←back to thread

Over 80% of sunscreen performed below their labelled efficacy (2020)

(www.consumer.org.hk)
230 points mgh2 | 1 comments | 06 Sep 25 19:57 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Insanity ◴[06 Sep 25 21:22 UTC] No.45152959[source]▶
Why does it not list the brands? The article is both informative and useless simultaneously
replies(1): >>45153021 #
mgh2 ◴[06 Sep 25 21:28 UTC] No.45153021[source]▶
Avoid (from other 3 articles/studies): Neutrogena, Banana Boat, Bondi Sands, Cancer Council, Aldi, Nivea, Estée Lauder, iPSA, Anessa, Shiseido, Curél, Sofina, Laneige, Dermacept, Bio-Essence, Fancl (Japan), Purito (Korea)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45145624

[2] https://labmuffin.com/purito-sunscreen-and-all-about-spf-tes...

[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-04/questions-over-lab-th...

replies(7): >>45153085 #>>45153094 #>>45153355 #>>45153485 #>>45153680 #>>45153747 #>>45153897 #
kelnos ◴[06 Sep 25 21:36 UTC] No.45153085[source]▶
Seems like it's not that simple. The CHOICE study[0] suggest that some brands do have some good "models" of sunscreen, but some are bad. It's also possible that there's a process issue at the manufacturers, and the quality of different lots can vary:

> Ultra Violette announced it was removing the Lean Screen product from shelves. Across eight different tests, the sunscreen returned SPF data of 4, 10, 21, 26, 33, 60, 61, and 64.

[0] https://www.choice.com.au/health-and-body/beauty-and-persona...

replies(2): >>45153195 #>>45153271 #
theteapot ◴[06 Sep 25 22:01 UTC] No.45153271[source]▶
> The CHOICE study[0] suggest that some brands do have some good "models" of sunscreen, but some are bad.

For reference, the results were:

   Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen   4
                              Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen 50+  24
                   Neutrogena Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch Lotion SPF 50  24
                                                  Aldi Ombra 50+  26
                    Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Zinc Mineral Body Lotion  26
                      Cancer Council Everyday Value Sunscreen 50  27
                      Woolworths Sunscreen Everyday Tube SPF 50+  27
                  Banana Boat Baby Zinc Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+  28
                    Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Fragrance Free Sunscreen  32
                              Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc 50+  33
                      Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+  35
             Invisible Zinc Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50  38
           Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock SPF 50+ Sunscreen  40
               Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen Lotion 50+  40
  Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+  41
                              Coles SPF 50+ Sunscreen Ultra Tube  43
        Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body SPF 50+ Hydrating Sunscreen  51
                          Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen SPF 50+   52
                       Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion SPF 50  56
                 La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen 50+  72
> It's also possible that there's a process issue at the manufacturers, and the quality of different lots can vary

If you read the article, that variable test result was provided by Ultra Violette themselves. Choice tested it three times with three different independent testers and got results of 4,5,5. It's possible Ultra Violette is just trying to muddy the waters here.

replies(2): >>45153343 #>>45153627 #
SilverElfin ◴[06 Sep 25 22:50 UTC] No.45153627{3}[source]▶
Is this saying the Neutrogena and La Roche did better than stated?
replies(2): >>45153778 #>>45154536 #
1. cjensen ◴[06 Sep 25 23:14 UTC] No.45153778{4}[source]▶
Yes. The original article[1] is clear about that. However only for one of the two Neutrogena sunscreens.

[1] https://www.choice.com.au/health-and-body/beauty-and-persona...