough to go to a third lab. The TGA says that they are investigating the Choice findings and they'll take regulatory action as required. They themselves have pointed out that, you know, there can be variability between labs and that that's not uncommon. But you would have to presume that they were looking into it. The Cancer Council pointed out, as did a few other sunscreen brands, that Princeton Consumer Research is a really commonly used facility for SPF testing across the industry for sunscreens that are sold in Australia. And that's certainly what our investigation bore out. Like we've named the ones that we could get the reports. But, you know, there are others out there that are using it. And the Cancer Council, interestingly, said that the Choice findings have raised questions about the accuracy of SPF test results and that the Cancer Council is taking that seriously and investigating. Sydney Pead: Yeah, a lot of questions for the brands themselves, but what should consumers make of all of this? Because Ava Chandler-Matthews made the point in her video responding to the Choice results that this whole saga could have eroded trust in all sunscreen. Ava Chandler-Matthews, Ultra Violette co-founder: It's not just about us. It's just about, you know, knowing that the consumer can trust the sunscreens that they're wearing. Sydney Pead: Does she have a point there? Rachel Carbonell: Look, she does have a point, and I really hope that's not the case. And so do a lot of the organisations that work so hard in the skin cancer space in Australia. This is a really important issue, and it is really, really important that consumers and Australians don't lose faith in their sunscreens. Organisations like the Melanoma Institute are really keen to point out to people that the difference between an SPF 50 and SPF 25 is probably not as great as some people might think. And so an SPF in the 20s is still going to provide quite a lot of protection for people. Australians have a bit of a habit of not putting enough sunscreen on. And so, you know, if you've got a sunscreen that you think is potentially underperforming, the advice is not to throw it out. I think the advice is just to make sure you're putting plenty of it on and that you're reapplying regularly. Sydney Pead: That's right. I mean, Australia has the highest rate of melanoma in the world. So as you say, something is better than nothing. But I suppose we'll have to see how this pans out so they can get to the bottom of exactly how protected we are. Rachel Carbonell: That's right. I think we're going to have to leave it to the experts for now and wear long sleeves, put on your sunglasses, put on your hat, seek shade and hope that somebody can sort out the labelling issues so that people know that what it says on the sunscreen bottle is what you're actually getting. Sydney Pead: Rachel Carbonell is the ABC's National Health Equity reporter. This episode was produced by Kara Jensen-Mackinnon and Sam Dunn. Audio production by Adair Sheppard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sydney Pead. ABC News Daily will be back again on Monday. Thanks for listening.
