Cutaneous Effects of Household Synthetic Detergents and Soaps

Suskind, Raymond R.; Meister, M. M.; Scheen, S. Randy; Rebello, D. J. A.

doi:10.1001/archderm.1963.01590200005001

Cited by 32 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Suskind et al [6] found that repeated immersion of one hand in warm soap solution did not worsen the dermatitis on the immersed hand compared to the other hand. Stoughton et al [7] found no difference in patients with hand dermatitis whether soap was used or not.…”

Section: Soaps: From the Phoenicians To The Twentieth Centurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Has Mildness Replaced Cleanliness Next to Godliness?

Wolf

1994

Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 30 years we have witnessed a change in our approach to soaps. The turning point was, in fact, the publication of an article by Frosch and Kligman in 1979, in which they described a new method for assessing the irritancy of soaps. They maintained that the chief weakness of the usage tests in the past was that the reactions under normal usage conditions were weak and did not discriminate adequately between different soaps. They proposed a test, called the soap chamber test, which was conducted under extreme conditions, on people known to have a sensitive skin, thereby resulting in strong reactions that emphasized the slight differences between the various soaps. Frosch and Kligman’s work opened up a whole new era in the field of assessment of soap quality. Following their initial studies, many other studies were conducted, including the exaggerated use tests, often in conjunction with instrumental methods of evaluation, such as measurement of transepidermal water loss, electrical conductance, skin color and blood flow, and other tests designed to evaluate the irritation potential of various soaps. All those tests had a common purpose: to achieve extreme conditions which would provide greater sensitivity and discriminating power and would accentuate and emphasize the differences between soaps as much as possible: the greater the discrimination and the differences between the products, the more efficient and useful the test. The introduction and publication of tests such as those completely changed our approach to soaps. The sought-after qualities in a soap became safety, mildness, gentleness, less irritation, less drying – in particular, gentleness and mildness were emphasized. Rather surprisingly, the soap’s main purpose – cleaning the skin – was set aside; people no longer talked of the soap’s most important quality – skin cleansing. Is the above change in approach justified? What really constitutes a good soap? Which soap should we recommend to our patients? Is a soap that scored well on irritancy tests under extreme conditions really the best soap? It seems to me that it would be a mistake to ignore all the accumulated clinical experience in favor of new, modern testing methods. A balance must be found between new information resulting from modern testing methods, and clinical experience that has proven itself over years.

show abstract

Section: Soaps: From the Phoenicians To The Twentieth Centurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Has Mildness Replaced Cleanliness Next to Godliness?

Wolf

1994

Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While true sensitivity to soap and detergents can be demonstrated, in most instances these materials aggravate a pre-existing dermatitis and do not play a primary role. 9 Recently we have seen an increased number of reactions and aggravations traceable to the washday products in tablet form which contain combinations of bleaches and cleansers.…”

Section: Household Contactantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact Dermatitis

Je¹,

Cm²,

Jg³

et al. 1965

Postgraduate Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Wind, as well as the use of soap and water, can also be a precipitating factor. In fact when the skin surface is repeatedly treated with soap, detergent bar or cleansing creams or lotions, an irritation response is often seen in the tissue, generally depending upon the frequency and duration of the treatment used (7,8,9,10,11,12,13), the concentration of detergents and the formation of the cleansing preparations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protective effect of collagen upon irritation response of detergents

Morganti¹,

Muscardin

Fabrizi

1983

Intern J of Cosmetic Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SynopsisIn order to evaluate the protective effect of collagen solution on the skin in the case of an irritation response to detergents, it was measured, by a washing simulator, on collagenpretreated human skin (3% solution of native acidsoluble collagen) after washing with different cleansers. Moreover, collagen protective effects were evaluated on human skin by chamber test methodology (fifty women aged 20-35). Human data obtained demonstrate a rather general property of collagen solution, used in protecting the skin from the harsh effects of various cleansing preparations.L'effet protecteur du collaghe a I'action irritante des detergents Resum6On sait que la diminution de I'humidite relative de I'atmosphire qui entraine un dimunition de la teneur en eau de la couche cornee est le facteur principal de la perte de souplesse de la peau. Le vent ainsi que I'utilisation de I'eau et du savon peuvent constituer des facteurs agravants.En fait, lorsque la peau est traitie de facon repetitive par des savons, des detergents, des lotions ou des crimes de nettoyage, il se produit souvent une irritation des tissus dont I'importance depend de la frequence et de la duree du traitement, de la concentration des detergents et plus g6ndralement de la formulation des produits utilises. On a voulu evaluer I'effet protecteur des solutions de collaghe sur lapeau humaine avec des solutions 3% de collagine natif acido soluble et on a utilisi un simulateur de lavage pour appliquer diffirents produits de nettoyage.L'effet protectcur du collagkne a CtB halu6 par la 'chamber test methodology' sur 50 femmes agees de 20 a 35 ans. Les rdsultats obtenus montrent que la solution de collagbne exerce un effet protecteur a I'encontre de l'irritation d i e aux produits de nettoyage. La raison de cette efficaciti n'est pas Claire.Les reactions inflammatoires qui sont riduites de facon significative et la plus faible solubilisation de certaines fractions des prot6ines de la peau sont probablement dies ii une diminution du pouvoir dkgraissant des solutions ditergentes.Le collaghe forme vraisemblablement un film autour des micelles de detergent et modire de ce fait I'action des savons et des pains de d6tergents. Cet effet protecteur peut Cgalement &tre expliqu6 par un mecanisme qui met en oeuvre I'absorption du collaghe sur la surface externe du stratum corneum.

show abstract

Cutaneous Effects of Household Synthetic Detergents and Soaps

Cited by 32 publications

References 14 publications

Has Mildness Replaced Cleanliness Next to Godliness?

Has Mildness Replaced Cleanliness Next to Godliness?

Contact Dermatitis

Protective effect of collagen upon irritation response of detergents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About