Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Cyclomethicone

1991 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-19 ◽  

Cyclomethicone is a mixture of cyclic dimethylpolysiloxane compounds used primarily as an emollient and solvent in cosmetic formulations at concentrations from <0.1%to>50%. Cyclomethicone is not significantly absorbed through the skin. Small amounts of Cyclomethicone were absorbed by both humans and monkeys in oral feeding studies. The absorbed Cyclomethicone was detected in both the urine and expired air. Acute oral dose of Cyclomethicone to rats produced no deaths nor any gross lesions. Short-term dermal studies produced no behavioral, local skin, gross, nor histopathological changes. In subchronic inhalation studies in monkeys, no significant differences were found between exposed and unexposed animals. Undiluted Cyclomethicone applied to the intact and abraded skin of rabbits produced little or no irritation in two studies. Ocular studies indicated that Cyclomethicone produced only slight transient conjunctival irritation in washed and unwashed eyes. Cyclomethicone did not produce reproductive effects in rats. Cyclomethicone was not a mutagen when assayed in the Ames test. Cyclomethicone was neither irritating nor sensitizing to human skin in two clinical studies. On the basis of the available data, it is concluded that Cyclomethicone is safe as a cosmetic ingredient in present practices of use.

1994 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 361-373 ◽  

The aromatic amine HC Blue No. 2 is used as a colorant exclusively in hair dyes. Current information indicates this ingredient is usually found in hair dyes at a concentration of ∼ 1.7%. Studies in volunteers in which HC Blue No. 2 at use concentrations was applied to the scalp, <0.1% was absorbed over a period of 30 days. National Toxicology Program oral feeding bioassays in rats and mice shows the ingredient to be relatively nontoxic. Animal studies indicate no evidence of dermal irritation, sensitization, or photosensitization, and no ocular irritation. Whereas HC Blue No. 2 is mutagenic, it was not carcinogenic in rats or in two mouse strains. Clinical data indicate minimal irritation and no sensitization. On the basis of the available data, it is concluded that HC Blue No. 2 is safe as used in cosmetic formulations (hair dyes).


1995 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 182-192 ◽  

Diisopropylamine is a strongly alkaline, aliphatic amine used to adjust the p H of cosmetic formulations. In 1993, it was reported to be used in only one formulation. In acute and short-term inhalation studies, toxic effects were observed in the respiratory system and eyes of rats and guinea pigs. Dermal application of diluted and undiluted Diisopropylamine in rats and guinea pigs showed irritation but not sensitization. This ingredient is considered an ocular irritant. Mixed results were obtained in evaluating the mutagenicity of this ingredient by the Ames test, but there were negative results in the rat hepato-cyte primary culture/DNA repair assay. Occupational exposure to Diisopropylamine vapor (5–10 min, two or three times per day, mean concentration 0.1–0.2 mg/l) was associated with dimness of vision, nausea, and headaches. Because the skin irritation results were interpreted as attributable to the alkaline p H of this ingredient, and it is recognized that it is likely neutralized in cosmetic formulations, the irritation potential in actual use was not a concern. In the presence of N-nitrosating agents, Diisopropylamine has the potential to form nitrosamines. Based on the data presented in this report, it is concluded that Diisopropylamine is safe as a cosmetic ingredient in the present practices of use, except it should not be used in products containing N-nitrosating agents.


1986 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 309-327 ◽  

Cosmetic-grade Shellac is a mixture of hydroxyaliphatic and alicyclic acids and their polyesters. It is used in cosmetic formulations at concentrations up to 25%. Shellac had an LD50 of greater than 5 g/kg in rats. Results of acute animal toxicity studies using cosmetic formulations containing up to 6% Shellac indicated no adverse effects upon oral (rats), dermal (rabbits), ocular (rabbits), and respiratory tract (rabbits) exposure. Chronic inhalation of a Shellac hair spray formulation by rabbits produced no observable toxicity. No treatment-related toxic or pathologic effects were observed when concentrations of Shellac up to 10,000 ppm were fed to rats in a subchronic study. Ames' mutagenicity assays, with and without metabolic activation, were negative. Clinical assessment of safety of cosmetic formulations containing up to 6% Shellac indicated no measurable irritation and absence of sensitization and photosensitization. It is concluded that cosmetic-grade Shellac is safe for use in cosmetic formulations at concentrations up to 6%, the maximum concentration tested.


2003 ◽  
Vol 22 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10-35

Dimethicone is a fluid mixture of fully methylated linear siloxane polymers end-blocked with trimethylsiloxy units. Methicone is a linear monomethyl polysiloxane. The other dimethicones and methicones covered in this review are siloxane polymers of Dimethicone and Methicone. Most of these ingredients function as conditioning agents in cosmetic formulations at current concentrations of use of ≤ 15%. Clinical and animal absorption studies reported that Dimethicone was not absorbed following oral or dermal exposure. Dimethicone, Methicone, and Vinyldimethicone were not acutely toxic following oral exposure. No adverse reactions were found in rabbits following short-term dermal dosing with 6% to 79% Dimethicone, yet adverse effects were noted with a hand cream formulation containing 1% Dimethicone, suggesting something else in the preparation was toxic. Mice and rats were dosed for 90 days with up to 10% Dimethicone without adverse effect. Dimethicone did not produce adverse effects in acute and short-term inhalation-route studies, Methicone and Vinyldimethicone were negative in acute exposure studies using rats, but Hexyl Methicone was toxic to rats at 5 mg/L delivered in small particle (mean diameter of 0.29 μ) aerosols. Most dermal irritation studies using rabbits classified Dimethicone as a minimal irritant. Dimethicone (tested undiluted and at 79%) was not a sensitizer in four assays using mice and guinea pigs. It was not a sensitizer at 5.0% in a clinical repeated insult patch test using 83 panelists. Most ocular irritation studies using rabbits classified Dimethicone as a mild to minimal irritant. Dimethicone was tested in numerous oral-dose (using rats) and dermal-dose (using rats, rabbits, and monkeys) reproductive and developmental toxicity studies. In a few studies, treated males had significantly decreased body weight and/or decreased testes or seminal vesicles weights. No treatment-related adverse findings were noted in dosed pregnant females or fetuses. Dimethicone was negative in all genotoxicity assays. It was negative in both an oral (tested at 91%) and dermal (tested at an unknown concentration) dose carcinogenicity assay using mice. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel considered it unlikely that any of these polymers would be significantly absorbed into the skin due to their large molecular weight. Although adverse effects were noted in one inhalation study with small aerosol particles, the expected particle sizes for cosmetic products would primarily be in the range of 60 to 80 μ, and less than 1% would be under 10 μ, which is an upper limit for respirable particles. Overall, the safety test data support the safety of these ingredients at the concentrations they are known to be used in cosmetic formulations. Accordingly, the CIR Expert Panel was of the opinion that Stearoxy Dimethicone, Dimethicone, Methicone, Amino Bis-propyl Dimethicone, Aminopropyl Dimethicone, Amodimethicone, Amodimethicone Hydroxystearate, Behenoxy Dimethicone, C24–28 Alkyl Methicone, C30–45 Alkyl Methicone, C30–45 Alkyl Dimethicone, Cetearyl Methicone, Cetyl Dimethicone, Dimethoxysilyl Ethylenediaminopropyl Dimethicone, Hexyl Methicone, Hydroxypropyldimethicone, Stearamidopropyl Dimethicone, Stearyl Dimethicone, Stearyl Methicone, and Vinyldimethicone are safe as used in cosmetic formulations.


1983 ◽  
Vol 2 (7) ◽  
pp. 35-60 ◽  

Nonoxynols are chemically stable ethoxylated alkylphenols which are chemically foaming and solubilizing agents. Estimates of the acute oral LD50s of nine of the Nonoxynols (-2 to 15) range from 0.62 to 7.4 g/kg in several animal species. Acute dermal toxicity studies in rabbits produced an LD50 range of 1.8 ml/kg to 4.4 g/kg. Skin irritation tests on rabbits indicated that Nonoxynols are nonirritating to moderately irritating. Nonoxynol compounds with short ethoxylated chains are generally severe ocular irritants, whereas long-chained Nonoxynols are only slightly irritating to the rabbit eye. No evidence of carcinogenicity was observed when Nonoxynol-4 and 9 were fed to both dogs and rats. A mutagenicity study of these two compounds by the Ames test was negative. Undiluted Nonoxynol-4 and 9 were nonirritating and nonsensitizing in clinical studies. A 50% solution of Nonoxynol-15 and/or Nonoxynol-50 produced no irritation or sensitization when tested on 168 subjects, nor was there evidence of phototoxicity when tested on a subset of this population. It is concluded that Nonoxynols 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 30, 40, and 50 are safe as cosmetic ingredients.


1985 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 107-146 ◽  

The 7 Stearates described in this report are either oily liquids or waxy solids that are primarily used in cosmetics as skin emollients at concentrations up to 25 percent. The toxicology of the Stearates has been assessed in a number of animal studies. They have low acute oral toxicity and are essentially nonirritating to the rabbit eye when tested at and above use concentration. At cosmetic use concentrations the Stearates are, at most, minimally irritating to rabbit skin. In clinical studies the Stearates and cosmetic products containing them were at most minimally to mildly irritating to the human skin, essentially nonsensitizing, nonphototoxic and nonphotosensitizing. Comedogenicity is a potential health effect that should be considered when the Stearate ingredients are used in cosmetic formulations. On the basis of the information in this report, it is concluded that Butyl, Cetyl, Isobutyl, Isocetyl, Isopropyl, Myristyl, and Octyl Stearate are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the present practices of use.


1982 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 103-118 ◽  

Polybutenes are the isotactic polymers of isobutene and n-butene. Polybutenes provide viscosity or emulsifiability to more than 80 cosmetic products in concentrations up to 50%. The results of acute oral and percutaneous toxicity tests of Polybutenes show these materials to be relatively harmless. Acute skin irritation tests on rabbits showed no or mild irritation. Other test results indicate that Polybutenes are not toxic: (a) there were no observable effects in rats after inhalation at concentrations up to 18.5 mg/l of air; (b) there was only mild, transient eye irritation in rabbits; (c) intravaginal application of concentrated Polybutene daily for 30 days produced no observable effect in rabbits. Chronic oral toxicity in rats fed up to 20,000 ppm for three successive generations showed no impairment in reproduction. The available human clinical data indicated only very mild effects. Skin tests for sensitization, irritancy, phototoxicity, and photosensitization were limited to cosmetic formulations. On the basis of the available information, it was concluded that Polybutenes are safe as presently used in cosmetics.


2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 47-55 ◽  

Malic Acid functions in cosmetic formulations as a pH adjuster, and Sodium Malate functions as a skin conditioning agent-humectant. Malic Acid is reportedly used in almost 50 cosmetic formulations across a range of product types at low concentrations, whereas Sodium Malate is used in only one. As a pH adjuster, Malic Acid is used at low concentrations. One commercial method of preparing Malic Acid is hydration of fumaric acid or maleic acid, and then purified to limit the amount of the starting material present. Because Malic Acid is a component of the Kreb's cycle, another method is fermentation. Malic Acid was relatively nontoxic in acute toxicity studies using animals. In a chronic oral study, feeding Malic Acid to rats resulted only in weight gain changes and changes in feed consumption. Malic Acid did not cause reproductive toxicity in mice, rats, or rabbits. Malic Acid was a moderate to strong skin irritatant in animal tests, and was a strong ocular irritant. Malic Acid was not mutagenic across a range of genotoxicity tests. Malic Acid was irritating in clinical tests, with less irritation seen as pH of the applied material increased. Patients patch tested with Malic Acid, placed on a diet that avoided foods containing Malic or citric acid, and then challenged with a diet high in Malic and citric acid had both immediate urticarial and delayed contact dermatitis reactions. These data were considered sufficient to determine that Malic Acid and Sodium Malate would be safe at the low concentrations at which these ingredients would be used to adjust pH (even though Sodium Malate is not currently used for that purpose). The data, however, were insufficient to determine the safety of these ingredients when used in cosmetics as other than pH adjusters and specifically, the data are insufficient to determine the safety of Sodium Malate when used as a skin conditioning agent-humectant. The types of data required for the Expert Panel to determine the safety of Sodium Malate as a skin-conditioning agent are: concentration of use data; dermal irritation and sensitization data; and ocular irritation data, if available. The data needed to assess the safety of Malic Acid or Sodium Malate for some function other than as a skin-conditioning agent cannot be specified without knowing the intended function. Were these ingredients to be used as exfoliants, for example, data similar to that included in the Cosmetic Ingredient Review safety assessment of Glycolic Acid would be needed. Until these data are available, it is concluded that the available data are insufficient to support the safety of these ingredients in cosmetic formulations for functions other than use as a pH adjuster.


1993 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  

Acetamide MEA is used in cosmetics as a skin conditioning agent-humectant and hair conditioning agent. Oral LD50s of 27 g/kg were reported for Acetamide MEA in rats. No rabbits died following an acute dermal exposure of 20 ml/kg Acetamide MEA. In ocular irritation studies, 70% Acetamide MEA and cosmetic formulations containing 1.3% Acetamide MEA were classified as nonocular irritants in rabbits. Only mild skin irritation occurred following a 24-h skin exposure to undiluted Acetamide MEA. In the maximization test, Acetamide MEA was classified as a nonsensitizer in guinea pigs when tested at a concentration of 5.0%. Neither primary irritation nor sensitization reactions to 7.5% Acetamide MEA were observed in a human repeated insult patch test. Acetamide MEA was not nonmutagenic in the Ames assay. In the presence of nitrosating agents, Acetamide MEA may form N-nitroso compounds; acetamide may be a minor impurity in Acetamide MEA. On the basis of the data presented in this report, it is concluded that Acetamide MEA is safe as a cosmetic ingredient at concentrations not to exceed 7.5% in leave-on products and is safe in the present practice of use in rinse-off products. Cosmetic formulations containing Acetamide MEA should not contain nitrosating agents or significant amounts of free acetamide.


1996 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 284-294

4-Chlororesorcinol is a halogenated phenol that is used as a hair colorant in over 30 hair dye and color products, generally at concentrations <1% Hair dye and color products containing 4-Chlororesorcinol will generally have a warning statement and patch test instructions for determining if each individual user is sensitive to the product before use. The available data do not suggest that 4-Chlororesorcinol is particularly toxic. The oral median lethal dose in rats was 369 mg/kg. Subchronic dermal exposure of rats to a hair dye product containing 2% 4-Chlororesorcinol produced no evidence of compound-induced toxicity. At that same dermal exposure, no embryotoxic or teratogenic effects, no evidence of reproductive toxicity, and no carcinogenic effects were seen. Likewise, 4-Chlororesorcinol was not mutagenic in either a micronucleus or Ames test, not did it induce aneuploidy in neurospora. A 2.5% solution was not a dermal irritant or an ocular irritant in rabbits. While there was some concern that impurity data were not available, the use of actual formulations in the reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity studies failed to produce any evidence of toxicity. On the basis of the information in the report, it was concluded that 4-Chlororesorcinol is safe as currently used in hair dye formulations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document