Following the publication of CHOICE's sunscreen test results last week, the consumer group is releasing the laboratory reports for the 20 products tested.
Full sunscreen test results: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xfZ_N0zhAwhYoErZfMwnkaTDSd5G-bhf?usp=sharing
Quotes attributable to Ashley de Silva, CHOICE CEO:
"CHOICE stands by its rigorous, independent sunscreen testing, conducted under the guidance of industry experts in specialised, accredited laboratories. All 16 sunscreens that didn't meet their claims were tested to a 10-person panel, in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Sunscreen Standard. As Australia's leading consumer advocacy organisation, CHOICE has been testing products for decades, and we take our commitment to independence and scientific rigour extremely seriously."
"All sunscreen products tested by CHOICE underwent blind testing, a standard method used to minimise bias and improve validity in scientific research. To facilitate blind testing, all 20 sunscreen products were decanted into amber glass jars, sealed, labelled and transported in accordance with strict instructions provided by Eurofins Dermatest, the accredited and specialised laboratory CHOICE used for testing. Amber glass jars were used in order to limit any degradation of the sunscreen ingredients and ensure the validity of our results, as they block UV light more than clear glass jars, and glass is less reactive than plastic. The entire process, including transportation to the Sydney-based Eurofins Dermatest, was undertaken within an hour."
"After Ultra Violette's product returned an SPF of 4 when tested at the Sydney lab, we sent a different batch to an accredited, specialised laboratory in Germany, the Normec Schrader Institute, for a validation test. To facilitate blind testing, this product was also decanted into an amber glass jar, sealed, labelled and transported according to strict instructions provided to CHOICE by sunscreen experts at the Normec Schrader Institute. The validation test returned an SPF of 5."
"We did this testing because it's in line with our mission to work for fair, safe and just markets for Australian consumers. Millions of people rely on SPF ratings to understand the sun protection they're paying for, and expect these ratings to be as accurate as possible."
"Sunscreen testing is costly. CHOICE – an independent, member-funded non-profit – funded this work entirely ourselves due to its importance for consumers."
"We believe the discrepancy between our test results and those provided by manufacturers warrants further investigation by the TGA. We are calling for a compliance review, including independent testing of the mean SPF for, at least, the sunscreens that did not meet their label claims in our commissioned tests."
Stock images: Getty, unless otherwise stated.
