June 9, 2025, 3:03 pm | Read time: 4 minutes

High spf on the package–but much less protection on the skin? A new study reveals significant deficiencies in sunscreens. Some products offer little protection, while others even contain problematic substances.

Many Sunscreens Do Not Provide Promised Protection

Those looking to effectively protect themselves from sunburn and long-term skin damage often rely on sunscreens with a high sun protection factor (SPF). However, as a recent analysis by the magazine “Öko-Test” (Issue 6/2025) shows, not every sunscreen offers the protection it promises.

For the first time, the SPF was determined by the editorial team itself—made possible by a new testing standard that uses animal-free and skin-independent measurement methods. Previously, an exact determination of the SPF was only possible on human skin. “We didn’t want to expose anyone to the risk of skin damage because of our tests,” explain the testers.

SPF Only Protects Against UV-B

As the consumer center reminds us, SPF only protects against UV-B radiation—the shortwave radiation responsible for sunburn. The longer-wave UV-A radiation, on the other hand, penetrates deeper into the skin, promotes skin aging, can cause age spots, and may contribute to the development of skin cancer.

The EU Commission, therefore, recommends that at least one-third of a product’s UV protection should also work against UV-A radiation. The corresponding UVA seal (a “UVA” in a circle) on the packaging indicates that this protection standard is met—however, a separate UV-A value does not need to be specified.

Every Second Sunscreen Product Fails the Test

The test examined 26 sunscreens with SPF 50 or 50+. Minor deviations between the advertised and actual SPF were tolerated. For 15 products, the measured protection was adequate, and one even exceeded the manufacturer’s claim. However, eleven creams performed significantly worse: Ten of them provided less than three-quarters of the stated protection, and one stood out particularly negatively—with a measured protection factor of less than 20, leading to a “poor” rating.

DHHB and Other Concerning Ingredients: Health Concerns for Some Products

In addition to the protection factor, “Öko-Test” was also interested in the chemical composition of the products. Particularly in focus: the UV filter DHHB (Diethylamino Hydroxybenzoyl Hexyl Benzoate), which can be contaminated with the plasticizer DnHexP during production. This is suspected of impairing reproductive ability.

The testers found residues of DnHexP in five products. In four cases, these were so low that no devaluation occurred. However, in one sunscreen, the contamination was so high that it also received a “poor” rating. Nevertheless, according to “Öko-Test,” none of the detected amounts pose an immediate health risk.

Concerning UV Filters: Warning About Octocrylene and Benzophenone

Independent of the test, the consumer center also warns about other potentially problematic UV filters like Octocrylene. This can transform into Benzophenone over time—a substance considered potentially carcinogenic, which can be absorbed through the skin and may trigger allergic reactions.

Hormone-Active Substances: Other Filters Under Observation

Other UV filters such as 4-Methylbenzylidene Camphor, Benzophenone-1, Benzophenone-2, Benzophenone-3, Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate, or Homosalate are also viewed critically. Studies suggest that these substances could affect the hormonal system.

Caution with Nanoparticles

However, nanoparticles are often used in these products. According to the consumer center, they do not penetrate healthy skin but could be absorbed through damaged skin or pose a problem when inhaled—such as in sprays. Those who want to avoid nanoparticles should check the ingredient list. Indications like “Titanium Dioxide (nano)” suggest such additives. Another risk is posed by products containing nanoparticles in a fine sprayable form—here, there is a danger that the particles could be inhaled.¹

More on the topic

Approximately 30,000 Participants Study Shows Link Between Low-Carb Diet and Depressive Symptoms

Dispelling Prejudices What Does It Mean to Be Asexual?

Nutrition Expert Explains the Diet Plan How the Louwen Diet Aims to Ease Childbirth for Pregnant Women

Test Winners Offer Protection and Price Advantage

Despite the shortcomings, twelve products received a “good” rating in the test. Two sunscreens even received a “very good” rating—and are among the cheapest in comparison:

– “Sun D’Or Sunscreen, 50” from Budni or Edeka (€3.57 for 200 milliliters)
– “Sundance Sunscreen, 50” from Dm (€3.18 for 200 milliliters)

They show: Good sun protection is possible—even at a fair price. Those who also pay attention to ingredients protect not only their skin but also their health.