SPF claims - what is all the racket about?
There has been a lot of talk in the media about sunscreens over the past week, which has coincided with some extremely hot weather across the country, so I believe it deserves a mention about now.
One thing I would like to stand by is that the NUDE in The Nude Alchemist stands for transparency. I have NEVER claimed a specific SPF number (as clearly stated in the product description on the website) as I haven't got the Sun-Barrier Cream tested as it is a costly business venture.*
[*EDIT: If you still think we should and if you still think SPF has credibility, let us know!]
So WHY are SPF numbers not living up to claims on popular brands?
- SPF testing is not compulsory here in NZ. Companies are only ‘encouraged’ to have evidence to support the SPF and broad spectrum protection claimed. How ridiculous is this?
- Testing on new formulations are not necessarily carried out, which are important as different active ingredients would change the SPF rating.
- Regular testing is not necessarily carried out to ensure consistency between batches
- Lack of consistency between labs across the world
- Storage conditions - like with anything sunscreens deteriorate over time especially if kept in a warm place.
- The standard SPF testing is based on human subjects. Testing on humans always throws the variability spanner in there.