[Deodorants and antiperspirants]. / Déodorants et antitranspirants.

The terms deodorants and antiperspirants very frequently used interchangeably despite the fact that they employ completely different active substances and mechanisms of action. Antiperspirants are necessarily deodorants due to the lack of substrate to decompose. They nevertheless represent a group of very specific substances that create particular problems due to the presence of aluminium chlorohydrate, or ACH, (Al2(OH)5Cl, 2H2O), aluminium sesquichlorohydrate and aluminium-zirconium complex, which, after hydrolysis, causes intense acidification of the skin, hence the importance of inclusion of emollients and pH regulators in formulations. Moreover, systemic aluminium is thought to be genotoxic and to promote breast cancer, and it is thus at the centre of numerous scientific controversies. Nevertheless, its potential toxicity following topical application is related to its ability to penetrate skin, which is as yet poorly understood but considered very low, a fact that may provide some degree of reassurance regarding its use in cosmetic products. Its role in Alzheimer's disease has not been proven. On the other hand, zirconium salts are considered toxic and are partly regulated in Europe. The problems associated with deodorants are those arising from the presence of antiseptics (triclosan, usnic acid) capable of inducing bacterial resistance, but more particularly, the presence of axillary dermatitis due to the allergenic potential of the fragrances and essential oils used (e.g. isoeugenol, citronellal, lyral, cinnamic aldehyde, etc.).

Breast Cancer and Deodorants/Antiperspirants: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, the possible association between underarm deodorants/ antiperspirants use and breast cancer risk has raised important interest in the scientific community. The objective of our systematic review is to estimate the pooled risk of deodorants/antiperspirants use for breast cancer. METHODS: All observational studies that evaluated the association between breast cancer risk and deodorants/antiperspirants use were reviewed. We have only identified two case-control studies, carried out between 2002 and 2006. RESULTS: The first study was conducted in USA and investigated the possible relationship between use of products applied for underarm perspiration and the risk for breast cancer in women aged 20-74 years. This population-based case-control study gathered information by in-person interview. The second study was conducted in Iraq and investigated the possible relationship between use of antiperspirants and the risk for breast cancer in women attending a teaching hospital. This study also gathered information by in-person interview. There was no risk of antiperspirants use in the pooled risk (odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.46). CONCLUSION: Our comprehensive search has identified an insufficient number of studies to conduct a quantitative review and obtain reliable results. Further prospective studies are strongly needed.

Deodorant use and related adverse effects: A cross-sectional survey among Palestinian students.

Background: Deodorants are widely used to mask unpleasant body odors. They are reported to cause some adverse effects depending on the form and ingredients. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of deodorant use and related adverse effects among Palestinian students. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out at An-Najah National University from Aug 2018 to Mar 2020. A questionnaire was constructed using a Google survey form. All analyses were done using SPSS 21.0, Fisher test was used for comparative analysis and the P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: A total of 554 students participated in the study. About 93% of the participants were using deodorants and adverse effects were reported by 25% of the participants. The reported adverse effects were itching (26%), coloration (25%), sneezing (21%), and eye redness (8%). Only 4.1% of the participants visited a physician for counselling regarding various adverse effects. Conclusion: Deodorants were widely used by Palestinian students with reported adverse effects, but these side effects rarely prompted the participants to seek medical advice.

Correlation between daily life aluminium exposure and breast cancer risk: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data indicate that the role of environmental factors on breast cancer (BC) incidence remains undetermined. Our daily life exposure to aluminium (Al) is suspected to influence BC development. This review proposes a state of the art on the association between Al and BC risk combined with a critical point of view on the subject. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database using terms related to Al and BC up to November 18, 2022. Reports were eligible if they were cohort or case-control studies or meta-analyses. FINDINGS: Six studies focused on the relationship between deodorant and antiperspirant use and BC incidence and didn't produce consistent results. Among 13 studies relating Al content in mammary tissues and BC risk, results are not unanimous to validate higher Al content in tumor tissues compared to healthy ones. We detail parameters that could explain this conclusion: the absence of statistical adjustments on BC risk factors in studies, the confusion between deodorant and antiperspirant terms, the non-assessment of global Al exposure, and the focus on Al in mammary tissues whereas a profile of several metals seems more appropriate. The clinical studies are retrospective. They were carried out on small cohorts and without a long follow-up. On the other hand, studies on cell lines have shown the carcinogenic potential of aluminum. Moreover, studies considered BC as a unique group whereas BC is a heterogeneous disease with multiple tumor subtypes determining the tumor aggressiveness. CONCLUSION: In light of the precautionary principle and based on the data obtained, it is better to avoid antiperspirants that contain Al. Deodorants without aluminum are not implicated in breast cancer, either clinically or fundamentally.

Sources, concentrations, and risks of naphthalene in indoor and outdoor air.

UNLABELLED: Naphthalene is a ubiquitous pollutant, and very high concentrations are sometimes encountered indoors when this chemical is used as a pest repellent or deodorant. This study describes the distribution and sources of vapor-phase naphthalene concentrations in four communities in southeast Michigan, USA. Outdoors, naphthalene was measured in the communities and at a near-road site. Indoors, naphthalene levels were characterized in 288 suburban and urban homes. The median outdoor concentration was 0.15 µg/m(3), and a modest contribution from rush-hour traffic was noted. The median indoor long-term concentration was 0.89 µg/m(3), but concentrations were extremely skewed and 14% of homes exceeded 3 µg/m(3), the chronic reference concentration for non-cancer effects, 8% exceeded 10 µg/m(3), and levels reached 200 µg/m(3). The typical excess individual lifetime cancer risk was about 10(-4) and reached 10(-2) in some homes. Important sources include naphthalene's use as a pest repellent and deodorant, migration from attached garages and, to lesser extents, cigarette smoke and vehicle emissions. Excessive use as a repellent caused the highest concentrations. Naphthalene presents high risks in a subset of homes, and policies and actions to reduce exposures, for example, sales bans or restrictions, improved labeling, and consumer education, should be considered. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Long-term average concentrations of naphthalene in most homes fell into the 0.2-1.7 µg/m(3) range reported as representative in earlier studies. The highly skewed distribution of concentrations results in a subset of homes with elevated concentrations and health risks that greatly exceed US EPA and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. The most important indoor source is the use of naphthalene as a pest repellant or deodorant; secondary sources include presence of an attached garage, cigarette smoking, and outdoor sources. House-to-house variation was large, reflecting differences among the residences and naphthalene use practices. Stronger policies and educational efforts are needed to eliminate or modify indoor usage practices of this chemical.

Bullous cryothermic dermatitis artefacta induced by deodorant spray abuse.

BACKGROUND: Dermatitis artefacta belongs to a broad spectrum of factitious diseases of lesions usually self-induced by patients. Here we report a surprisingly effective induction of blisters and thermic dermatitis by excessive abuse of common deodorant sprays. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical course and outcome in three patients with dermatitis artefacta induced by deodorant spray. METHODS: A 12-year-old boy only admitted the abuse of deodorant spray after psychiatric intervention. Two adults (21-year-old and 37-year-old women) had borderline personality disorder and frankly reported the urge to induce pain by spraying for at least 100 s at a short distance. RESULTS: Bullous dermatitis was the acute presenting sign in all patients. The bullae were found on the extensor surfaces of the extremities, with a distribution of older lesions showing erosions and scarring and fresh lesions with intact bullae with a diameter of 3-15 cm. After searching for the causative agent and removal of the deodorant spray, clinical outcome showed a healing without and with scars. CONCLUSIONS: Cryo-damage by abuse of common deodorant sprays seems to become a popular mechanism by which an impressive bullous dermatitis can be artificially induced. Dermatologists and psychiatrist should be aware of this method of injury.

Deodorants are the leading cause of allergic contact dermatitis to fragrance ingredients.

BACKGROUND: Fragrances frequently cause contact allergy, and cosmetic products are the main causes of fragrance contact allergy. As the various products have distinctive forms of application and composition of ingredients, some product groups are potentially more likely to play a part in allergic reactions than others. AIM: To determine which cosmetic product groups cause fragrance allergy among Danish eczema patients. METHOD: This was a retrospective study based on data collected by members of the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group. Participants (N = 17,716) were consecutively patch tested with fragrance markers from the European baseline series (2005-2009). RESULTS: Of the participants, 10.1% had fragrance allergy, of which 42.1% was caused by a cosmetic product: deodorants accounted for 25%, and scented lotions 24.4%. A sex difference was apparent, as deodorants were significantly more likely to be listed as the cause of fragrance allergy in men (odds ratio 2.2) than in women. Correlation was observed between deodorants listed as the cause of allergy and allergy detected with fragrance mix II (FM II) and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde. CONCLUSION: Deodorants were the leading causes of fragrance allergy, especially among men. Seemingly, deodorants have an 'unhealthy' composition of the fragrance chemicals present in FM II.

Deodorants and antiperspirants: identification of new strategies and perspectives to prevent and control malodor and sweat of the body.

Excessive sweating and body odors in many cultures can cause negative perceptions of an individual and in many cases is related to poor hygiene. Personal hygiene products have been developed with the intention of preventing these undesirable issues. The aim of this paper is to review the main active ingredients used in marketed deodorant and antiperspirant formulations as well as to identify new strategies and future methods to optimize such products and prevent malodor. PubMed and ScienceDirect databases were used to search for studies reporting the use of deodorants and antiperspirants, the compounds used in the formulations, their mechanisms of action and associated controversies, as well as new trends and approaches in the area. Even today, we are still using well-known and established actives such as triclosan and aluminum salts, and these are still the most used compounds in deodorants with bactericidal and antiperspirant properties. These substances have been on the market for more than 40 years, and still there are many questions concerning the safety of both actives. There is a general increased interest globally for lifestyles that focus on sustainability and more natural products such as plant sources and the use of, for example, essential oils. The research that focuses in the area of antiperspirants and deodorants is now more focused on studies of the armpit biochemistry and function and control of the microbiota present in this area. Other possible areas of interest are biotechnological solutions and finding new compounds that will interfere with the biochemistry of the process of sweat decomposition. Further approaches include formulations with probiotics which would maintain the balance of axillary microbiota.

Deodorant aerosol spray can in the rectum: a potential fire hazard during surgery.

Rectal foreign bodies are not uncommon and often pose a serious challenge to surgeons. In majority, the objects are inserted by self in children, psychiatric patients and for sexual gratification in adults. Various rectal foreign bodies have been reported. Deodorant aerosol spray can in the rectum has not been reported previously. Danger of aerosol dispenser can is the risk of fire and explosion. Especially during any surgical procedures to remove the foreign body using cautery or any energy devices. We report of a rare foreign body of deodorant aerosol spray can in the rectum in a young male patient, which was removed under general anaesthesia.

Axilla surface area for males and females: measured distribution.

With the recent introduction of exposure-based Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) as an approach to the evaluation, of materials in finished consumer products that are potential dermal sensitizers, the need for robust exposure data was clearly identified. The objective of this current study is to provide a value for the axilla surface area (SA) that is statistically derived and can be used in dermal sensitization QRA for ingredients of personal care products meant for use on the axilla. The axilla surface area measured for 60 men and 60 women resulted in a median surface area for a single axilla of 64.5 cm(2) for females and 135.5 cm(2) for males. These participants were representative of the United States population in their range of heights and weights. Furthermore, combining these surface area data with measured use data from this and other studies has enabled calculations of consumer exposure to solid APDO products on a dose/unit area/day basis (9.1 mg/cm(2)/d).