This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

George Warren McCarl, MD, MPH
Winthrop Laboratories New York

Arch Dermatol. 1976;112(7):1031-1032.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

This letter is in response to the report by Dr Catalano, "Hexachlorophene—Not a Cry of Wolf," that appeared in the ARCHIVES (111:250-251,1975). In Catalano's communication, an obviously biased approach toward the toxicity of hexachlorophene was taken. We do not recommend the unlimited use of hexachlorophene-containing products, and the label of pHisoHex imposes limitations on its uses. We must object to some of Dr Catalano's statements.

Initially, he notes that hexachlorophene is a dangerous substance. While in oral or intravenous administration, sufficient doses of hexachlorophene have produced untoward effects, amounts of hexachlorophene encountered in normal use of this product are not in the same range.

In the second column of his article, Dr Catalano alludes to a study of monkeys bathed with pHisoHex. Monkey skin is quite different from human skin, in that it is thinner and more fragile. The infant monkeys weighed about 300 gm, approximately one . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?