Non-irritant baby shampoos may cause cataract development
AMAÇ: Bu çalışmada değişik şampuan formülasyonlarınm katarakt oluşumuna etkisi Sprague Dawley türü sıçanlarda araştırılmıştır. YÖNTEM: Çalışma 20 sıçan kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada yetişkinler tarafından kullanılan 2 farklı şampuan ile bebekler için geliştirilen iki farklı şampuan kullanılmıştır. Her gruba ayn bir şampuan formülasyonu 14 gün süreyle uygulanmış ve oluşan değişiklikler gözlemlenmiştir. BULGULAR: A, B, C ve D gruplarında sırasıyla 4 (%40), 4 (%40), 5 (%50) ve 6 (%60) sıklıkta gözde opasite saptanmıştır. Katarakt gelişme oranlan gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak birbirinden farklı değildir (p>0,05). C ve D gruplarında irritasyon gelişmiş göz oranı (%10 ve %20) A (%90) ve B (%80) gruplarına göre daha azdır (p
Göz yakmayan bebek şampuanları katarakt gelişimine neden olabilir
BACKGROUND: The effect of different shampoo formulations as a risk factor for cataract formation was investigated in Sprague Dawley rats in the present study. METHODS: Study was performed by using 20 rats. Two different shampoos used by adult subjects and two different baby shampoos were used in the study. Different shampoos were used in different groups for 14 days, and they were followed for changes. RESULTS: Different degree of opacities were observed in 4 (40%), 4 (40%), 5 (50%), and 6 (60%) eyes in Groups A, B, C, and D, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for formation of cataract between the groups (p>0.05). The number of irritated eyes was significantly lower (p<0.05) in groups C (10%) and D (20%) compared to groups A (90%) and B (80%). CONCLUSION: The use of non-irritant baby shampoos does not seem to eliminate the risk of cataract formation and these should even be used more carefully as the non-irritant shampoo will have more contact with the eye.
___
- 1. Delaye M, Tardieu A. Short-range order of crystallin proteins accounts for eye lens transparency. Nature. 1983;302:415-417.
- 2. Benedek GB. Theory of transparency of the eye. Appl Optics. 1971;10:459-473.
- 3. Hyvarinen L, Forster SH. Ophthalmologic Disorders (chapter 20). In Textbook of Clinical Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Vol 1. Eds: Rosenstock L, Cullen MR., Brodkin CA., Redlich CA. Sec. Ed. Elsevier Publ. 2005.
- 4. Hejtmancik JF, Kantorow M. Molecular genetics of age-related cataract. Exp Eye Res. 2004 Jul;79(1):3-9.
- 5. Allen D, Vasavada A. Cataract and surgery for cataract.BMJ. 2006 Jul 15;333(7559):128-32.
- 6. Thylefors B, Negrel AD, Pararajasegaram R, Dadzie KY. Global data on blindness. Bull World Health Organ 1995;73: 115-21.
- 7. Kelly SP, Thornton J, Edwards R, Sahu A, Harrison R. Smoking and cataract: review of causal association. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:2395-404.
- 8. Taylor HR, West SK, Rosenthal FS, Munoz B, Newland HS, Abbey H, et al. Effect of ultraviolet radiation on cataract formation. N Engl J Med 1988;319: 1429-33.
- 9. Zodpey SP, Ughade SN, Khanolkar VA, Shrikhande SN. Dehydrational crisis from severe diarrhoea and risk of age-related cataract. J Indian Med Assoc 1999; 97: 13-5, 24.
- 10.Durocher LP. Skin Disease Prevention of Occupational Dermatoses. Pages 12.1-12.19. In Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety, 4th Edition. International Labour Office, Geneva 1998.
- 11.Reidy E. Deadly Shampoos. Ecologist, Vol. 33, Issue 8, Oct 2003.
- 12.Chadwick B. Safe Shampoos, Synthetic Oil and Economics. The latest on cleaners, auto emissions and environmental regulation. E Magazine. March/April 2000; 64.
- 13.Trovato R. Proceedings of the 1998 Children at Risk Conference. Environmental health Issues inthe Great Lakes Region. Sponsored by EPA. July 8, 1998. p:89 Chicago, Illinois.
- 14. Committee on Environmental Health American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatric Environmental Health. 2.nd Ed. Ed: Etzel RA, Balk SJ. Risk Assessment and Risk Management. Chapter 43. p.:653-663.
- 15.Low irritation shampoo. http://www.freepatentso nline.com/4426310.html (Access 5 March 2007).
- 16. Draize JH, Wooward G, Calvery HO. Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1944. 82, 377-390.
- 17.Moldenhauer F. Using in vitro prediction models instead of the rabbit eye irritation test to classify and label new chemicals: a post hoc data analysis of the international EC/HO validation study. Altern Lab Anim. 2003 Jan-Feb;31(1):31-46.
- 18. Sina JF, Galer DM, Sussman RG, Gautheron PD, Sargent EV, Leong B, Shah PV, Curren RD, Miller K. A Collaborative evaluation of seven alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test using pharmaceutical intermediates. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1995;26(1):20-31.
- 19.Bruner, LH, Shadduck J. Essex-Sorlie D. 1991. Alternative methods for assessing the effects of chemicals in the eye. In: Hobson, DW. (Ed.), Dermal and Ocular Toxicology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp: 585-600.
- 20. Wong W, Sivak JG, Moran KL. Optical response of the cultured bovine lens; testing opaque or partially transparent semi-solid/solid common consumer hygiene products. Toxicol In Vitro. 2003;17(5-6):785-90.
- 21.Cooper KJ, Earl LK, Harbell J, Raabe H. Prediction of ocular irritancy of prototype shampoo formulations by the isolated rabbit eye (IRE) test and bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay. Toxicol In Vitro. 2001;15(2):95-103.
- 22. Montague P. "The Precautionary Principle" Rachel's Environment and Health Weekly 586 February 19, 1998. (http://www.biotechinfo. net/rachels_586.html (access: March15, 2007)
- 23. Bianchi C, Calati M. Studies on characteristics of a new baby-shampoo and its effect on the anterior segment of the eye. Experimental study. Minerva Pediatr. 1974;26 (1): 37-42.