DERMATEST John Staton runs Dermatest, the number one analytics and in vivo testing company in Australia and the only independent laboratory testing sunscreens in Australia. Staton says that his company conducts tests for about half of the sunscreens on the market, while the remaining half would be tested overseas. “Nowhere in the world are there audits of the labs that do the testing,” Staton told the ABC in 2017. “The TGA, as far as I know, doesn’t test anything, they actually rely on submissions that are put to them and they can do analytical testings but that’s different to actually testing if the product really works in the marketplace as used by consumers”. Published in the DERMATEST Newsletter in July 2015 “Earlier this year, the Consumer Reports.org published a list of 34 US SPF tests, reported from an independent US Test lab. Of these, when compared with label claim, 14 were found to be deficient according to the SPF measured in vivo.” A troubling revelation! BANANA BOAT AND PEPPA PIG As increasing cases of adverse reactions and severe skin burns are reported, there is a growing consumer concern surrounding SPF reliability and safety. Michael Moore, Chief Executive of the Public Health Association told the ABC, “We can see there are problems, it does point to an inadequate system with the TGA and I think it requires the TGA themselves to look at what they’re doing”. CONSUMERS The respective regulatory bodies around the world e.g. TGA, FDA, require submissions of clinical data by the manufacturer (sponsor) to substantiate the claims being marketed to the public. But as consumers, we have no way of verifying the validity, nor is there any information published on product packaging or marketing material that identifies the testing conditions or types of individuals on the testing panel.
mydadthechemist.com published an article in April 2018 that explained what happened when the author phoned ‘Australian Gold’, sun care and sun protection company, and asked them to share their lab results – the answer was disappointing; “The ingredients and (SPF) levels have been tested by a third-party company, which we pay them to do. We do not have the test results for consumers to review.” If tests have been conducted, paid for, and the results are positive, why wouldn’t you share them as part of your marketing strategy to instil even more confidence in the consumer’s perception of your product? CONCLUSION Hopefully, one day, there will be uniformity in validation, certification and consumer education explaining the practical limitations of an ‘SPF’ product. Hopefully, one day, we will see product companies and manufacturers held accountable for the claims they are making, with public declarations of their scientific data to substantiate their ‘SPF’ rating. How difficult is it to add a page with this information on their website? Sun protection should be held in high esteem by consumers, manufacturers and testing facilities alike, given its critical role in the prevention of skin cancer. The next generation of skin protection starting to appear around the world includes the use of peptides to add layers of defence beyond simply reflection and refraction of UV rays. At present, these new formulas have no common certification developed to allow comparison in the ultimate pursuit of protecting DNA from mutations – but I’m sure that will come. APJ Danielle Hughes is the Managing Director of Skinfaktor Australia who distribute the Technology and Skincare of the European Group, Dermia Solutions. Her career over the past 12 years in the hair and beauty industries has included roles as Australian Education Manager and National Brand Manager for leading imported cosmeceutical brands and currently also includes an international role as Marketing Manager using digital communications for a new to market European Medical and Aesthetics provider with patented technology. Danielle can be contacted on 0437 013 777, danielle@skinfaktor.com.au
APJ 29