The fallout from CHOICE's sunscreen testing continues.
After CHOICE testing in June revealed that 16 out of 20 sunscreens failed to meet their SPF claims, Ultra Violette voluntarily removed the worst offender – the Ultra Violette Lean Screen product – from shelves.
In the wake of that removal, several other sunscreens, thought to be based on a similar formula, were quietly removed from sale.
Now the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is taking action.
On Tuesday, 30 September, the TGA is now suggesting consumers find alternatives to the 21 sunscreen products identified as sharing the same base formulation as Ultra Violette's Lean Screen.
That list includes:
- Aspect Sun SPF50+ Physical Sun Protection
- Aspect Sun SPF50+ Tinted Physical Sun Protection
- Aesthetics Rx Ultra Protection Sunscreen Cream
- New Day Skin Good Vibes Sunscreen SPF50+
- New Day Skin Happy Days Sunscreen SPF50+
- Allganics Light Sunscreen SPF50+
- Beauti-FLTR Lustre Mineral SPF50+
- Found My Skin SPF 50+ Tinted Face/Body Cream
- Ethical Zinc Daily Wear Light Sunscreen
- Ethical Zinc Daily Wear Tinted Facial Sunscreen (Dark)
- Ethical Zinc Daily Wear Tinted Facial Sunscreen (Light)
- Endota Mineral Protect SPF50 Sunscreen
- We are Feel Good Inc Mineral Sunscreen SPF50+
- GlindaWand The Fountain of Youth Environmental Defence Cream SPF50+
- Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF50+
- Ultra Violette Velvet Screen SPF50 (product export only – not available in Australia)
- People4Ocean SPF 50+ Mineral Bioactive Shield Lightly Tinted Cream
- MCoBeauty SPF50+ Mineral Mattifying Sunscreen
- Naked Sundays Collagen Glow Mineral Sunscreen
- Outside Beauty & Skincare SPF 50+ Mineral Primer
- Salus SPF50+ Daily Facial Sunscreen Broad Spectrum
"The preliminary testing indicates that this base formulation is unlikely to have an SPF greater than 21," said the TGA in a statement.
"Preliminary testing of specific goods manufactured using the base formulation indicates that the SPF value of the goods may, for at least some of the goods, be as low as SPF 4."
If you purchased a product in the above list, the TGA states that "you may wish to consider using an alternative product until the TGA completes its review".
CHOICE had initially tested Ultra Violette's Lean Screen at an SPF of 4, against a claim of SPF 50+. A secondary test conducted at an alternative independent lab in Germany came back with a result of SPF 5. In response Ultra Violette did its own internal testing and ultimately removed the product from shelves.
If you purchased a product in the above list, the TGA states that 'you may wish to consider using an alternative product' until it completes its review
"We had multiple, independent labs conduct new tests of Lean Screen," Ultra Violette said in a statement released in August.
To date, tests on Ultra Violette's Lean Screen returned SPFs of 4, 10, 21, 26, 33, 60, 61 and 64.
"That wasn't good enough for us, and it isn't good enough for you," Ultra Violette said in August.
"Given this pattern of inconsistency in testing, we have decided to withdraw Lean/Velvet Screen from the market, effective immediately. Purchases of this product will be eligible for a refund and a product voucher, regardless of where it was purchased."
Concerns over reliability of sunscreen lab
The TGA also called out Princeton Consumer Research Corp (PCR), the UK-based lab responsible for Ultra Violette's initial testing. That lab was also used by eight products that did not meet their SPF claims in CHOICE testing.
In the wake of that testing, many sunscreen experts raised concerns about PCR's testing methodology and calculations.
"[T]he TGA has significant concerns about the reliability of SPF testing undertaken by Princeton Consumer Research Corp (PCR Corp), a testing laboratory based in the United Kingdom," the TGA wrote in a statement.
"The TGA is aware that many companies responsible for sunscreens manufactured using this base formulation relied on testing by PCR Corp to support their SPF claims, and that they obtained that testing before they were informed of the TGA's concerns.
[T]he TGA has significant concerns about the reliability of SPF testing undertaken by Princeton Consumer Research Corp (PCR Corp), a testing laboratory based in the United Kingdom
TGA statement
"The TGA has now outlined its concerns with PCR Corp testing to all companies responsible for sunscreens manufactured using this base formulation. The TGA has also written to PCR Corp regarding its concerns and has not received a response."
The TGA has notified all sunscreen manufacturers named above about the concerns with both the base formula and the testing performed by PCR.
"It's highly concerning to see the TGA confirm that 20 sunscreens using the same base formula as Ultra Violette's Lean Screen are unlikely to meet their SPF claims," says CHOICE CEO Ashley De Silva.
"Today's announcement highlights, yet again, the importance of the TGA's investigation and the need for changes to how sunscreens are regulated and tested in Australia."
We're on your side
For more than 60 years, we've been making a difference for Australian consumers. In that time, we've never taken ads or sponsorship.
Instead we're funded by members who value expert reviews and independent product testing.
With no self-interest behind our advice, you don't just buy smarter, you get the answers that you need.
You know without hesitation what's safe for you and your family. And our recent sunscreens test showed just how important it is to keep business claims in check.
So you'll never be alone when something goes wrong or a business treats you unfairly.
Learn more about CHOICE membership today
Stock images: Getty, unless otherwise stated.
