Major skin cancer warning slapped on popular sunscreen: 'It doesn't do what it says', study finds

A major report has warned that a popular sunscreen does not work, potentially leaving consumers at risk of skin cancer.
Consumer champion Which? safety tested 15 sun creams from Boots, Garnier and Nivea, as well as own-brand alternatives, and saw surprising results.
While a £2.99 supermarket-own sun protectant passed the stringent testing process, a £28 branded favourite failed to reach industry standards.
As a result, the consumer body warned, users may not be adequately protected from the sun's UV rays, putting them at risk of deadly cancer.
Ultrasun Family SPF30, sold by some of the biggest UK high street retailers and costing £28, markets itself as being 'perfect for the whole family' and 'especially suitable for children with sensitive skin'.
But the cream failed two separate tests that measured both its sun protection factor—or SPF—and ultraviolet (UV) protection.
To trial the creams, scientists applied a small amount on volunteers' backs, before shining a lamp on the patch to simulate the sun's rays.
The time it takes for the skin to become red was then measured.
Ultrasun Family SPF30 (left), sold by some of the biggest UK high street retailers, markets itself as being 'perfect for the whole family' and 'especially suitable for children with sensitive skin'. Another sunscreen that made it onto the Don't Buy list was Morrisons Moisturising Sun Spray SPF30 - £3.75 per bottle
In another test, scientists took a sample of the cream and spread it onto a glass plate to measure the absorption of UV radiation directly.
To pass, the sunscreen needed to provide at least one third of the claimed SPF.
SPF is measurement of the length of time you can be in the sun before you get burnt.
For example, a sunscreen with an SPF of 30 will take 30 times longer to damage your skin compared to no protection at all.
If a product failed to demonstrate the level of SPF it claimed to have on its first test, Which? repeated the test. If it passed the second time around, a third test was done.
Any product that failed either test twice overall, was labelled a 'Don't Buy' by Which?.
Natalie Hitchins, Which?'s head of home products and services, warned shoppers to look out for these products, as they are not guaranteed to protect as expected.
'It's really concerning that widely available sunscreens could be putting families at risk by failing to offer the level of sun protection claimed on the packaging,' she said.
'Our results prove that there's no need to splash out to keep you and your loved ones safe in the sun as we've found other cheap and reliable options.'
A spokesperson from Ultrasun told Which? that the brand was fully confident in its testing protocols and that these not only met, but surpass industry standards.
Another sunscreen that made it on to this year's Don't Buy list was Morrisons Moisturising Sun Spray SPF30, priced £3.75 per bottle.
Morrisons says it's looking closely at the data and working with its supplier to carry out additional independent testing.
Sunscreens that did pass Which?'s test included Aldi's Lacura Sensitive Sun Lotion SPF50+, which costs just £2.99.
At just £1.50 per 100ml, it also earned a Which? Great Value badge.
Lidl's Cien Sun Spray 30SPF High (£3.79) Boot's Soltan Protect & Moisturise Suncare Spray SPF30 (£5.50) Nivea's Sun Protect and Moisture Lotion SPF30 (£7.90) and Sainsbury's Sun Protect Moisturising Lotion SPF30 (£5.50) all also passed the safety tests.
The damning report comes days after Kelsey Parker, 34, came under fire for admitting she doesn't put sunscreen on her children.
The podcast host, who is currently expecting her third child with tree surgeon Will Lindsay, claimed daughter Aurelia, five, and son Bodhi, four, 'don't burn' and that it 'causes skin cancer'.
The children's father, The Wanted star Tom Parker, tragically died from brain cancer in 2022.
Speaking in the latest episode of her Mum's The Word! podcast about 'the secret world of parenting', Ms Parker confessed that she opts to keep her children out of the sun rather than using SPF to protect them.
She added that she makes 'organic' sunscreen out of beeswax for UV protection instead.
'It's bad for you–that sunscreen,' she said. 'My kids do not wear sun cream.'
'The only thing that I may put on them is an organic sun cream.
'My kids, we went on holiday, I never put sun cream on them and they do not burn.
'I never used to wear sun cream, sun cream causes skin cancer'.
Since making the controversial remarks, the expectant mother has been blasted by listeners, who have accused her of spreading 'dangerous misinformation.
One listener wrote on social media: 'This is really dangerous spreading this information. Please research.'
'This is insane and so unsafe. It's so damaging, burning doesn't indicate sun damage, it can literally kill them. Wow,' a second said.
A third slammed the 'dangerous advice', while a fourth called the dismissal of conventional sun cream 'irresponsible'.
Experts say there is no evidence that sunscreen causes cancer in humans.
Dr Bav Shergill a consultant dermatologist at the Queen Victoria Hospital, London and spokesperson for the British Association of Dermatologists, previously told MailOnline: 'Sunscreens are a safe and effective way to protect your skin from burning and other forms of sun damage.
'Millions of people have used sunscreen over many decades so we can be confident about their safety profile.'
Studies have long shown sun creams can contain both mineral and chemical UV filters.
Mineral UV filters mainly remain on the skin's surface and form a physical barrier to deflect UV rays before they penetrate your skin.
Chemical UV filters, meanwhile, absorb UV light and convert it into heat energy.
As well as being used in sun creams, they may be added to other personal care products, such as moisturisers.
Some research on animals, mainly mice, has indicated many commonly used chemical UV filters in high quantities could be endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) — chemicals that interfere with hormones — such as mimicking natural oestrogen found in our bodies.
Lifetime exposure to oestrogen is an established risk factor for cancers, including breast.
But no research on humans has backed this up.
Going without sunscreen, meanwhile, has been shown to directly raise the risk of developing skin cancer.
Around 15,000 people in the UK are diagnosed with melanoma each year—the UK's fifth most common cancer—with the incidence rate rising faster than any other common cancer.
A recent study from Cancer Research UK warned found that an alarming 87 per cent of melanoma cases, the equivalent of 17,100 in the UK each year, are caused by overexposure to ultraviolet radiation, either directly from the sun or sun beds—meaning they could be avoided.
This is because increased UV exposure can damage the DNA in skin cells, triggering mutations that become cancerous.
From here, the cancer can spread to the blood vessels beneath the skin, getting into the bloodstream and spreading throughout the body.
Last year, rates of the cancer reached a record high in the UK, with new diagnoses increasing by almost a third in just a decade, according to the charity.
According to the NHS website, people should apply suncream to avoid burning and use 'at least factor 30'.
'Sunburn increases your risk of skin cancer. Sunburn does not just happen on holiday. You can burn in the UK, even when it's cloudy,' the site reads.
The health service also recommends avoiding the sun when it is at its strongest, between the hours of 11am and 3pm from March to November, and to cover up with suitable clothing and sunglasses.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

BBC News

10 minutes ago

• BBC News

Protesters gather to demand hospice reopens and question funding

Campaigners have returned to a hospice inpatient unit in Liverpool a year after it was shut to stage another protest to demand the facility reopen as soon as possible. The 26-bed unit at Marie Curie in Woolton, Liverpool, closed in July 2024 because of a shortage of specialised nursing decision sparked immediate concern and a campaign group, Save our Hospice, formed to demand a u-turn. A Marie Curie spokesman said it was in talks with the NHS Cheshire & Merseyside Integrated Care Board (ICB), which commissions end-of-life care in Liverpool, to agree a "sustainable long-term plan" for the unit's future. A large group of campaigners gathered outside the unit on Saturday afternoon and held placards criticising Marie Curie for not "taking up our offer" to fundraise for the unit. Some wore yellow t-shirts with the slogans "Save our Hospice" and "Save our Ward". Independent Liverpool councillor Lucy Williams, who attended a protest at the unit on Saturday, told the BBC: "It's been a year since they closed their doors to the inpatient unit and it's been a year that they've continued to receive funding from the ICB."So we're here today to ask where has that money gone and why haven't they delivered that service that they're getting commissioned to provide."Williams worked at the hospice as a palliative care nurse for two years, and said: "People's relatives and loved ones have died here and a lot of them have committed their time to fundraising for this hospice."We found out over this year that money doesn't come to this hospice, it goes into a national pot - so throughout the closure this fundraising has continued and people haven't been aware that the inpatient unit in Liverpool has been closed." 'Get the ward open' Williams said an "easy" resolution was to immediately re-open the ward. She said: "They're receiving the funding to have the ward open, surely they can have one or two beds? That's better than none at all. "So get the ward open and if Marie Curie aren't competent to provide the service then the ICB need to commission someone who is."The Marie Curie spokesperson said the charity hoped to reach an agreement with the NHS integrated care board "as soon as possible".While admissions to the inpatient unit "had been paused", the hospice had remained open and was providing palliative and end of life care to "thousands of people in Liverpool in different ways", they added. The spokesperson said the ICB was aware its funding was being used to provide these services. Listen to the best of BBC Radio Merseyside on Sounds and follow BBC Merseyside on Facebook, X, and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.

BBC News

an hour ago

• BBC News

Vicar from Colchester shocked as stage four cancer 'disappears'

A vicar diagnosed with stage four skin cancer said he was "astonished" after the disease appeared to have left his Reverend Matthew Simpkins, from Colchester, said he had been preparing to die after his diagnosis in there was no sign of cancer on his last five scans, a realisation he told the BBC was "remarkable"."It can come back and I know that, but it's astonishing and I really give thanks for where I am," Mr Simpkins said. He was first diagnosed with acral letiginous melanoma in 2019 and had a toe Simpkins, the vicar of St James in Clacton-on-Sea and St Christopher in Jaywick, later got the all-clear from doctors, before the disease returned two years later. It spread across his body, before Mr Simpkins then contracted aseptic an "extremely rare" reaction to the meningitis treatment meant it started to attack his cancer as well."Halfway through 2024 I had a scan and my jaw hit the floor because the cancer was gone," explained Mr Simpkins, who grew up in Ipswich and Sudbury."It had been on my lungs and on my back and it was gone. I've had five scans since and it's not there."According to Cancer Research UK, 55% of people with stage four BRAF positive melanoma would survive for six -and-a-half years or more. 'Poignant moment' The vicar said his shock revelation followed a year of "preparing people for what was to come next" when his condition worsened."One of the very wise nurses said to me 'You're lucky'," he added. "It's remarkable." Mr Simpkins believed he was the first person to be discharged from St Helena Hospice's home-care team, father-of-two said: "I'm so grateful I had the chance to be the first person looked after by this nurse to thank her in person."I realised as I did it, it was quite a poignant moment."Having already released a song made from the sounds of an MRI scanning machine, the keen musician said hallucinations he had during meningitis treatment inspired his latest released the 11-track album Headwater on 6 June."My cancer helped me go back to music and tell people a little of the human experience of illness and seemingly approaching death," Mr Simpkins added. Follow East of England news on X, Instagram and Facebook: BBC Beds, Herts & Bucks, BBC Cambridgeshire, BBC Essex, BBC Norfolk, BBC Northamptonshire or BBC Suffolk.

Times

5 hours ago

• Times

How can hospitals have dignity if staff don't notice you're dead?

There have been miracles happening at a mental health hospital in the east of London — miracles so remarkable that I am surprised so little has been made of it. What happened at Goodmayes Hospital in Ilford was that a patient died — but then three days later was seen by staff cheerfully eating his breakfast. Extraordinary goings-on, don't you think? Or perhaps, worryingly, not quite as extraordinary as they appear. The man who died and then — stone rolled away from the tomb — was up and about eating his cornflakes three days later was called Mr Winbourne Charles. He had been admitted to Goodmayes suffering from depression, and five months later he killed himself. So how was he seen eating his breakfast three days later? He wasn't. The staff who were meant to be watching him had not even noticed that he had died: they lied on the official forms, not realising that Mr Charles had been in a coffin for the best part of 72 hours. Such was the level of care and concern. Such was the rigour and the attention to detail. • Rod Liddle on his radio comeback: Somehow I'm still on air When Mr Charles was admitted to Goodmayes it was with a clinical psychological assessment which revealed he was a very high-risk patient and should be observed once every 15 minutes. Goodmayes downgraded that assessment so that he should be observed only once an hour. But it didn't really matter, because the staff didn't even do that. It turns out that he hadn't been observed for at least two hours when he was found dead. You might gauge the interest the Goodmayes staff took in their employment, and in the people they were there to care for, by their behaviour at Mr Charles's inquest. One staff member gave evidence lying in their bed at home, because they weren't due at work that day. Another gave evidence from the Tube because they were on their way to the airport to take a nice break in the sun. In my days of court reporting the coroner would have sent round the Old Bill to drag that person from their pit and grounded all flights — but times change. The authority has seeped away. We know about Mr Winbourne Charles partly because of another inquest into another unnecessary death at the same hospital and some expert digging by the BBC, which revealed at least 20 more very dubious deaths at the North East London NHS Foundation Trust. People who had been on short-term medication for years and years. People neglected. The staff not doing what they were paid to do. At Mr Charles's inquest the coroner recorded a verdict of death by suicide contributed to by neglect. The trust accepted the verdict and admitted that the behaviour of its staff at the inquest had been 'unacceptable', and so you might expect things to be changing in Goodmayes right now. You'd be wrong. On the hospital's own site the latest review — from May this year — details the utterly useless nature of the service provided for patients. Underneath it says: 'Goodmayes Hospital has not yet replied' — but then, in fairness, it says that underneath all the reviews, dating back to 2023. Where do we start with this farrago? Perhaps with the nature of management in the public sector, where a laxer atmosphere and regimen prevails than in the private sphere, and where it seems that the ethos is far more about supporting the staff than providing for the customer, or patient. There are no sales figures and financial imperatives to sharpen the concentration a little. The unions are on the side of staff and the managers dare not demur. Nobody is on the side of the patient, the taxpayer. But I do not think that is the main problem. In the past year I have been detailing here the various manifestations of Skank Britain and the cultural shifts that have led us down this fetid back alley. The dissolution of authority and the refusal of people to take responsibility for their own actions, or indeed for themselves. The notion of such terms as 'discipline' and 'duty' becoming de trop and the insistence by each errant individual that he or she mustn't be judged and will behave exactly as they wish, thank you. The almost complete lack of regard for that most annoying of encumbrances, other people. A lack of dignity in the self and towards others. And, perhaps more than anything else, the long-term whittling-away of a communitarian ethos, the sense that as a nation we have a responsibility to look out for one another and to do the right thing. All of that stuff has largely gone, I fear. Goodmayes Hospital is as much a function of Skank Britain as some feral lout on the Tube with his feet on the seats and hideous music blaring out of his infernal device. Two members of Palestine Action broke into RAF Brize Norton and claimed to have put out of action a couple of Voyager air-to air refuelling tankers. Three questions arise. First, why weren't they shot? Second, the prime minister called it an act of vandalism — but isn't it, more properly, an act of treason? And, finally, why hadn't Palestine Action already been put on the list of proscribed terrorist organisations and its members arrested? You will be relieved to know that Olsi Beheluli is still with us. Olsi, an Albanian by birth, has recently been released from prison after an 11-year stretch for heroin dealing. In a move that suggests he is perhaps not the sharpest tool in the box, he photographed himself sitting in front of a vast pile of banknotes worth £250,000. Anyway, the Home Office wanted him out of the country, but the immigration tribunal judges wouldn't have it. In gaining British citizenship, Olsi had signed a form which stated that he had never done anything that 'might indicate that you may not be considered a person of good character'. Dealing skag didn't remotely count. Readers of a certain age may remember the comedian Dave Allen's observation that, as 10 per cent of road accidents were caused by drink-drivers, it followed that 90 per cent were caused by people who were sober. 'Why don't those people keep off the roads and let us drunks drive in safety?' he asked. The dyscalculic lefties will all be channelling Dave, having read about the Ministry of Justice stats released last week which showed that more than a quarter of all sexual assaults on women last year were carried out by people not born in this country. You can hear them now: 'That means 74 per cent were carried out by British people and nobody has suggested investigating them. Racist!'