Here’s what to know about the feud between a popular sunscreen brand and an Australian consumer group [Choice].
I wouldn’t be surprised if Choice fucked this test up. The wide range of results from the Cancer Council products was very strange.
Possibly, or the standards are vague. The PR person from the brand that had an SPF of 4’s spin was basically everything is SPF 50 if you put enough on.
That product description sounded to me like a mechanical (not chemical) sunscreen. Unlinke chemical sunscreens those tend to have a visible whitening effect when applied properly. Given that the Choice tests were blind and on human skin, I can imagine a scenario where it was “rubbed in” like chemical sunscreen until invisible, and gave the absurdly low score as a genuine result of misapplication
On the other hand, two independent labs getting similar awful results is damning.
It’s unfortunate the responses from these companies are mostly along the lines of “nuh-uh”. It’s good that there have been some emergency retests, but I would have hoped that someone would have worked with Choice to figure out what was up rather than just telling them “you did it wrong”.
I can imagine a scenario where it was “rubbed in” like chemical sunscreen until invisible, and gave the absurdly low score as a genuine result of misapplication
That would make sense.
I agree that working with Choice to understand would have been a much wiser PR decision
I love how this is Australia’s contribution to the news feed rn.
Well, do you remember the great big hole in the ozone layer?
You can tell it’s an AI-generated article because of the em dash in the title /s
Fuck I hate all these “AI-detecting” advice I’m seeing going around. So much of it is literally just good writing—use of em dashes, use of the rule of three, and parallel sentence structures. There are other things, of course, like the general vibe of being generic without saying much, but I feel like people are really grabbing onto the grammar and syntax points. I’ve been accused of using AI before, and the person even doubled and tripled down when called out—I have never used AI for any social media comments—all, presumably, just because I know a few alt-codes and really, really basic rhetoric.
“Good practice” can be a giveaway though - the AI use of active listening tactics just makes them a stupidly verbose parrot.
