Will shortly methylisothiazolinone/methylchloroisothiazolinone (MI/MCI) replace nickel as the most frequent patch test positive allergen? The epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis to MI/MCI is becoming a huge problem. In 2014 MI/MCI was the second most frequent allergen in our patch test unit with 13.3% positive tests, following 14.7% positive tests to nickel, and preceding 6.3% positive tests to cobalt, 6.3% to fragrance mix I and 4.9% to chromium.
I think it is best to caution the public about the unnecessary use of cosmetics. Many companies use products which are unlicensed. True that there is a demand for imposing a ban first should a caution.
You need to consider the use of these preservative materials These are hardly unnecessary materials and folks are highly unlikely to stop using cosmetics. There are very few preservatives that are effective, and serious even fatal infections have been reported as the consequences of use of contaminated cosmetics. It's also important to understand the product contexts that provoke both sensitization and expression of sensitized state.
This issue is largely attributed to methyl isothiazolione in personal care products and developed consistent with its use at higher levels in cosmetic products . The primary supplier is recommending against its use in this context and that industry has moved away for the application. It remains to be seen if this resolves the issue.
I agree with you. Preservatives are indispensable and their choice is very limited. There is no ideal preservative. It is not realistic to expect that people will stop using cosmetics, toiletries, cleansing agents, etc.
The European Commission announced the limitation for methylisothiazolinone in cosmetics. From 16 July 2015 it's additional content will not be allowed, and from 16 April 2016 all products containing a higher concentration have to be removed from the market. The mixture methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone is still allowed in a ratio 3:1 up to the maximum concentration of 0.0015%.
I am wondering if this regulation can stop the progression of the actual epidemic, once so many persons are already sensitized. What is the threshold of sensitization to an allergen in a population, when it has to be banned, of course if possible?
It is almost impossible to avoid sensitization because Isothiazolon-Derivatives are present in almost all indoor wall paints...
But why is a preservative needed. to prevent degeneration or alteration of the original formula.
Preservatives are added to water-containing products to inhibit the growth of nonpathogenic and pathogenic microorganisms, which may cause degradation of the product or be harmful to the consumer. (Johansen, Frosch, Lepoittevin eds. Contact Dermatitis. 5th ed. Springer-Verlag; 2011.)
This matter speaks to the broader issue of lack of alternatives. there are few if any and none are being developed. Be aware that the combination is used in almost every shampoo and body wash in the world as well as many paints household products, etc. - so a magnified exposure for development and expression of sensitization as well as a very problematic replacement if it comes to that.
And an example of potential consequences of failed preservaiton.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019567011100020X
I believe it can be formulated safely using proper exposure-based risk assessment approach (1) particularly at acceptable low levels and in rinse-off products. The increasing incidence of sensitization, in my view, is due to more and more widespread formulating in leave-on skin care products. This includes products formulated without the chloro species, but with high levels of methylisothiazolinone (2). Once sensitized in this way leaves one vulnerable to potential elicitation to lower concentrations - perhaps even in rinse-off applications.
1. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0536.2000.042005251.x
2. DOI: 10.1111/cod.12236
- Badges
- Science topic