Time to test sunscreens
In 1997 Australian film director Baz Luhrmann produced a hit song of advice on how to live a fulfilling life. And though each piece of wisdom held genuine and uplifting merit, the song made clear the only thing they could recommend with absolute certainty was the need to wear sunscreen.
Even after 21 years that is still sound advice, but it should come with the addendum that not all sunscreens are created equal, so make sure you’re using a good one. Quite how you make sure of that is the problem.
Last week it was revealed six out of 10 sunscreens tested by Consumer NZ failed to meet their sun protection factor as stated. In one case a brand that purported to be offering a sun protection factor (SPF) of 30 was giving the wearer no more than six.
The results come a year after similar testing by Consumer NZ found half the sunscreens tested did not live up to their SPF ratings. So it’s understandable the group is calling for mandatory and consistent testing of sunscreens.
This really should not go unheeded. It is surprising there is no legal requirement that sunscreen manufacturers regularly test their products to ensure they meet their SPF claims. This is the country, after all, with the highest rate of skin cancer in the world. And one way that is heavily promoted to help protect yourself again skin cancer is to use sunscreen.
With melanoma killing more than 300 Kiwis each year, making sure our sunscreen is up to scratch is more than just a consumer rights issue, it is a public health issue. Voluntary standards are not good enough.
Knowing that our sunscreen will do as it says may just save lives. At the very least it will help maintain confidence in a product we ask our kids to slop on every day. At worst it will put the price up by a couple of per cent.
Consumer NZ’s testing has another lesson for us. As consumers we should be able to expect a product will do what it says. We have the Consumer Guarantees Act to back up this expectation. But we should not blindly believe that expectation will be met just because the rules say it should be. In a competitive market place businesses can be expected to push a product’s claims to the extreme – to maximise the potential benefits and minimise the weaknesses. That is marketing 101.
We accept the exaggeration of this type of marketing in such things as the latest exercise gadget, cooking implement or underarm deodorant and do little more than roll our eyes when those claims fall short.
We don’t have the same sense of cynicism for sunscreen. This could be because most of us would assume sunscreen must reach a certain prescribed level of effectiveness before it is even allowed on the market.
After decades of government promotion to wear sunscreen when outside and daily reminders from our government-backed weather service of what hours of the day that protection is required, that’s a fair assumption. It’s now time the rules caught up with that assumption.
Regardless of when that happens, the sunscreen advice from 1997 holds true. Wear it. It’s a proven life-saver. But slip on a T-shirt as well and, of course, slap on that hat.
Most of us would assume sunscreen must reach a certain prescribed level of effectiveness before it is even allowed on the market.