Australia sunscreen scandal grows as more products pulled off shelves
A sunscreen scandal continues to grow in the world’s largest skin cancer Hotspot, and now 18 products have been drawn on security concerns from shelves in Australia.
In June, an analysis of a consumer advocacy group, several popular and expensive sunscreen, found that it did not provide the protection requested by its manufacturers.
Ultra Violette, a product, needs to offer lean screen leathers 50+ skin protection factor (SPF), but instead returned a result of the SPF 4 and was voluntarily recalled in August.
An investigation by the drug regulator warned about 20 more sunscreen from other brands that shared the same basic formula and increased “important concerns” about a test laboratory.
“The pre -test shows that this base formulation is not more than 21 to SPF.” He said.
TGA has stopped doing the basic formula manufacturer Wild Child Laboratoies Pty Ltd, as a result.
Eight of the 21 products he named were recalled or production was completely stopped. The sale of another 10 products has been paused and two more reviewed. A product called TGA is made in Australia, but is not sold in the country.
In a statement, the boss of wild children’s laboratories, Tom Curnow, said he could not find any production problems in TGA’s facility.
“The inconsistencies reported in the last tests are part of a wider problem in the sector,” he added that the wild child has stopped working with PCR laboratories and offers their formulas to test with other accredited, independent laboratories.
BBC contacted PCR Corp for comment.
Australia has the highest skin cancer rate in the world – it is estimated that two of the three Australians will have at least one segment throughout their lives – and globally has the most strict sunscreen arrangements.
The scandal caused a major reaction of customers in the country, but experts warned that it may have global effects. Both the production of some sunscreens and the integrity of the laboratory test have been identified.
TGA said that he had previously looked at the “extremely subjective” “existing SPF test requirements”, but in the update on Tuesday, he had important concerns about the test by Princeton Consumer Research Corp (PCR Corp), a US laboratory.
“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.”
He has now summarized his concerns about the laboratory to all companies using the problematic base formula. “TGA also wrote to PCR Corp about his concerns and did not get a response.”
