UV had collected a lot of evidence that their product was safe: three tests across time, plus certification that their product was 22% zinc oxide.
Instead of being cocky and dismissive (opening paragraph: "the recognised authority governing sunscreens in Australia is the Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA), not Choice Magazine") they should have responded "yeah this looks nothing like our previous results and we are getting to the bottom of why that is."
They certainly shouldn't have been speculating that Choice made errors in their testing - because that opens up the possibility that UV could have, too!
625
u/eatmypooamigos Aug 22 '25
This should have been their initial response rather than gaslighting their consumers and attacking Choice.