Consumer NZ warns sun seekers not to believe everything they read when using sunblock.

Six out of 10 sunscreens tested by Consumer NZ fail to meet their SPF claims, the watchdog says.

Consumer NZ published its latest investigation into the SPF claims made by sunscreen manufacturers on Thursday.

The watchdog checked ten sunscreens against the voluntary Australian and New Zealand standard for SPF (sun protection factor), which measures protection against UVB rays, and its broad-spectrum protection against UVA and UVB rays.

Six products didn't meet the SPF claimed on their label after they were assessed using a test panel of 10 volunteers in a lab, Consumer NZ said, with one product only giving low protection despite claiming a high protection of SPF30.

READ MORE:

* What you should know about sunscreen

* Half of NZ sunscreens fail to live up to their claims - report

* Consumer NZ lays complaint about sunscreen

* Calls for tougher sunblock controls

Among these were well-known global brand Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Face & Body Dry-Touch Sunscreen Lotion with an SPF50 label claim. With a tested SPF of 42, it still provides high protection but not the SPF 50 claimed.

Also pinged by Consumer was Bondi Sands Coconut Beach Sunscreen Lotion SPF50+, Banana Boat SunComfort SPF50+, Sunsense Sensitive Invisible SPF50+ and Coola Classic Body Plumeria SPF30. All, Consumer NZ found, came in under their advertised SPF rate.

123RF Consumer NZ keeps finding sunscreens that don't meet the SPF claim.

In response, Neutrogena's maker Johnson & Johnson told Consumer all Neutrogena sunscreens currently sold in New Zealand met the standard, but it declined to provide with a test certificate for its Ultra Sheer Face & Body sunscreen. The company said the SPF50 label claim was backed by test results and it stood by the claim.

Its not the first sunscreen controversy for Neutrogena. Johnson & Johnson previously agreed to only sell sunscreen products which meet the joint Australian/New Zealand standards after an investigation by the Commerce Commission prompted by Consumer NZ testing.



Consumer alleged the value of one of Johnson & Johnson's Neutrogena-range products, Sensitive Skin SPF60+, was significantly less than the label claimed. Johnson & Johnson stopped selling it in September 2016.

The other manufacturers showed Consumer test results to meet the standard for the claimed SPF.

SUPPLIED Neutrogena sunscreen failed SPF testing by Commerce Commission and its maker committed to meeting the Australian and NZ standard.

However, Consumer said Banana Boat and Sunsense test certificates were from 2015 and the Coola testing was done in 2013. Coola said it was commissioning an independent review of its formula.

Only three of the 10 sunscreens met their SPF label claim and the requirements for broad-spectrum protection: Nivea Sun Kids Protect & Sensitive Sun Lotion SPF50+, UV Guard Max Sunscreen SPF50+ and Essone Natural Sunscreen Summer Coconut & Jojoba SPF30.

Last year, similar testing showed half of sunscreens tested did not live up to their claims.

The organisation called for mandatory standards for the industry.

"Companies don't have to regularly test their products to ensure they still meet SPF claims, even if an ingredient supply changes, and some companies may go for years without re-testing. Our testing has also highlighted the lack of consistency between labs even when products are tested the same way," Consumer NZ chief executive Sue Chetwin said at the time.

123RF There are two kinds of rays and they're both bad for your skin; UVA and UVB.

Why does it matter?

Both types of UV rays that sunscreen tries to block from your skin can cause cancer.

Obviously, if the SPF isn't accurate consumers may think they're protecting their skin for longer periods of time than the sunscreen is working.

So the best advice is still three-fold; slip (into some clothing), slop (on the sunscreen) and slap (on a hat).

For more advice head here.