‘Breach of faith’: slippery slope for sunscreen trust
Trust in sunscreen may be slipping after withdrawal from the shelves of large brands due to sun protection fears.
The therapeutic goods administration described 20 sunscreen as a significant inadequate from the allegations of the sun protection factor advertised.
Paul Harrison, Professor of Consumer Behavior and Marketing University, said that it could harm the reputation of the industry and the general consumer trust.
Dr. Harrison AAP said, “Now it erodes confidence in all sunscreens, and that will be in front of the mind for everyone when they buy sunscreen,” Harrison AAP said.
In June, the election of the consumer defender group found that 16 of the 20 popular sunscreen with SPF 50 or 50+ could not provide the level of protection requested in the packaging.
Ultra Violette sunscreen, after discovering the brand’s lean screen, finally entered under fire 50+ Mattifing Zinc skin received the lowest SPF degree four points.
Since then, at least six products have been recalled voluntarily, including the SPF50+ and SunSPF50+ physical sun protection in the Ultra Violette since then.
Meanwhile, three products from various brands were voluntarily canceled and were paused by about one dozen and under a TGA examination.
Regular, Lean Screen and Wild Child Laboratoies Pty Ltd.
He said pre -tests show that base formulation may have a SPF greater than 21.
“The pre -test of certain goods produced using the basic formulation shows that the SPF value of the goods can be as low as 4 for at least part of it,” he said.
Wild Children’s Laboratories told AAP “(ITS) there is no production problem that can explain the variability in SPF test results in the facility”.
Tom Curnow, Chairman of the Executive Officer, said the inconsistencies were “part of a wider, part of a sector -wide problem”.
TGA admitted that companies had their own test results to support SPF claims, but found that the reliability of the test laboratories could change.
Regulator, Princeton Consumer Research Corp.
“TGA is aware that many companies responsible for sunscreen produced using this basic formulation are based on testing by PCR Corp to support SPF claims and that they obtained this test before TGA is informed about the concerns.”
Princeton Consumer Research made a statement to AAP ası Sunscreen test in good faith, to the recognized industrial standards and certain examples given to us during the test ”.
Dr Harrison believes that TGA’s investigation creates uncertainty for consumers.
“There was a violation of faith in the system because most of our trust is automatic,” he said.
“This strengthens the negative value that no brand wants… And what happens is sunscreen suffering, so people think that they cannot trust SPF sunscreen elements.”
The Cancer Council is one of the five basic ways to reduce the risk of skin cancer and recommend daily use when the UV index is 3 or higher.
Australian Associated Press is a beating heart of Australian news. AAP has been the only independent national Newswire of Australia and has been providing reliable and fast news content to the media industry, the government and the corporate sector for 85 years. We inform Australia.
