No BS Bulletin 72

Seventy two

Author

Sarah
August 12, 2025

Welcome to Issue 72 of the No BS Beauty Bulletin!

This week’s newsletter is coming to you with a bit of a twist—thanks for sticking with me through the chaos! What started as a kitchen remodel has turned into a full-blown home upheaval, with the mess now creeping into the rest of the first floor and even the basement. Boxes everywhere, furniture in motion—it’s a scene! Cameraman has basically turned into a professional mover this week, lifting, shifting, and reconfiguring the house one room at a time.

Meanwhile, Ike and Lincoln are not exactly loving the disruption, but they’ve been getting in some quality time at Grandpa’s house, complete with poolside lounging. Honestly, they might be handling it better than the humans!

Thanks again for your patience—I hope you enjoy this week’s edition. As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts!

Made Me Laugh -

These elephants got intoxicated after eating lot of ripe Marula fruit in MalaMala Reserve.. : r/likeus

www.reddit.com/r/likeus/comments/1m8vdlx/these_elephants_got_intoxicated_after_eating_lot

Juicy Beauty News

👀 What did I buy this week?👀

Don’t tell Cameraman!

In Case You Missed It

Sunscreen Scandal Two - A Tale of Two Continents:

Are We Facing Another Sunscreen Scandal?

Some of you may already be aware that we could be entering a new sunscreen controversy, this time involving the Australian brand Ultra Violette. There are also whispers that Naked Sundays, another Australian brand, might be implicated — though at this point, that's purely speculative.  The rumor is that Naked Sundays has the same base formula as Ultra Violette.  I wish this topic was getting more attention because these brands and the same formulas are being sold far and wide outside Australia.

This new “scandal” brought to mind the last major sunscreen scandal, which centered around K-Beauty sunscreens. What caused it? How did it unfold? And what can we learn to prevent a repeat?

Why Did the Korean Sunscreen Scandal Happen?

Recently, I was asked about K-Beauty sunscreen formulations — a topic I find both fascinating and crucial. After posting a first impressions video on the Round Lab Camellia Deep Moisturizing Sun Serum a viewer asked whether most Korean sunscreens are just variations of the same formula. My answer? Yes and no.

If you’ve followed Korean skincare, you’ll remember what many called “Sunscreen Armageddon.”  Around 2020–2021, it was discovered that several bestselling Korean sunscreens did not meet their advertised SPF claims, despite being labeled as SPF 50+. Independent lab testing revealed that some of these products had protection levels closer to SPF 17–21.

But why were so many sunscreens affected — and why did others pass with flying colors?

The Role of OEMs in K-Beauty Sunscreen Manufacturing

Many K-Beauty brands are small to midsize companies. If you’ve ever browsed K-beauty, you know there are hundreds — even thousands — of brands to choose from. Unlike multinational giants like L’Oréal, these smaller brands often lack the resources to develop complex products like sunscreens in-house.

Instead, they turn to OEM/ODM (original equipment manufacturer) manufacturers — large companies that specialize in product development and production. These manufacturers allow smaller brands to launch sunscreens without building their own R & D labs.

Here’s how it typically works:

  • A brand approaches a manufacturer with a marketing concept — like “soothing,” “firming,” or “glow-boosting.”

  • The OEM provides a base sunscreen formula, and the brand customizes it by selecting a few additional ingredients.

  • The result? Many Korean sunscreens end up sharing very similar base formulas, especially in terms of texture, filters, and performance.

Unfortunately, this shared formula model is what led to widespread SPF “mislabeling”  — whether intentional or not.

The Core of the Scandal: Inaccurate Testing and Overreliance on Manufacturers

The controversy primarily involved sunscreens manufactured by Nowcos (now renamed Green Cos), which produced products for Purito, Klairs, Keep Cool, as well as several others.

These OEM-produced sunscreens were tested using in-vitro methods (in a lab environment), not in-vivo testing (on human skin), which is generally considered more accurate. Because Korean regulations at the time permitted in-vitro testing for SPF claims, these brands legally marketed their sunscreens as SPF 50+, even though independent in-vivo tests later proved otherwise.

The scandal happened because of a “perfect storm” of weak testing regulations, blind trust in third-party manufacturers, and a lack of transparency in how SPF ratings were validated.

Not All K-Beauty Brands Were Involved

Importantly, not every Korean sunscreen was mislabeled. Some brands conducted more rigorous testing and produced accurate, trustworthy products — especially those that formulate and manufacture in-house.

Brands that did not suffer recall issues or SPF failures included:

  • Isntree

  • Dr. G

  • Innisfree

  • Laneige

  • Missha

  • Etude House

Some of these brands are part of larger companies like Amorepacific or affiliated with medical institutions, giving them access to dedicated R & D and in-house testing. In contrast to the OEM-dependent brands, they were often required to undergo stricter, in-vivo testing, which is likely why their SPF claims held up under scrutiny.

The Bigger Picture: Why This Matters

Sunscreen isn’t just a beauty product — it’s a health care product. It plays a crucial role in preventing skin cancer, which can be both disfiguring and fatal. For some people, especially those with high UV exposure or pre-existing conditions, the reliability of a sunscreen could literally mean the difference between life and death.

My aunt is currently undergoing facial reconstruction because of skin cancer on her face. It started as a small spot between her eye and nose. Doctors first performed the MOHS surgery (which was initially successful) but the cancer reappeared 5 years later. They are harvesting skin from her leg to use in order to reconstruct her eye and nose areas. Is this genetic or could it have been prevented?

We need to be able to trust that the products we use for sun protection are accurately labeled and thoroughly tested — not just marketed well.

Final Thoughts

The K-Beauty sunscreen scandal was a major wake-up call. It exposed the vulnerabilities in an industry that thrives on innovation, aesthetics, and affordability — but sometimes overlooks scientific accountability.  As consumers, we can push for better standards by supporting brands that are transparent, science-driven, and committed to public safety.

And as we watch the situation with Ultra Violette unfold, let’s remember: this isn't just about one brand. It's about demanding better from an entire industry that affects our health.  Hopefully at some point in the near future the USFDA will approve more filters.  That will be able to allow US based brands to better formulate more effective sunscreens.  More options are almost always a good thing for the consumer and spurs innovation.  

Comment of the Week:

@whitneybrown4067  - Yesss n as usual This is Gonna b so Good Sarah🧴💐🎉🔥🔥🔥👍n Happy Tuesday😀!!!….

@NObsBeauty - I always love your positivity, you are the comment of the week!  I always love seeing your name pop up!  Thank you for always being there and watching!

Myth: Pet insurance isn’t worth the money

Did you know that one pet health emergency can cost up to $10,000? That could put a huge strain on your savings or even force you to max out your credit cards. Protect your budget and your pet by thinking ahead and choosing a plan that works for both of you.