Latest news with #EverydayValueSunscreen50
7NEWS
4 days ago
- Health
- 7NEWS
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
The Advertiser
4 days ago
- Health
- The Advertiser
Consumer group tests burn sunscreens over SPF 50 claims
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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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". 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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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". 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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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". 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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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".
West Australian
4 days ago
- Health
- West Australian
Consumer group tests burn sunscreens over SPF 50 claims
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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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".
Perth Now
4 days ago
- Health
- Perth Now
Consumer group tests burn sunscreens over SPF 50 claims
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 were egregiously falling behind. 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+ scoring a strong 52. AAP has contacted the Cancer Council about the results. 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 a SPF 50+ label but was following Therapeutic Goods Authority guidelines. "We do not accept these results as even remotely accurate," the company told AAP. "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." 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. Mr 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".
