Colipa Backs Commission Opinion: Limit SPF Claims

Posted: September 26, 2006

page 2 of 3

“Claims concerning the efficacy of sunscreen products should be simple, meaningful and based on identical criteria in order to help the consumer to compare products and to choose the right product for a given exposure and skin type…

“A wide variety of numbers used on labels for indicating the sun protection factor does not support the aim of making claims that are simple and meaningful. The increase in protection from one number to the next is negligible, particularly in the high range. Moreover, the increase in protection is only linear in the case of sunburn, that is to say, a product with sun protection factor 30 protects twice as well from sunburn as product with a sun protection factor of 15. However, a product with sun protection factor 15 absorbs 93% of UVB radiation, and a product with sun protection factor 30 absorbs 97% of UVB radiation.

“Finally, sun protection factors above 50 do not substantially increase the protection from UV radiation. Therefore, the range of labelled sun protection factors can be made smaller without reducing the choice of different strengths for the consumer.”

According to Colipa’s press statement, market research consistently has shown that consumers value the Sun Protection Factor number (SPF) to select their correct level of protection, and continued and consistent use of the SPF designation is in the interest of consumers traveling worldwide.

Colipa agrees that the variety of SPF numbers used on product labels can be limited without significantly reducing choices for consumers. In addition it agrees with the idea that any label referring to UVA protection should be supported by a demonstrated minimum efficacy—and will actively contribute to its implementation.