Latest news with #AvaChandlerMatthews
ABC News
16-06-2025
- Business
- ABC News
Choice defends sunscreen testing after criticism from Ultra Violette over testing methods
Consumer group Choice has hit back at criticism of its sunscreen testing after the makers of the worst performing product called into question the organisation's testing methodology. Choice said it stands by its testing which found only four out of 20 popular sunscreens sold in Australia met their advertised label claim of SPF50. The worst performer in Choice's testing was Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ Mineral Mattifying Zinc Sunscreen which returned a rating of SPF4. Ultra Violette completely rejected the findings and said its own independent testing showed its product had an SPF of more than 60. Over the weekend, co-founder Ava Chandler-Matthews took aim at Choice for unreliable testing methods on Ultra Violette's social media channel. "What we do know about Choice is they are not a regulator … they are not the ones who approve sunscreens." Choice used an accredited, independent laboratory in Australia for all the testing but was so surprised when Ultra Violettte's sunscreen showed an SPF of 4 that it ordered a second round of testing just for that product. To do this, it sent a different batch to a laboratory in Germany for a smaller validation test where it returned a result of SPF5. But Ms Chandler-Matthews criticised Choice for decanting the samples into unlabelled containers before sending them to both the Australian lab, Eurofins Dermatest, and the German lab, Normec Schrader Institute. "I don't know what happened on the journey to that lab, I don't know whether it was in extreme temperatures, heating or otherwise," she said. Choice CEO Ashley de Silva said all 20 sunscreens tested were decanted into amber glass jars which were sealed and transported in accordance with the strict instructions provided by the labs. "Amber glass jars were used in order to limit any degradation of the sunscreen ingredients and ensure the validity of our results, as they block UV light more than clear glass jars, and glass is less reactive than plastic," he said in a statement. He said in Australia the entire process, including transportation to the Sydney-based lab, was undertaken in less than an hour. Ms Chandler-Matthews also criticised Choice for testing a small sample size of volunteers. In accordance with Australian and international standards, Choice tested all sunscreens on 10 volunteers at the Sydney-based laboratory. Choice told the ABC in addition to the ten-person test in Australia, the extra Ultra Violette test in Germany was done on just five people because it was a validation test performed out of an abundance of caution. Ultra Violette has pointed out that two of the results from the five- person panel in Germany were invalid, meaning the results were based on just three people. Choice has told the ABC those results were sufficient to confirm the original test results. Ms Chandler-Matthews said Choice may have tested on 13 people overall but Ultra Violette had done three rounds of testing on 30 people altogether. She said the company was continuing to investigate the matter. Mr de Silva said Choice "stands by its rigorous, independent sunscreen testing" and publicly released all its test results. "We did this testing because it's in line with our mission to work for fair, safe and just markets for Australian consumers. Millions of people rely on SPF ratings to understand the sun protection they're paying for, and expect these ratings to be as accurate as possible," he said. Choice has called on the regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), to do its own testing of the 16 products that failed to meet their label claims. The TGA says variability in sunscreen testing is common across laboratories due to the reliance on human subject testing and it is investigating Choice's findings. All the other sunscreen products that did not meet their label claims according to Choice's testing have also said they have their own independent testing that confirms their products are compliant and meet the SPF on their labels.
Daily Mail
13-06-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Distraught co-founder of Aussie sunscreen brand labelled as having the WORST SPF50+ rating by CHOICE breaks her silence with stunningly personal message: 'My own children'
The co-founder of embattled Australian sunscreen brand Ultra Violette has broken her silence after one of the brand's products failed to meet its SPF50+ claim in CHOICE's bombshell investigation. In an emotional eight-minute video posted to Instagram on Friday, Ava Chandler-Matthews addressed the backlash following the consumer watchdog's damning one of the brand's most popular sunscreens. The consumer advocacy group's results shockingly claimed Ultra Violette's cult-favourite Lean Screen SPF50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen was one of the worst performing sunscreens on Aussie shelves - delivering an extremely low SPF rating of just 4. CHOICE experts said they were 'so perturbed' by the results of its extraordinary first experiment that it conducted a second test at an independent lab in Germany where the results came back with a reported SPF of 5. The condemning sunscreen report, which tested 20 popular products, found 16 failed to live up to their SPF claims, with Ultra Violette's mineral-based formula copping the biggest blow, and sending concerned customers into meltdown. However, Ava has hit back, saying the bombshell report was 'absolutely shocking,' and why she felt the need to speak up and dispute the damning claims. What might come as more surprising to consumers though is the fact that they've known about the report since March. 'We obviously freaked out, [and] took it very seriously immediately,' she said in the clip. 'We have now done three tests on this product,' she said in the clip. 'Two to ISO Australian standards [International Organisation for Standardisation] and one to FDA standards.' The results, she said visibly emotional, 'were all consistent SPF rating of over 60 [and] we stand behind the tests we've done.' Fighting back tears, the beauty entrepreneur said she was devastated not just for the brand but for the growing sense of mistrust this might cause with Aussie consumers. 'My concern with this whole thing is that people will now no longer trust any sunscreen,' she admitted. 'This isn't just about us. I put Lean Screen on my own children - and I still would tomorrow.' Addressing her followers directly, Ava pleaded that they have in-house regulators and have followed all the correct rigorous testing procedures. Because they knew where CHOICE had purchased the product from, they'd sent the brand a receipt, Ava and her team were able to know what batch number their test was from. 'We checked that the SPF, [and] the zinc levels in the product were as we have put on the packaging, which was 22.75% zinc'. 'That is almost a quarter of the entire formulation is zinc, and they were within spec, so there was no issue from a manufacturing point of view,' she continued. The next thing they did, within the same hour, was organize an urgent SPF test of a 10 panel study at an independent third party lab. She said those new tests, done on 10 real people as required by the TGA, returned SPF scores of 64 and 61.7. By contrast, CHOICE allegedly ran two small-scale tests - one with five people (with only three results counted), and one with a batch that had been decanted into another container, which Ava says could have compromised the zinc-based formula. 'You can never, especially a zinc… never decant the product.' 'We know that CHOICE decanted our product because they told us they decanted it into a different packaging.' According to Ava, all sunscreens have to go through a long stability process for six months depending on the country. 'We had our lean screen sitting in stability testing for six months in the exact same tube that we sell it in for six months and the same material for six months before we were launching it.' Australian consumer group CHOICE claimed in a bombshell report that Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen, which retails for $52, returned an SPF of just 4 during its first round of rigorous testing Ava said that CHOICE however sent it in an unlabelled container that was not the packaging that it had been stability tested in Ava said that CHOICE however sent it in an unlabelled container that was not the packaging that it had been stability tested in. In a moment of calm defiance, Ava reminded viewers that CHOICE is not the authority on SPF in Australia. 'They are not the TGA. They are not the ACCC. They're not a regulator. They are not the ones who approve sunscreens.' The TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) requires all listed sunscreens to meet strict testing protocols before being sold to Australians - protocols Ultra Violette insists they've followed to the letter. 'We live and die by what we put in the market.' We as founders, Beck [Jefferd] (Ultra Violette's other co-founder) and I, are so across the formulating, the testing, the regulatory rigor, the process behind what how we bring a sunscreen to market.' CHOICE's report has already sent shockwaves through the beauty industry, with social media erupting in anger and confusion. Many consumers have flooded Ultra Violette's Instagram page with demands for refunds and answers but Ava's video may begin to turn the tide. 'We now have 3 SPF tests done on 30 people that show where they've got a consistent result,' she continued. 'We are as baffled as you are.' The brand is continuing its own internal investigation and says it will fully cooperate with the TGA if required. Meanwhile, Ava is calling for calm and for consumers to seek clarity rather than panic. For now, Ultra Violette is standing firm behind its sunscreen and its science. 'We have the data to support the testing results. It is on our website.' The surprising results of the 20 popular sunscreens tested Australian consumer watchdog CHOICE has tested 20 popular sunscreens, with 16 failing to meet the SPF50 protection claims on their labels. Of the 20 sunscreens tested, only four passed the SPF test: Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen SPF 50+ passed with a reported SPF of 52 La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen 50+ passed with a reported SPF of 72 Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body SPF 50+ Hydrating Sunscreen passed with a reported SPF of 51 Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion SPF 50 passed with a reported SPF of 56 Sunscreens that failed the SPF test: SPF results in the 10s Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen - tested at 4 SPF results in the 20s Aldi Ombra 50+ ¿ tested at 26 Banana Boat Baby Zinc Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ - tested at 28 Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Zinc Mineral Body Lotion - tested at 26 Cancer Council Everyday Value Sunscreen 50 - tested at 27 Cancer Council Ultra Sunscreen 50+ - tested at 24 Neutrogena Sheer Zinc Dry-Touch Lotion SPF 50 - tested at 24 Woolworths Sunscreen Everyday Tube SPF 50+ - tested at 27 SPF results in the 30s Banana Boat Sport Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ - tested at 35 Bondi Sands SPF 50+ Fragrance Free Sunscreen - tested at 32 Cancer Council Kids Clear Zinc 50+ - tested at 33 Invisible Zinc Face + Body Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50 - tested at 38 SPF results in the 40s Coles SPF 50+ Sunscreen Ultra Tube ¿ tested at 43 Nivea Sun Kids Ultra Protect and Play Sunscreen Lotion SPF 50+ - tested at 41 Nivea Sun Protect and Moisture Lock SPF 50+ Sunscreen - tested at 40 Sun Bum Premium Moisturising Sunscreen Lotion 50+ - tested at 40
Daily Mail
22-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Ditch your foundation for a new tinted SPF
Sun's out, bring on the suncream. Although for those applying make-up, there's nothing worse than slopping on SPF that leaves a dull, white cast or causes foundation to become patchy. This year that problem has been solved, thanks to a slew of new products promising both proper protection from the sun and the sort of coverage you'd normally get from foundation – and in more than just one standard shade of 'bronze' that looks orange on almost everyone. Yes, 'SPF make-up' has been around for a while – but many foundations only contain around SPF 15, and you need to apply a decent amount to get even that level of coverage (around half a teaspoon for your face and neck). But this new generation of products are proper sun-creams, with added pigment in a broad range of shades so you can get perfectly matched, full coverage foundation as well as sun protection. It's all part of what Dr Julian Sass ( a cosmetic scientist, calls the 'skincarification of suncare'. 'The idea is that your serum, primer, moisturiser and make-up all contain SPF 50 so, if you layer them, you're getting at least that half teaspoon.' Ava Chandler-Matthews, co-founder of Australian sun-care brand Ultra Violette, says the difference is that these new products have sun safety at their core. 'With a tinted SPF like ours, you start with the SPF and then add pigment. That gives a much better sun protection product than a foundation with SPF,' she says. Apply a tinted SPF as the last step of your skincare, if you find you're not able to apply enough, use around a quarter teaspoon of an untinted SPF, let it sink in, and then apply a quarter teaspoon of tinted SPF over the top. To find your shade, use (put in the foundation shade you already use in any brand, and it will tell you the closest). There are an impressive number of options available with a wide shade range – we tried out a few… BARELY THERE BASE Merit The Uniform Tinted Mineral Sunscreen SPF 50, £34 for 50ml, 15 shades Merit is basically Glossier for grown-ups – foolproof formulas you can slap on with your fingers – and their light but buildable SPF launches today. It feels a bit tacky as you apply it but it spreads easily and dries down to a nice even finish that really does, as they claim, look like skin with nothing on it. Mineral sun protection uses filters such as zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, while other formulas have names such as avobenzone and are often called 'chemical'. They both absorb UV rays but historically mineral protection has been better for sensitive skin. However, it can appear white or chalky, hence why tinted mineral SPFs are a bit of a breakthrough. PATCHY PROTECTION Supergoop! Protec(tint) Daily Skin Tint SPF 50, £40 for 35ml, 14 shades Launched in 2007 by a Texan who wanted to improve suncare provisions in local schools to prevent skin cancers, Supergoop! pioneered products such as SPF setting mists and powders for on-the-go top-ups. New to the UK this year, the Daily Skin Tint takes a bit of work to stop it going patchy but gives a nice dewy finish that mattifies over time. AUSSIE RULES Naked Sundays BeautyScreen SPF 50 Peptide Foundation Tint, £38 for 30ml, 13 shades Launched in 2021 by an Australian news anchor, their latest product is this tint. It has a more liquid consistency than the others, so you might want to use their brush to work it into your skin a little. It boasts skincare ingredients like niacinamide but it's pricey for the size and gave me a bit of a powdery finish. FAB FOUNDATION Ultra Violette Daydream Screen SPF 50 Tinted Veil, £38 for 50ml, 15 shades Tinted sun protection can leave a white cast if it contains zinc oxide, as many do. Ultra Violette's doesn't so might be a good option if you've been left looking ashy in the past. After applying, you have to work quickly as you don't have a lot of time before it sets. The coverage was good – it concealed brilliantly and left a gorgeous made-up but glowy finish. KOREAN BARGAIN Beauty of Joseon Daily Tinted Fluid Sunscreen Broad Spectrum SPF 30, on sale at £15.30 from £17 for 50ml, 12 shades This Korean brand has a lower SPF than others, and even if you apply double, you'll still only be getting SPF 30. The formulation is very sheer and its coverage lighter than many. So if you're looking for something to cover pigmentation, it's not great but works as a nice lightweight weekend base. SHEER GLOW Fenty Hydra Vizor Huez Tinted SPF 30 Mineral Sunscreen, £32 for 50ml + £5 refillable case, 10 shades Again, you'll get less protection from this than from the SPF 50s out there, but if you know your Fenty foundation shade, it's easy to match your shade. The finish was much more sheer and glossy than I found with any of the others so if dewy isn't for you, you'll need powder.
