Test results highlighting discrepancies in the SPF claims and efficacy of many sunscreen brands may have sparked concern about misleading marketing, but an expert from UNSW warns the way these findings were communicated could end up doing more harm than good.

Consumer group CHOICE recently tested 20 popular SPF 50 or 50+ sunscreens and found 16 of 20 products didn’t meet their SPF claims.

Professor Nitika Garg from the School of Marketing at UNSW Business School says the SPF 50+ label has long given consumers comfort.

“It’s a quick, accessible signal that they’re doing the right thing and they rightly trust that if a brand is saying it’s SPF 50+, somebody has taken a look at it and approved it,” she said.

However, the release of CHOICE’s findings impacts this consumer confidence.

“The implicit trust consumers had in those labels because they thought they were being backed by some scientific evidence… falls apart,” said Prof Garg. “As a consumer, you think: where do I go now? What do I buy? You feel betrayed.”

Independent confidence

Consumers are especially likely to trust independent third parties like CHOICE, she explains, because they are seen to have “no skin in the game.” Unlike companies with something to sell, independent testers appear unbiased.

“That’s the reason why CHOICE data or CHOICE conclusions make more of an impact on consumers,” Prof Garg said.

Media confusion

But when media headlines aren’t framed carefully, that trust can quickly turn to confusion. Prof Garg says the coverage of the CHOICE findings may have done more harm than good.

“There is no sunscreen they tested that didn’t provide protection at all,” she says. “But some consumers may only read the headline and walk away thinking none of them work, which is extremely harmful. Not using anything is not an option. 

“Every agency, every person in the chain of delivering this news has some responsibility to present information in a way that is easy, but also avoids misleading interpretations,” says Prof Garg.

“Misleading headlines risk losing consumer trust, and when it comes to a product as important as sunscreen, even one person lost is one too many.” 

Rebuilding trust

Prof Garg says that rebuilding trust will be difficult unless brands and government agencies step in.

“If a brand has contradictory evidence, they need to share it, and they need to back up their claims with science. Simply saying ‘we stand behind our product’ isn’t going to help. Brands must give people clear, scientific evidence to earn back trust.” 

Public reassurance is just as important.

“It’s taken years to build sunscreen use into a daily habit. We don’t want to see that reversed overnight,” she said.