'Quality' sunscreen fails to protect

JO MCKENZIE-MCLEAN

A Canterbury mother is warning parents to seek pharmacist advice when buying sunscreen after her son received second-degree burns on his shoulders despite being coated in lotion.

Jo Pattie, of Kirwee, said Angus, 7, had spent the past week crying in pain after his shoulders and back were blistered after about three hours in the sun.

He was wearing a Cancer Society 30-plus sunscreen for delicate skin. It had an expiry date of 2012 and was reapplied after Angus had spent an hour in the sun.

"That afternoon, he had sores all over his shoulders. The next day, he had broken out in blisters," Pattie said.

"He's been in tremendous pain. He's been crying and screaming. I am really disappointed.

"I feel like people think I'm a bad parent, but I'm a preschool teacher and am really careful with Angus. He's really white and has delicate skin.

"You assume a Cancer Society sunscreen is a quality product. People should talk to the pharmacist before purchasing sunscreen."

She questioned the effectiveness of the brand after seeking treatment for the burns from the Darfield Pharmacy.

Darfield Pharmacy owner and pharmacist Aaron Orangi said Angus had suffered second-degree burns and he had never seen a case as bad.

While he would not comment on Angus's specific case, he said that generally New Zealanders had a culture of putting sunblock on in the morning, but not reapplying it.

"It's hard to know what a parent has done and if they have been applying it properly," he said. "However, we do have a lot of people who come in with an allergic reaction to the same product or come in quite badly burnt."

The Cancer Society sunscreen products were "over-represented" in complaints from customers, he said.

"For some reason with that product, people have come in with a bad reaction or burns. Maybe someone needs to look into it."

He said the pharmacy did not stock the Cancer Society sunscreens because it did not feel ethically or professionally comfortable stocking a product it had doubts about. "I hate running them down, but the truth of the matter is, we see it too often," he said.

Cancer Society chief executive Dalton Kelly said the society sold "swimming pool quantities" of sunscreen in New Zealand.

"The reason we got into the sunscreen business is we wanted to make a product that will do the job in New Zealand conditions. Our products meet Australasian standards," he said.

"I am very sorry for the situation, but I can honestly say of the 10,000 tubes we sell, we don't get a reaction like that. I don't know of another one."

There were many uncertainties when dealing with sunburn, he said.

People needed to remember that while sunscreen was important, people had to apply enough, reapply it and wear clothing in the sun, including sunglasses and a hat, and seek shelter in the shade where possible.

The society would welcome talks with the pharmacist and Pattie, Kelly said.

In 2008, Consumer NZ chief executive Sue Chetwin said the organisation tested sunscreens after a mother, who had been applying sunscreen to her child, felt the lotion was not working properly.

Tests showed three sunscreens did not meet their SPF 30+ claims and another did not provide the broad-spectrum protection it claimed.

Three of the sunscreens were Cancer Society products and one was from SunSense.

"They took some steps to reformulate the sunscreen at the time," Chetwin said yesterday.

Consumer NZ was pushing to have sunscreen standards made compulsory in New Zealand, she said.

"There is an Australian-New Zealand standard for sunscreens which is not compulsory in New Zealand but which is in Australia. We have been pushing for it to be compulsory here. The Cancer Society does adhere to the standard."

Consumer NZ was considering retesting sunscreens next year, she said.

* Comments are now closed on this story.

- © Fairfax NZ News