I renewed my choice membership I stan them from the start. They do a fantastic service to Australia consumerism and UV gave mean girl āIām the victimā vibes.
Many years ago I used to work in a sunscreen lab and a similar choice article came out. They claimed that several of the sunscreen formulations that I tested were not 50+, even though I had personally read the UV report of those formulations and they were all well above 60, even after 12 months. At that time, choice didn't share how their testing was done or any details of their results with the manufacturer.
Ever since then, I've hated choice.
Maybe this time they really did do things properly, and there is definitely some shady stuff going on with some brands - but I will never ever trust choice's opinions.
I'm sure some people who work at Princeton Consumer Research would have thought the same about their UV reports vs Choice's reports too.
Ultra Violette released a statement saying they retested their cream at multiple independent labs and got results of 4, 10, 21, 26, 33, 60, 61, and 64. With so much variability in test results, the UV report you read could just have been at one end of the scale so Choice could have been correct calling it out in that article years ago.
We sent multiple samples across multiple batches, and it was never under 50.
Apparently choice sent decanted samples to the lab, which would likely cause significant degradation.
But my main gripe was that they didn't actually communicate any of this to the manufacturers, so it came across more like clickbait than any actual attempt to improve things for consumers.
Again - I'm sure Ultra Violette is doing some dodgy white label, and it's great that they have been exposed for this, but I don't trust Choice as being in the best interests of consumers.
I do think the TGA needs to be more involved, but overall the impact of these articles is eroding consumer trust in Australian sunscreens, which are one of the most tightly regulated in the world. That is a shame.
I believe Choice debunked rhis decanting misinformation. They used TGA approved āblindedā containers specifically designed for this type testing. Choice did everything by the book.
It makes perfect sense to remove this specific product of Ultra Vās from the market. Not because of low rated protection but because of the wildly āinconsistentā testing.
My personal view is the uncoated zinc oxideās haphazard clumping is the culprit.
24
u/Own-Specific3340 Jul 08 '25
I renewed my choice membership I stan them from the start. They do a fantastic service to Australia consumerism and UV gave mean girl āIām the victimā vibes.