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.

Ultra Violette co-founder Ava Chandler-Matthews has addressed the backlash following CHOICE’s damning one of the brand’s most popular sunscreen

‘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’.

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

‘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.’

Ava with her Ultra Violette co-founder Bec Jefferd

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 

Source: Choice Australia

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk