How Sunscreens May Be Cheating on Their SPF Labels

Sunscreens, now available with SPFs of up to 100, have come a very long way in just a few years — or have they? Because the watchdog Environmental Working Group, for one, suspects that sunscreen labels with sky-high UV protection numbers could be making trumped-up promises, and it has called on the FDA to look into it — stat.

“We ask that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration investigate whether ingredients and other technologies are being used to boost SPF claims by masking the skin reddening that is the body’s warning sign of sun damage,” reads a letter submitted by the EWG to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf on Aug. 18. “Such products may encourage people to remain in the sun, where, though they don’t see or sense burning, they may in fact sustain subtle or profound damage to the skin, potentially leading to cancer.”

The number of products making SPF claims of 70 or higher has increased significantly over the last decade, according to EWG’s 2016 Guide to Sunscreens, the latest version of a resource it has published annually since 2006. But the number of UVA-shielding active ingredients available to U.S. manufacturers has remained the same in about that time — including avobenzone, the primary UVA filter used in nonmineral sunscreens, which is limited by the FDA to a concentration of 3 percent.

“The information is just not out there about how you could make such a huge boost in your SPF rating,” EWG senior scientist David Andrews tells Yahoo Beauty. Other active ingredients, such as homosalate and oxybenzone, are typically added as UVB filters, or filters of a UVA/UVB mix. But products analyzed by the EWG often contain the same active ingredients — at the same concentration levels — whether they are labeled SPF 30 or SPF 100.

What that says, Andrews notes, is that manufacturers may be using further additives — such as butyloctyl salicylate, bisabolol, aloe, vitamin A, vitamin C, and vitamin E — which may succeed in cutting down on sun-induced skin redness, which is how SPF protection is measured. Meanwhile, UV damage could still be going on.

Because of additives that could be concealing sunburn, consumers could be “lulled into a false sense of security and spend more time exposed to harmful UV radiation without reapplying a sun-filtering product,” writes the EWG. The letter, therefore, urges the FDA to analyze “the use of anti-inflammatories, antioxidants and other ingredients in sunscreen products, which may increase SPF measurements without shielding the body from UV light.” The EWG also called on the FDA to update its testing methodology for SPF values and finalize its proposed rule to cap SPF values at 50+.

The FDA told Yahoo Beauty it would be responding directly to EWG. It also noted, “While the FDA is aware of recent articles on sunscreen products (including Consumer Reports and EWG), we cannot speculate on why there are reported differences between SPF values in testing and those on product labels. Manufacturers of sunscreen drug products are responsible for the quality of their products and for determining the SPF reported on the labels for their products by following specific test methods set forth in FDA regulations. When performed according to current regulatory requirements, the FDA’s established SPF test method demonstrates a sunscreen’s effectiveness in helping prevent sunburn.” It also noted, in part, “The FDA is continuing to evaluate all scientific issues related to sunscreens as we work to finalize the sunscreen monograph as required by the Sunscreen Innovation Act.”

Between calls for SPF investigations — also spurred by recent sunscreen analyses by Consumer Reports and subsequent class-action suits against Banana Boat — as well as recent news about Wen Hair Care products generating thousands of consumer complaints about rashes and hair loss, the FDA has been under increasing fire to step up its oversight of chemicals that go into skincare and beauty products. Bipartisan legislation seeking that oversight is currently pending in the Senate.

Still, despite the FDA’s reputation of being notoriously slow to react and laissez-faire about cosmetic chemical additives, the EWG is not letting up in its quest to have the government find answers to the SPF issue — something it’s been raising red flags about to the agency for more than a year. “It’s part of a dialogue, and I think it’s helpful to engage the agency in a public manner,” Andrews says. “This is an extremely important question from a public health perspective.”

Each year, more than two million Americans develop skin cancer — and rates of melanoma, the deadliest form, have soared over the past few decades. The EWG notes that in 1978, when the FDA first began its review of sunscreens, the rate of new melanoma cases was 8.9 out of every 100,000 people. By 2012, the rate climbed to 22.9 per every 100,000 — an increase of 250 percent.

“We’re not telling people to avoid sunscreen,” Andrews stresses, “but to be aware that there’s evidence, in our reviews and in the Consumer Reports independent testing, that the SPF system seems to be failing consumers.”

Let’s keep in touch! Follow Yahoo Beauty on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest.