Original source (on modern site)
Consumers are being deceived by labels on aerosol sunscreens, say experts in radiation and melanoma, with products boasting high SPF ratings that would be impossible to achieve in the real world. A favourite among parents of wriggly children, and those wanting to apply sunscreen over make-up, aerosol sunscreens are a concern for skin cancer experts, who say Australians should opt for creams and lotions instead. Emma Le Sueur, from Lennox Head, applying sunscreen lotion on son Jaxon. Credit: Danielle Smith "We've got real, grave concerns that it's incredibly difficult to get the SPF stated on the tin," said Associate Professor Craig Sinclair, director of the World Health Organisation Collaborative Centre for UV Radiation at Cancer Council Victoria. "And because it's so inadequate in terms of its ability to deliver sunscreen in real life conditions, we are particularly concerned this is sunscreen often used by parents with young children." Last month, the Therapeutic Goods Administration approved changes to the Sunscreen Standard, which governs sunscreen testing and labelling in Australia. Under the new rules, aerosol and pump pack sunscreens will need to be labelled with guidance for use, including instructions that the consumer should hold the container 10 to 15 centimetres from the body and apply it until the product looks and feels wet on the skin, and that they should not apply the product in windy conditions. However, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and the Cancer Council both believe the changes fall short of adequately regulating aerosols, which can be marketed as providing levels of sun protection impossible to achieve with even a whole can of product. All sunscreen sold in Australia is tested as a lotion, regardless of its eventual packaging. The product is tested using two grams of product per square centimetre of skin, or about 35 millilitres (seven teaspoons) for a full-body application. That means a 200-millilitre aerosol sunscreen can earn the same SPF 50+ rating as a lotion, even though, once lotion is mixed with propellant and sprayed as an aerosol, it may be impossible to extract 35 millilitres of product from spraying the can. Loading "It is not tested in the way that it is delivered," Sinclair said. A 2020 study of nine aerosol sunscreens by Queensland University of Technology, with the support of the Cancer Council and ARPANSA, found some contained equal parts sunscreen and propellant. Further research by Griffith University found up to 93 per cent of sunscreen was lost when aerosol products were sprayed in 20km/h winds, and up to 79 per cent was lost when sprayed in 10km/h winds: both common beach conditions. Dr Stuart Henderson, ARPANSA's UVR exposure assessment assistant director, said he was concerned that the new labels, directing consumers to spray the product until wet, did not address the problem. "What's in a can of aerosol sunscreen is not entirely clear to the consumer; a lot of what comes out is just the propellants," he said. "It's been an ongoing issue for many years that people do not apply enough sunscreen, even if it's a lotion or a cream, and we feel that with aerosol sunscreens those issues are compounded." In a discussion paper on the new standard, the TGA acknowledged that ARPANSA, a federal agency, did not deem the new labels adequate to address inappropriate or inadequate administration of aerosol sunscreen. It said it would consider the concerns in future messaging to consumers. Emma Le Sueur, owner of The Fit Way outdoor training in Lennox Head, in northern NSW, said she looked for high SPF sunscreens for herself and her son, Jaxon, aged eight. "When they're younger, it's a harder application," she said. "I've once bought a spray before, just to try. Then I tried roll-on, but now we've just stuck with regular sunscreen." LoadingMost Viewed in National