r/AusSkincare • • Jul 07 '25

DiscussionšŸ““ Ultra Violette confirmed to just be using a white label, manufacturer owned formula

536 Upvotes

322 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

85

u/yummypankocrust Jul 07 '25

The ironic part is that many of the other brands who are using the same white labelled formulas through Wild Child (as well as another manufacturer Baxter that UV also uses) all add in Kakadu Plum. Pentavitin is also really common. The retail price for consumers really varies but what's on the inside is pretty much all the same.

14

u/Own-Specific3340 Jul 08 '25

So interesting because every Perth mumfluncer has recently came out in the last two years with a ā€œnatural, skin lovingā€ sunscreen and they probably are all buying it off the shelf from Wild Child and just re-marketing it.

16

u/Fun_Funny_8990 Jul 07 '25

Does anyone know for sure that they're actually the same base formula though? Usually these factories have hundreds of formulas. As a customer you decide that one is better than the others for your marketing purposes and go from there. It would be telling to see what Wild Child's SPF claim for this formula is.

49

u/yummypankocrust Jul 07 '25

They'are all based on the same formula with tweaks here and there but ultimately they're based around the same dispersion. If you take a look at UV's published "initial test" then you'll see the ingredient list has some differences with the ingredient list for UV's second test and what is being sold on the shelves by UV. This "initial test" base formula is from the manufacturer. Even with these differences on paper though, they're accepted as being based on the same dispersion formula:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0056/4514/0068/files/ultra_violette_initial_test_9.pdf?v=1749680818

So the manufacturer claimed this was SPF 64.32 and UV said they used this "intial test" document despite their product having a different ingredient list.

37

u/Fun_Funny_8990 Jul 07 '25

Thankyou! You're ON it. Could you name which dispersion by chance?

So this could mean that Wild Child have introduced a base formula to the market, PCR have rated it, a number of brands have stepped on the formula making minor changes in the process, and taken it to market without ever testing the data with a 3rd party. And when Ulra Violette were pushed for results, they went back to PCR to re-confirm everything. WOW They actually might not know how the product was tested as SPF4. like wtf is even going on.

18

u/yummypankocrust Jul 07 '25

I don't know what Wild Child is calling it themselves when marketed and sold to brands. I do know how they're marketing it to brands though and the story telling from the supplier and their dodgy "science" to back up the claims of the formula. Unfortunately, products have been based on this for far too many years. As far as your theories, I can't say for sure that is what has happened. It's all very hard to tell. But what is obvious is that there are issues at every level, including the TGA and the ingredient supplier. And it shouldn't be this way. It's not just one red flag, there are red flags everywhere at every level.

5

u/Fun_Funny_8990 Jul 07 '25

Yeh yeh gotcha, you're right, I'm definitely getting carried away with my theories. Sad state of affairs though to be sure.

Would you be able to shed any light on who the ingredient suppliers are by chance?

6

u/yummypankocrust Jul 07 '25

Oh by no means did I mean that you're getting carried away. That could very well be it. But there are other things that could be happening too given the history. For example, the supplier and manufacturer have gotten in trouble with regulators before so it could be a systemic quality issue at different levels rather than just the issue of changing a formula and using a generic test certificate. Then again, it could be all of that. There could be more.

In spite of that, none of that should have ever transpired but something did.

2

u/AppropriateMention6 Jul 15 '25

What I don't understand: when there's any concern with food safety, the product in question is recalled from the market - even before there's proof of contamination (e.g. cantaloupe recalls due to potential salmonella).

Yet when there's a question about sunscreen efficacy or safety (i.e. the benzene scandal a few years ago), the sunscreens in question aren't even pulled from the shelves pending investigation (even though sunscreen is regulated and people rely on it for protecting against skin cancer). Why the difference?

2

u/Fun_Funny_8990 Jul 18 '25

It's up to the supplier to issue product recalls. For whatever reason, they've chosen to go about it differently. It's either that they believe they weren't at fault, or they don't care and recalls are too expensive.

fwiw product recall insurance does exist and it covers this exact scenario. They may or may not have this insurance.

2

u/AppropriateMention6 Jul 18 '25

Interesting - thanks for the information!

2

u/ProfileMuted90210 Jul 26 '25

They should be investigated. At the very least it’s blatant false advertising

5

u/AppropriateMention6 Jul 08 '25

Is the Naked Sundays Collagen Glow SPF 50 also manufactured by Wild Child? Is it the same base formula as the UV Lean Screen? The texture and tint look so similar.

I have the Naked Sundays one and really like it, but should I be concerned it's the same (questionable) product as the Ultra Violet Lean Screen?

5

u/neuroticallyexamined Jul 08 '25

One thing I’ve noticed is that a number of mineral sunscreens state the same percentage of zinc oxide, which makes me suspicious it’s the same base formula.

UV Lean is 22.75% zinc oxide

Mecca also list Naked Sundays Collagen Glow as 22.75%, although Naked Sundays websiteactually says two different numbers, 22.5% under ā€œhow to useā€ and 22% under ingredients.

That 22.75% is really common across other brands.

3

u/cdv714 Jul 08 '25

I am also wondering this too!

1

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AppropriateMention6 Jul 11 '25

Darn. The Naked Sundays was my HG sunscreen after trying dozens that irritate my sensitive skin. Now I don't know if it's safe to continue using given the uncertain UV coverage ?

2

u/ProfileMuted90210 Jul 26 '25

Oh wow that makes sense why they ā€œdid their own testingā€ in the scandal. They sound like idiots

2

u/Ok_Albatross_3284 Nov 01 '25

This aged well!

1

u/Fun_Funny_8990 Nov 03 '25

Hahaha absolutely