The acquired cohort contains 26 official alert references published from 2008-03-07 to 2026-09-04. This page compares 8 selected, distinct product descriptions, including sun screen, sun protection cream, sunscreen. The other 18 records still contribute to the cohort counts but are not displayed: descriptions may repeat, lack the display inputs, or fall outside the eight-description display limit. The recorded risks raise separate evidence questions about sun-protection claims. Compare the product features and dated findings below before scoping an investigation. These historical observations do not determine your product’s compliance or a market failure rate.
Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.
Dated official observations
Compare the product features and reported failure mechanism
The source wording below describes the reported case at that time. Read each complete report before using it in an investigation.
Sun screen · SR/02379/26
Report published 2026-09-04 · notifying country Germany · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Cosmetic product to protect the skin from harmful UV radiation. MFG: 2026.02.02. EXP: 2030.02.01. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The actual protection factor of the sunscreen is lower than declared (measured value: SPF 4). Consequently, the user will be under-protected against UV radiation increasing the risk of sunburns or skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 21/08/2026 [1]
Report published 2026-08-28 · notifying country Germany · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Cosmetic product to protect the skin from harmful UV radiation [2]
Reported risk explanation
The actual protection factor of the sunscreen is lower than declared (measured values lower than SPF 2). Consequently, the user will be under-protected against UV radiation increasing the risk of sunburns or skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 17/08/2026 [2]
Report published 2026-08-28 · notifying country Germany · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Cosmetic product intended to protect the skin from harmful UV radiation. Manufacturing date 18-04-2026, Expiry date 17-04-2030. [3]
Reported risk explanation
The actual protection factor of the sunscreen is lower than declared (measured values lower than SPF 2). Consequently, the user will be under-protected against UV radiation increasing the risk of sunburns or skin cancer. Moreover, the product contains the preservatives. methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI) and methylisothiazolinone (MI), which are prohibited in leave-on products. These substances cause severe skin burns and eye damage, and may cause an allergic skin reaction. Additionally, the product contains formaldehyde, which is prohibited in cosmetics. Formaldehyde is a skin sensitiser and can trigger allergic reactions and may cause cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 17/08/2026 [3]
Report published 2026-03-27 · notifying country Austria · reported origin Austria
Reported product description
Sunscreen, advertised as having a sun protection factor (SFP) of 50, intended for children, 75 ml. [4]
Reported risk explanation
The cream does not provide the announced level of Sun Protection Factor (SPF). Consumers may therefore suffer sunburn and the chronic consequences of excessive sun exposure through the UV radiation contained in sunlight when using the product, including immunosuppression, skin ageing and skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 02/03/2026 [4]
Report published 2026-03-13 · notifying country Austria · reported origin Austria
Reported product description
Cream advertised with sun protection factor (SPF) 50, intended for children, 50 ml. Product sold online. [5]
Reported risk explanation
The cream does not provide the announced level of Sun Protection Factor (SPF). Consumers may therefore suffer sunburn and the chronic consequences of excessive sun exposure through the UV radiation contained in sunlight when using the product, including immunosuppression, skin ageing and skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 25/02/2026 [5]
Report published 2026-03-06 · notifying country Spain · reported origin Spain
Reported product description
Cream advertised with sun protection factor (SPF) 50 intended for use around the eyes. All batches are affected. Product sold online, in particular via Amazon. [6]
Reported risk explanation
The lotion does not provide the announced level of Sun Protection Factor (SPF). Consumers may therefore suffer sunburn and the chronic consequences of excessive sun exposure through the UV radiation contained in sunlight when using the product, including immunosuppression, skin ageing and skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: Unknown [6]
Report published 2025-10-31 · notifying country Ireland · reported origin United States
Reported product description
Sunscreen, advertised as Sun Protection Factor (SPF) 50 in a 50 ml squeeze tube with a screw cap, attached with precision nozzle and tamper seal. Product sold online, in particular via refybeauty.com [7]
Reported risk explanation
The actual protection factor of the sun lotion is lower than declared (measured value: 28.9). Therefore, the user can have serious sunburn. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Product Regulation [7]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ImporterCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: Unknown [7]
Report published 2024-12-06 · notifying country Spain · reported origin Spain
Reported product description
Tan enhancing cream, 150 ml. Product sold online. [8]
Reported risk explanation
The label of the product does not indicate that the product should be used in combination with sunscreen. Consequently, the user is not protected against UV radiation, increasing the risk of sunburns or skin cancer. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation. [8]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: Unknown [8]
26 distinct official alert references, published between 2008-03-07 and 2026-09-04. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2008
3
2009
1
2016
1
2020
3
2021
2
2023
1
2024
3
2025
3
2026
9
Recorded risk labels within this evidence task
Label combinations are source facts within one comparison; they do not create separate guides with identical preparation tasks.
Burns: 10 recorded references
Health risk / other: 16 recorded references
Source selection, exclusions and calculation method
Filter the acquired, completely parsed English weekly XML releases. Deduplicate official alert references. Group by product category and the complete set of conditional evidence-question topics supported by actual risk text. Risk-label combinations remain recorded cohort facets and do not create buyer intents. Brand, product name, model, origin, notifying country, measurement-only changes and different wording of the same questions do not create intents. Unrecognized mechanisms stay internal for enrichment. Count report years and notifying countries deterministically. Display at most eight newest descriptions with at least 40 characters after whitespace normalization, nonempty reported measures and distinct casefolded descriptions; break date ties by official identifier. All cohort records count even if their description is shorter or not displayed. This is not a representative sample. Counts concern this acquired corpus only.
One acquired version per official public alert reference. Display at most eight newest distinct product descriptions whose normalized whitespace-collapsed text contains at least 40 characters and has nonempty reported measures; ties sort by official identifier. The complete cohort includes shorter descriptions. This is an explicit display selection, not a representative sample.
8 distinct descriptions displayed; 18 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {}.
These are selected, dated enforcement observations in the acquired weekly reports, not a random market sample, market-wide failure rate, proof of current product status, or a determination about your product. Notification country is not a complete sales-market or jurisdiction-coverage field. A quoted legal/standard reference is the report’s statement, not independently verified current law or a mandatory test panel.
Calculation safety-gate-evidence-comparison-10; units recorded alerts; no incidence denominator.
Turn the reported failure mechanism into a scoped investigation
Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.
Sun-protection claims, use and formula evidence — what evidence do we have?
For a sunscreen or other cosmetic sun-protection claim, compare the exact label, claimed SPF/UVA protection, intended use and quantitative formula with the report. Review the actual test method, batch and claim-support evidence with an assessor. Protection from sunlight is separate from the output of an optical-emitting device; the alert does not establish a universal test method or your product’s protection.
Useful evidence: Formula and filter identities, claimed SPF/UVA and use instructions, tested batch/method/results, label versions and assessor/RP review.
Can we trace the affected component, formula or design revision across our supplied products?
Compare the reported descriptions with your own identifiers and change records. Treat missing or “Unknown” source fields as unresolved; they do not establish that no action was needed.
Useful evidence: Product identifiers, revision history, supplier/batch traceability and market/operator records.
Who would own an evidence review and any resulting corrective-action decision?
Read the reported measures as historical observations. Establish your own operator roles, sector-specific rules, decision owner and communication responsibilities before adopting another case’s response.
Conditional: Product-risk evidence and operator-role review — Compare the reported cosmetic-product features and formula/label evidence with your formulation, use and markets. Review current ingredient conditions, safety-assessment inputs and RP/PIF responsibilities separately; an alert is not an automatic safety or legality determination.
Questions for providers
Which specific product features and reported risk mechanism make these cases relevant or irrelevant to our product?
What current legal, standards or scientific sources support your proposed investigation criteria, and what cannot be concluded from these dated alerts?
Which existing evidence can answer the risk question, what additional work is justified, and who owns any resulting corrective-action decision?
Sources and data dates
Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.
