CHOICE sunscreen testing and TGA updates — what it means for your sunscreen

In 2025, the Australian consumer organisation CHOICE published independent SPF testing of 20 popular SPF 50 / 50+ sunscreens sold in Australia. The findings raised a fair question: if some products test well below their label claim, how many other sunscreens might also be under-performing?

This page explains what CHOICE found, what the TGA did next — including its 4 May 2026 update — and a practical way to choose sunscreen based on your personal sun-damage risk. If you want the broader sunscreen guide first, see Sunscreen advice.

Why the CHOICE results matter

CHOICE’s testing found that only 4 of 20 sunscreens met or exceeded their SPF 50/50+ label claim, while 16 tested below. Most products that “failed” did not drop to zero protection — many still tested in the SPF 20–40 range — but the report clearly calls into question label accuracy and shows that under-performance is not rare.

The TGA’s own findings went further (May 2026)

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) reviewed the products itself. In its update of 4 May 2026, the TGA reported that, assessed under the current Australian standard (AS/NZS 2604), it considers 18 of the 20 sunscreens did not meet the SPF testing requirements — an even stricter result than CHOICE’s label-claim comparison.

This is an important distinction: CHOICE compared each product against its own label, whereas the TGA assessed the products against the testing requirements of the standard itself. The TGA has also acknowledged known variability in the current in-vivo SPF test method and is reviewing how SPF is tested and regulated in Australia. The practical message for patients is the same: label SPF cannot be taken for granted, so technique and a layered approach matter more than ever.

What CHOICE found (in plain English)

CHOICE’s media release listed the four products that met their SPF claim, with the tested SPF values:

• La Roche-Posay Anthelios Wet Skin Sunscreen SPF 50+ (tested at 72)
• Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Body Lotion SPF 50 (tested at 56)
• Cancer Council Kids Sunscreen SPF 50+ (tested at 52)
• Mecca Cosmetica To Save Body SPF 50+ Hydrating Sunscreen (tested at 51)

CHOICE also reported that Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ tested very low — around SPF 4 in the initial test, with similar confirmatory testing — and later updated their article with further market actions and at least one additional recall.

What the TGA did next

The TGA took the CHOICE report seriously and published a sequence of public updates, including:

• Recall of Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ (all batches) due to inconsistency in SPF level (22 Aug 2025).
• Further market actions involving multiple sunscreens with lower-than-claimed SPF levels (26 Sep 2025).
• Consumer guidance on SPF testing and known variability in the current in-vivo SPF test standard (Sep 2025).
• A dedicated update about sunscreens using the same base formulation as Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ (17 Dec 2025).
• An updated statement (4 May 2026) reporting that, under the current Australian standard, 18 of the 20 products did not meet the SPF testing requirements.

Bottom line: this was not treated as a one-off.

My practical advice: choose based on your sun-damage risk

If your skin check shows no sun damage and no actinic keratoses

If you have had a comprehensive skin examination and your doctor finds no evidence of solar elastosis (sun damage) and no actinic keratoses (precancerous change), it is reasonable to continue using the sunscreens you like — as long as you use them properly. In this lower-risk group, your biggest wins are applying enough, reapplying on time, and adding hats, clothing and shade.

How to apply properly: How to apply sunscreen — the teaspoon rule. Book: Full Skin Checks.

If your doctor notes solar elastosis or actinic keratoses

If your doctor has commented on solar elastosis or actinic keratoses (precancerous sun damage), it makes sense to be stricter. In this higher-risk group, you should strongly consider choosing a sunscreen that has been independently shown to meet SPF 50+, such as the top performers in the CHOICE testing listed above.

In my own skin checks I routinely comment on early sun damage and actinic keratoses — the ears, hands and nose are common places where these changes show up early. Related: Actinic Keratosis and Actinic Keratosis Treatment.

Important nuance: this is about label certainty, not panic

Even with the CHOICE and TGA findings, I don’t want patients to take the wrong message and stop protecting themselves. Use this hierarchy:

• Any sunscreen is usually better than none, especially if you apply it well.
• High-risk patients should prioritise products with the best available independent evidence for meeting SPF 50+, alongside clothing and shade.
• Everyone should treat sunscreen as one pillar of protection, not the only pillar.

Beyond sunscreen: UPF clothing, hats, sunglasses and shade.

If you’re high risk, don’t rely on sunscreen alone

If you have many actinic keratoses, extensive sun damage, or previous skin cancers, prevention often needs a broader plan, such as:

• Regular checks: Full Skin Checks.
• Field treatment for sun damage: Actinic Keratosis Treatment.
• At-home options for selected lesions: Efudix (5-fluorouracil).
• In-clinic alternatives for selected cases: Laser-assisted photodynamic therapy (LA-PDT) for non-melanoma skin cancer.

Book a sunscreen and skin cancer prevention review

If you’re unsure what sunscreen is appropriate for your risk level — or you have sun damage, actinic keratoses, or a history of skin cancer — we can tailor a simple plan you’ll actually follow. If you’re worried about a few specific spots, a Targeted Skin Spot Check (up to 3 lesions) is a focused 20-minute option; otherwise book a full skin check.

References

1. CHOICE. We tested the SPF claims of 20 sunscreens — 16 failed. Article and ongoing updates (2025).
2. CHOICE. Media release: 16 of 20 sunscreens didn’t meet SPF claims in CHOICE test (16 June 2025) — lists the four products meeting their claim with tested SPF values and notes the lowest performer.
3. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ — recall of all batches due to inconsistency in SPF level (22 Aug 2025).
4. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Multiple sunscreens recall: lower than claimed SPF levels (26 Sep 2025).
5. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Statement on CHOICE SPF sunscreen findings (Aug 2025) — notes known variability of the in-vivo SPF test method and review of requirements.
6. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Sunscreen SPF testing — information for consumers.
7. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Sunscreens using the same base formulation as Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+ (17 Dec 2025).
8. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Updated statement on CHOICE SPF sunscreen findings (4 May 2026) — under the current Australian standard, 18 of the 20 products did not meet the SPF testing requirements.