The cult favourite Aussie sunscreen label Ultra Violette has pulled one of its best-known products, after new tests raised questions about whether it was delivering the level of sun protection advertised.
The brand announced on Friday that its Lean Screen Mineral Mattifying SPF50+ will be withdrawn from shelves, effective immediately, after multiple labs returned widely varying results when re-testing the zinc-based formula.
In a statement, co-founders Ava Chandler-Matthews and Bec Jefferd told customers, “Across eight different tests, Lean Screen has now returned SPF data of 4, 10, 21, 26, 33, 60, 61, and 64. That wasn’t good enough for us, and it isn’t good enough for you.”
The company confirmed full refunds and product vouchers will be available to anyone who purchased Lean Screen, regardless of when or where they bought it. Customers can lodge their claims through Ultra Violette’s official update page.
Why was Lean Screen recalled?
The recall follows months of scrutiny. Back in June, consumer advocacy group CHOICE revealed that Lean Screen severely underperformed in its own independent tests. The sunscreen, labelled SPF50+, returned just SPF4 in a Sydney lab and SPF5 when tested again in Germany.
CHOICE chief executive Ashley de Silva said at the time: “Of the 20 sunscreens we tested, only four products actually met their SPF 50 or 50+ claims.”
Ultra Violette initially rejected those results, saying the samples may have been compromised during transport. The brand pointed to its own 2021 lab result of SPF64.32, and an urgent retest in April this year that returned SPF61.7, as proof the formula worked as intended.
But these latest tests — carried out by several independent, BIPEA-audited labs — paint a more complicated picture. The numbers swung wildly across trials, in some cases landing in single digits, and in others verifying ultra-high protection. That inconsistency, Ultra Violette says, is why the recall is happening.
What happens to the rest of the range?
Ultra Violette stressed that the issue relates only to Lean Screen. “Additional testing on all Ultra Violette products has reinforced our confidence in the rest of our line,” Chandler-Matthews and Jefferd said.
The brand explained that Lean Screen was the only sunscreen in its lineup manufactured on a third-party base formula, supplied by Perth-based Wild Child Laboratories. The founders noted that other Ultra Violette products are developed in-house.
“We are no longer manufacturing any SKINSCREENS with that supplier,” the founders wrote, adding that future releases will be tested at a minimum of two separate labs before launch and retested every 18 months using off-the-shelf samples.
A Wild Child Labs spokesperson addressed the recall to PEDESTRIAN.TV. The spokesperson emphasised its longstanding work with “many of Australia’s leading brands” and stressed, “every product we produce is developed and tested in accordance with Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) regulations, which are among the strictest in the world, and we remain compliant with all applicable standards”.
On the topic of the SPF test results, Wild Child highlighted, “These results, which differ from previous accredited laboratory findings, highlight the long-recognised variability in in vivo SPF testing methods.”
The company also noted disappointment at inconsistent outcomes from a lab that had long been trusted by the industry: “Like many in the industry, we were surprised and disappointed by inconsistencies in results from PCR, a laboratory long accepted by the TGA and widely used by Australian brands and manufacturers.”
In response, Wild Child confirmed, “In the interests of public confidence we have ceased using their services and initiated confirmatory testing with alternative accredited laboratories.”
They added, “Wild Child remains committed to transparency, product integrity, and supporting the introduction of more consistent and objective SPF testing standards across Australia.”
Why now, and not in June?
Some customers have wondered why Ultra Violette didn’t recall Lean Screen earlier, when CHOICE first revealed its findings. Responding on Instagram at the time, the brand said it was working with regulators, scientists and manufacturers to understand the discrepancies before making any major decisions.
On Friday, the co-founders reiterated that they acted only after receiving this latest batch of lab results. “We know this has taken time, but please know we have been investigating as rigorously and transparently as possible,” they wrote.
What’s next for Lean Screen?
While the current formula will be retired, Ultra Violette confirmed that a new version is already in the works.
“As part of our movement to owning and developing all of our products, a next-generation Lean Screen is underway and has now been prioritised. We will be involving our community in the development of the new formula, ensuring it lives up to your expectations of the product,” the founders said.
What this means for sunscreen in Australia
The recall lands at a time when sunscreen testing — and SPF labelling in general — is under the microscope. CHOICE’s June report found that 16 out of 20 popular sunscreens sold in Australia didn’t meet their SPF50 claims. Products from Coles, Bondi Sands, Cancer Council, Banana Boat and others also fell short in testing, though some brands have since commissioned new tests to double-check.
CHOICE has urged the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to launch their own compliance review, rather than relying on manufacturer-reported results. The TGA has confirmed it is assessing the findings.
For Ultra Violette, the incident is a hit to consumer trust — but the company appears set on repairing its reputation through stricter testing and transparency. “Trust is built and rebuilt over time,” Chandler-Matthews and Jefferd said.
“We know we have work to do.”
Lead image: Ultra Violette
The post Ultra Violette Pulls Popular Sunscreen As New Testing Reveals Inconsistent Protection appeared first on PEDESTRIAN.TV .
