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

Value and Limitations

LEON GOLDMAN, M.D.; ROBERT H. PRESTON, M.D.; SAMUEL R. SCHEEN, Jr., M.D.

AMA Arch Derm. 1957;76(2):208-212.

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

In many industrial plants, waterless skin cleansers are used primarily for the rapid removal of tenacious soils. Several of these products have been studied by Birmingham¹ since 1947. Recently, he and Perone¹ have reported detailed studies of a critical evaluation of such cleansers.

More than a year ago, at the suggestion of Birmingham, we began a study of some of the waterless cleansers in clinical dermatologic practice. To date, 3065 patients have used three of these materials. Cleanser "A" was used by 614 patients; cleanser "B" by 2361 patients, and cleanser "C" by 90 patients.

Modern waterless skin cleansers are classified by Birmingham and Perone¹ according to their primary cleansing ingredient: (1) petroleum oil or solvent; (2) soap, ammonia, or alkali, and (3) a system of wetting agents. Some cleansers may be mixtures of 1 and 2 or 1 and 3. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Cincinnati

From the Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati. Cleansers were furnished by Harper Laboratories, Cincinnati; G. H. Packwood Manufacturing Company, St. Louis, and Sugar Beet Products Company, Saginaw, Mich.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Feb. 25, 1957.

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