←back to thread

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

(www.consumer.org.hk)
230 points mgh2 | 2 comments | 06 Sep 25 19:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.491s | source
Show context
matsemann ◴[06 Sep 25 21:44 UTC] No.45153154[source]▶
Lots of sunscreen brands should be avoided as they don't meet the advertised SPF.

Lots of sunscreen brands should also be avoided as they contain allergy inducing-, hormone altering- or environment damaging- ingredients.

Not easy making a good choice.

replies(3): >>45153231 #>>45153390 #>>45156991 #
andrepd ◴[06 Sep 25 21:55 UTC] No.45153231[source]▶
The regulator should get rid of those + impose fines, not the user. It's unreasonable to hope the consumer deals with this themselves, that's what the regulator is there for.
replies(1): >>45153494 #
cogman10 ◴[06 Sep 25 22:30 UTC] No.45153494[source]▶
Agreed. The free market solutions to this problem are completely ineffectual. Nobody is paying a 3rd party to test sunscreen and even if they were, the results wouldn't likely be public and/or would be buried under the giant weight of mommy influencer blogs telling you to use apple cider vinegar instead of sunscreen.

The only way to solve the problem of bad actors in a consumer products market is government regulations, testing, and fines/dissolution of the bad actors.

replies(1): >>45153861 #
ekianjo ◴[06 Sep 25 23:32 UTC] No.45153861[source]▶
Not the only way. There used to be 3rd parties defending consumers by testing products back in the days, and publishing their results, not sure if those still exist today. The problem with mass manufactured products is that you need to keep testing them. Changes in formulation are a thing so you need to continuously sample and test them.

The problem with government being involved is that this opens the door for easy corruption (haven't we seen this before)

replies(3): >>45154017 #>>45154290 #>>45154335 #
1. cortesoft ◴[07 Sep 25 01:00 UTC] No.45154335[source]▶
The question is always, where do those third parties get the money to do their research?

If you are against the government funding them, where do you suggest they get their money?

A company like Consumer Reports was funded by subscriptions to their reports, but they don't make enough from that anymore to test enough products.

Another issue is the sheer number of companies producing products these days. It would be very expensive to test all the products sold.

replies(1): >>45156008 #
2. ekianjo ◴[07 Sep 25 06:59 UTC] No.45156008[source]▶
> The question is always, where do those third parties get the money to do their research?

in the 80s they were selling magazines.