There’s a reason Australia is known as the “sunburnt country”. With the highest rate of skin cancer in the world, the sun safety message has been drilled into many of us since childhood. So when test results from consumer advocacy group Choice revealed that many of Australia’s most popular sunscreen brands had failed to meet their SPF claims, alarm bells rang.
As part of the investigation, 20 popular sunscreens were scrutinised for their ability to meet the level of SPF protection they claimed to provide.
Of the 20, only four were found to match their SPF rating, with 16 of the products falling short (some significantly) of their advertised rating. Despite the results, many of the companies have already disputed the findings.
A spokesperson for Choice said that while the results were “disappointing” given the country’s reputation for its rigorous testing standards, it wasn’t cause for panic. “It would be a real shame if people decided that sunscreen was not useful or that it didn’t matter, or even products with lower scores are ineffective, because the science show’s that’s not true,” said CEO Ashley De Silva.
“There’s a big gap between the SPF rating but a very small gap in effectiveness.”
So what exactly do these findings mean and how did Choice get here? Below, an explainer on the latest findings, including which brands passed and which brands didn’t
Which Sunscreen Brands Passed The Test?
Of the 20 sunscreens that were included in the test, including market leaders Banana Boat, Cancer Council, Neutrogena and Bondi Sands, there were only four products that managed to meet their SPF claims.
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
Sunscreens that passed
Which Sunscreens Failed The Test?
Of the 20 sunscreens submitted for testing, 16 of the products failed to return a result in line with its SPF claims.
The most significant failure, according to Choice, was found in Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen – which returned a result of just four.
“Despite doing rigorous testing of this sunscreen the first time, we were so perturbed by the results that we decided to delay publishing and test a different batch of the Ultra Violette sunscreen at a completely different lab in Germany to confirm the results,” said De Silva. “Those results came back with a reported SPF of 5, almost identical to our initial test.”
A spokesperson for Ultra Violette responded to the findings immediately, calling the results not “even remotely accurate” and reminding consumers that “the TGA, not Choice Magazine, are the recognised authority governing sunscreens in Australia.”
“Ultra Violette most recently completed testing for Lean Screen in 2021 (with results of SPF of 64.32 to allow for an SPF 50+ rating) as required to support our listing on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG), and again in 2024 in accordance with the FDA standard revealing consistent results for UVB,” the spokesperson continued.
“At Ultra Violette we take misleading claims made about our products very seriously. As a suncare brand founded in Australia, the country with the highest skin cancer rates in the world, we are too familiar with the fearmongering that exists in this category. We find this study counterintuitive and not at all in the best interest of consumers.”
Aldi Ombra 50+ : Reported SPF of 26
Banana Boat Baby Zinc Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+: Reported SPF of 28
Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Zinc Mineral Body Lotion: Reported SPF of 26
Cancer Council Everyday Value Sunscreen 50: Reported SPF of 27
Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen 50+: Reported SPF of 24
Neutrogena Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch Lotion SPF 50: Reported SPF of 24
Woolworths Sunscreen Everyday Tube SPF 50+: Reported SPF of 27
SPF results in the 20s
Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+: Reported SPF of 35
Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Fragrance Free Sunscreen: Reported SPF of 32
Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc 50+: Reported SPF of 33
Invisible Zinc Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50: Reported SPF of 38
SPF results in the 30s
Coles SPF 50+ Sunscreen Ultra Tube: Reported SPF of 43
Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+: Reported SPF og 41
Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock SPF 50+ Sunscreen: Reported SPF of 40
Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen Lotion 50+: Reported SPF of 40
SPF results in the 40s
What Does This Mean For Your Favourite Sunscreens?
Da Silva reiterated the importance of continuing to wear and apply sunscreen regularly, stressing that while some of the sunscreens failed to meet their SPF claims, any sunscreen was always better than wearing none.
“But, once again, sunscreen isn’t a shield. Even SPF 50+ sunscreens let UV rays through, so we’d like to use this opportunity to recommend all the usual advice: wear a hat, stay in the shade, wear sunglasses. Don’t stay in the direct sunlight for sustained amounts of time, apply and reapply sunscreen, and get regular skin check-ups.”
“Sunscreens are a vital tool in the fight against skin cancer and sun damage,” added Rafi Alam, CHOICE senior campaigns and policy adviser.
“We’re calling on the TGA and ACCC to start an investigation into these sunscreen brands to ensure they are complying with the consumer laws and medical standards that keep us safe.”
You can read the full brand responses to the Choice findings here.
Related articles:
- This Is What Happens To Your Skin When You Don’t Wear SPF Daily
- 5 SPF Myths Debunked by a Dermatologist
- Everything You Need To Know About Mineral And Chemical Sunscreen
